BULZ vs IVV
MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3x Leveraged ETN vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, BULZ or IVV?
Trading-Leveraged Equity against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. BULZ led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 68.3%.
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 | BULZ | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.95% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $3.7B | $896.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 15 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +50.39%Best | +13.59% |
| 1Y Return | +48.82%Best | +17.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +78.24%Best | +22.46% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.38% | +13.28%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 94.0% | 15.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -94.4% | -24.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,954 | $18,654Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 68.3% | 38.9%Best |
| Fund Family | BMO Capital Markets | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Trading-Leveraged Equity | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 17, 2021 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 18, 2021 to Oct 14, 2026 (5.2 years).
BULZ 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 5.2 years both funds cover.
BULZ vs IVV Performance
MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3x Leveraged ETN (BULZ) is an ETF from BMO Capital Markets and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BULZ returned +48.82% while IVV returned +17.54%. Year to date, BULZ is up 50.39% versus a gain of 13.59% for IVV.
Over three years, BULZ compounded at +78.24% per year against +22.46% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +8.38% and +13.28% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BULZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 94.0% compared with 15.7% 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 -94.4% for BULZ and -24.5% 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 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BULZ charges 0.95% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $95 vs $3 annually, a gap of $92 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BULZ currently yields 0.00% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
100.0% of BULZ's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 40.7% of IVV's money is in holdings BULZ also owns.
Most of BULZ is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
15 positions in common, counted across the 15 positions we hold weights for in BULZ and 506 in IVV, against full books of 15 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 15 and 506 positions we hold weights for.
IVV holds 485 positions BULZ does not, 58.7% of the fund.
Largest: GOOG 2.41%, BRK.B 1.41%, LLY 1.39%, JPM 1.34%, XOM 1.02%
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BULZ | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 6.74% | 8.44% | 1.70% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.50% | 7.29% | 0.79% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.81% | 5.76% | 1.05% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 6.44% | 3.68% | 2.76% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 7.15% | 2.42% | 4.73% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 6.46% | 3.00% | 3.46% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 6.45% | 2.47% | 3.98% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 6.88% | 1.87% | 5.01% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 7.17% | 1.52% | 5.65% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | 7.26% | 0.90% | 6.36% |
100.0% of BULZ 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, BULZ or IVV?
BULZ has an expense ratio of 0.95% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $92 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BULZ or IVV?
Over the past year BULZ returned +48.82% vs +17.54% for IVV, so BULZ leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BULZ or IVV?
BULZ has been the more volatile fund at 94.0% annualized versus 15.7% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BULZ -94.4% vs IVV -24.5%.
Should I hold both BULZ and IVV?
BULZ and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, 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 BULZ and IVV?
100.0% of BULZ's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 40.7% of IVV's is in holdings BULZ also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 15 positions we hold weights for in BULZ and 506 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, BULZ or IVV?
BULZ yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than BULZ?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. BULZ led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 68.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.