GLOF vs IVV
iShares Global Equity Factor ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, GLOF or IVV?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GLOF led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. GLOF is less concentrated, with 25.1% 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 | GLOF | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $202M | $896.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.54% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 715 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +15.32%Best | +13.59% |
| 1Y Return | +20.57%Best | +17.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.97%Best | +22.46% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.53% | +13.28%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9%Best | 15.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.7% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,044 | $18,654Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 25.1%Best | 38.9% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 28, 2015 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: May 4, 2015 to Oct 14, 2026 (11.4 years).
GLOF 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 11.4 years both funds cover.
GLOF vs IVV Performance
iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GLOF returned +20.57% while IVV returned +17.54%. Year to date, GLOF is up 15.32% versus a gain of 13.59% for IVV.
Over three years, GLOF compounded at +22.97% per year against +22.46% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +12.53% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.71% annualized vs +9.09%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 14.9% for GLOF. 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 -36.7% for GLOF 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 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GLOF charges 0.20% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $3 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GLOF currently yields 1.54% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
59.7% of GLOF's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 80.7% of IVV's money is in holdings GLOF also owns.
Most of IVV is already inside GLOF. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
203 positions in common, counted across the 662 positions we hold weights for in GLOF and 506 in IVV, against full books of 715 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 299 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for GLOF (18.9% of the fund), and 21 for GLOF that do not appear in IVV (2.8%).
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 GLOF | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.14% | 8.44% | 3.30% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.54% | 7.29% | 2.75% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.51% | 5.76% | 2.25% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.12% | 3.68% | 1.56% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 3.28% | 2.41% | 0.87% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.60% | 2.47% | 0.87% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.37% | 2.42% | 1.05% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 0.01% | 3.00% | 2.99% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.05% | 1.87% | 0.82% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 0.89% | 1.34% | 0.45% |
80.7% of IVV is already inside GLOF.
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, GLOF or IVV?
GLOF has an expense ratio of 0.20% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GLOF or IVV?
Over the past year GLOF returned +20.57% vs +17.54% for IVV, so GLOF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), GLOF annualized +9.09% vs +12.71% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GLOF or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.9% for GLOF. Worst drawdown: GLOF -36.7% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both GLOF and IVV?
GLOF and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GLOF and IVV?
80.7% of IVV's money is in holdings GLOF also owns. 80.7% of IVV's is in holdings GLOF also owns. They hold 203 positions in common, counted across the 662 positions we hold weights for in GLOF and 506 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, GLOF or IVV?
GLOF yields 1.54% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GLOF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than GLOF?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GLOF led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. GLOF is less concentrated, with 25.1% 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.