GVIP vs IVV
Goldman Sachs Hedge Industry VIP ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, GVIP or IVV?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GVIP led over 3Y and the full window, IVV over 1Y and 5Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. GVIP is less concentrated, with 23.6% 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 | GVIP | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.45% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $576M | $896.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.30% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 51 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +6.27% | +13.59%Best |
| 1Y Return | +9.29% | +17.54%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.56%Best | +22.46% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.68% | +13.28%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.0% | 15.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -37.1% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,609 | $18,654Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 23.6%Best | 38.9% |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 1, 2016 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 3, 2016 to Oct 14, 2026 (9.9 years).
GVIP 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 9.9 years both funds cover.
GVIP vs IVV Performance
Goldman Sachs Hedge Industry VIP ETF (GVIP) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GVIP returned +9.29% while IVV returned +17.54%. Year to date, GVIP is up 6.27% versus a gain of 13.59% for IVV.
Over three years, GVIP compounded at +24.56% per year against +22.46% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +10.68% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, GVIP has the edge at +16.02% annualized vs +14.92%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GVIP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.0% compared with 15.4% 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 -37.1% for GVIP 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 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GVIP charges 0.45% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $45 vs $3 annually, a gap of $42 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GVIP currently yields 0.30% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
67.7% of GVIP's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 47.1% of IVV's money is in holdings GVIP also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
33 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in GVIP and 506 in IVV, against full books of 51 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 467 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for GVIP (52.4% of the fund), and 13 for GVIP that do not appear in IVV (23.1%).
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 GVIP | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corporation | 2.15% | 8.44% | 6.29% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 2.26% | 7.29% | 5.03% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 2.17% | 5.76% | 3.59% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 1.98% | 3.68% | 1.70% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc Cl A | 2.05% | 3.00% | 0.95% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc Class A | 2.58% | 2.42% | 0.16% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.83% | 2.47% | 0.64% |
| MUMicron Technology Inc . | 2.37% | 1.87% | 0.50% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices | 2.51% | 1.52% | 0.99% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway, Inc. | 2.08% | 1.41% | 0.67% |
67.7% of GVIP 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, GVIP or IVV?
GVIP has an expense ratio of 0.45% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $42 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GVIP or IVV?
Over the past year GVIP returned +9.29% vs +17.54% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), GVIP annualized +16.02% vs +14.92% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GVIP or IVV?
GVIP has been the more volatile fund at 19.0% annualized versus 15.4% for IVV. Worst drawdown: GVIP -37.1% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both GVIP and IVV?
GVIP and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 GVIP and IVV?
67.7% of GVIP's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 47.1% of IVV's is in holdings GVIP also owns. They hold 33 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in GVIP and 506 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, GVIP or IVV?
GVIP yields 0.30% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than GVIP?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GVIP led over 3Y and the full window, IVV over 1Y and 5Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. GVIP is less concentrated, with 23.6% 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.