FNGS vs IVV
MicroSectors FANG+ ETNs vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FNGS or IVV?
Mid Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FNGS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 100.0%.
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 | FNGS | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.58% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $631M | $896.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 10 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +22.71%Best | +13.59% |
| 1Y Return | +18.93%Best | +17.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +35.13%Best | +22.46% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +20.88%Best | +13.28% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 27.4% | 16.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -49.0% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $25,809Best | $18,654 |
| Top 10 Weight | 100.0% | 38.9%Best |
| Fund Family | BMO Capital Markets | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 12, 2019 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 13, 2019 to Oct 14, 2026 (6.9 years).
FNGS 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 6.9 years both funds cover.
FNGS vs IVV Performance
MicroSectors FANG+ ETNs (FNGS) 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 FNGS returned +18.93% while IVV returned +17.54%. Year to date, FNGS is up 22.71% versus a gain of 13.59% for IVV.
Over three years, FNGS compounded at +35.13% per year against +22.46% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +20.88% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, FNGS has the edge at +31.51% annualized vs +15.39%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FNGS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 27.4% compared with 16.8% 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 -49.0% for FNGS and -33.9% 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 0.75. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FNGS charges 0.58% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $58 vs $3 annually, a gap of $55 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FNGS currently yields 0.00% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
100.0% of FNGS's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 36.0% of IVV's money is in holdings FNGS also owns.
Most of FNGS is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
10 positions in common, counted across the 10 positions we hold weights for in FNGS and 506 in IVV, against full books of 10 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 10 and 506 positions we hold weights for.
IVV holds 490 positions FNGS does not, 63.4% of the fund.
Largest: GOOG 2.41%, AMD 1.52%, TSLA 1.51%, BRK.B 1.41%, LLY 1.39%
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FNGS | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 10.29% | 8.44% | 1.85% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 9.65% | 7.29% | 2.36% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 10.08% | 5.76% | 4.32% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 9.76% | 3.68% | 6.08% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 11.08% | 1.87% | 9.21% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 10.38% | 2.42% | 7.96% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 9.67% | 3.00% | 6.67% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 9.97% | 2.47% | 7.50% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 10.34% | 0.66% | 9.68% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 8.78% | 0.43% | 8.35% |
100.0% of FNGS 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, FNGS or IVV?
FNGS has an expense ratio of 0.58% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $55 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FNGS or IVV?
Over the past year FNGS returned +18.93% vs +17.54% for IVV, so FNGS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), FNGS annualized +31.51% vs +15.39% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FNGS or IVV?
FNGS has been the more volatile fund at 27.4% annualized versus 16.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FNGS -49.0% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both FNGS and IVV?
FNGS and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.75, 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 FNGS and IVV?
100.0% of FNGS's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 36.0% of IVV's is in holdings FNGS also owns. They hold 10 positions in common, counted across the 10 positions we hold weights for in FNGS and 506 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, FNGS or IVV?
FNGS yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FNGS?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FNGS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 100.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.