AGD vs IVV
Abrdn Global Dynamic Dividend Fund vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, AGD or IVV?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. AGD is less concentrated, with 27.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.9%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AGD | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.35% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $313M | $896.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 12.36% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 89 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +4.34% | +13.59%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.13% | +17.54%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.49% | +22.46%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.73% | +13.28%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 23.7% | 15.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -88.3% | -56.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,197 | $18,654Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 27.7%Best | 38.9% |
| Fund Family | Aberdeen | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 26, 2006 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 26, 2006 to Oct 14, 2026 (20.2 years).
AGD vs IVV growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 20.2 years both funds cover.
AGD vs IVV Performance
Abrdn Global Dynamic Dividend Fund (AGD) is an ETF from Aberdeen and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year AGD returned +12.13% while IVV returned +17.54%. Year to date, AGD is up 4.34% versus a gain of 13.59% for IVV.
Over three years, AGD compounded at +21.49% per year against +22.46% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +8.73% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.77% annualized vs -3.62%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AGD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.7% compared with 15.3% 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 -88.3% for AGD and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AGD charges 1.35% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $135 vs $3 annually, a gap of $132 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AGD currently yields 12.36% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
52.0% of AGD's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 35.2% of IVV's money is in holdings AGD also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 62 days apart, AGD as of Jul 31, 2026 and IVV as of Oct 1, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
42 positions in common, counted across the 87 positions we hold weights for in AGD and 506 in IVV, against full books of 89 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 458 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for AGD (64.3% of the fund), and 6 for AGD that do not appear in IVV (4.7%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in AGD | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 2.49% | 8.44% | 5.95% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 3.14% | 7.29% | 4.15% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.04% | 5.76% | 2.72% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 3.43% | 2.41% | 1.02% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.35% | 2.47% | 0.88% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 1.58% | 1.34% | 0.24% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.28% | 0.65% | 0.63% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.24% | 0.69% | 0.55% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 1.36% | 0.53% | 0.83% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 1.28% | 0.54% | 0.74% |
52.0% of AGD is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AGD or IVV?
AGD has an expense ratio of 1.35% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $132 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AGD or IVV?
Over the past year AGD returned +12.13% vs +17.54% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), AGD annualized -3.62% vs +9.77% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AGD or IVV?
AGD has been the more volatile fund at 23.7% annualized versus 15.3% for IVV. Worst drawdown: AGD -88.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both AGD and IVV?
AGD and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between AGD and IVV?
52.0% of AGD's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 35.2% of IVV's is in holdings AGD also owns. They hold 42 positions in common, counted across the 87 positions we hold weights for in AGD and 506 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, AGD or IVV?
AGD yields 12.36% while IVV yields 1.10%, so AGD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than AGD?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. AGD is less concentrated, with 27.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.