IVV vs ZTWO
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs F/m 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond 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 | ZTWO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $18M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 4.45% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 427 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +1.43% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +3.46% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 1.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -0.9% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | F-m investments | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 10, 2024 |
IVV vs ZTWO Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and F/m 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTWO) is a ETF from F-m investments. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while ZTWO returned +3.46%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 1.43% for ZTWO.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 1.4% for ZTWO. 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 -0.9% for ZTWO. 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 0.30. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while ZTWO charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $15 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 4.45% for ZTWO.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and ZTWO share 1 holdings out of 906 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in ZTWO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| HUBB | 0.04% | 0.23% | 0.19% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or ZTWO?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while ZTWO charges 0.15%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $12 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or ZTWO?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +3.46% for ZTWO, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +4.62% for ZTWO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or ZTWO?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 1.4% for ZTWO. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs ZTWO -0.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and ZTWO?
IVV and ZTWO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.30, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and ZTWO?
IVV and ZTWO share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 906 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or ZTWO?
IVV yields 1.09% while ZTWO yields 4.45%, so ZTWO 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.