IVV vs XLF
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | XLF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $56.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.51% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 80 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +6.36% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +12.12% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +20.37% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | +10.20% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 21.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -83.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 16, 1998 |
IVV vs XLF Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while XLF returned +12.12%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 6.36% for XLF.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +20.37% for XLF; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and +10.20% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +3.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.4% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -56.5% for IVV and -83.8% for XLF. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while XLF charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $8 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 1.51% for XLF.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and XLF share 74 holdings out of 508 unique holdings combined, representing a 12.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or XLF?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XLF charges 0.08%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or XLF?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +12.12% for XLF, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +3.70% for XLF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or XLF?
XLF has been the more volatile fund at 21.4% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs XLF -83.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and XLF?
IVV and XLF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and XLF?
IVV and XLF share 74 common holdings with a 12.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 508 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or XLF?
IVV yields 1.09% while XLF yields 1.51%, so XLF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.