IJS vs OSCV
iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Value ETF vs Opus Small Cap Value ETF
Which is better, IJS or OSCV?
IJS has been ahead.
IJS has a lower expense ratio. IJS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IJS is less concentrated, with 8.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 25.2%.
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 | IJS | OSCV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $7.5B | $626M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.45% | 1.17% |
| Holdings | 1,026 | 130 |
| YTD Return | +12.54%Best | +6.44% |
| 1Y Return | +17.84%Best | +5.06% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.40%Best | +10.43% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.88%Best | +4.27% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 23.8% | 18.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -49.0% | -42.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,307Best | $12,325 |
| Top 10 Weight | 8.9%Best | 25.2% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Aptus ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Value | Small Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 24, 2000 | Jul 18, 2018 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 18, 2018 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.2 years).
IJS vs OSCV 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 8.2 years both funds cover.
IJS vs OSCV Performance
iShares S&P SmallCap 600 Value ETF (IJS) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Opus Small Cap Value ETF (OSCV) is an ETF from Aptus ETFs. Over the past year IJS returned +17.84% while OSCV returned +5.06%. Year to date, IJS is up 12.54% versus a gain of 6.44% for OSCV.
Over three years, IJS compounded at +15.40% per year against +10.43% for OSCV; over five years the annualized figures are +5.88% and +4.27% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, IJS has the edge at +6.43% annualized vs +5.71%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IJS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.8% compared with 18.5% for OSCV. 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 IJS and -42.8% for OSCV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IJS charges 0.18% per year while OSCV charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $79 annually, a gap of $61 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IJS currently yields 1.45% against 1.17% for OSCV.
Holdings Overlap
3.3% of IJS's money is in holdings OSCV also owns. 20.0% of OSCV's money is in holdings IJS also owns.
OSCV and IJS share little of their money.
16 positions in common, counted across the 460 positions we hold weights for in IJS and 70 in OSCV, against full books of 1,026 and 130.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 52 positions for OSCV that do not appear in our book for IJS (77.3% of the fund), and 440 for IJS that do not appear in OSCV (94.7%).
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 IJS | Weight in OSCV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| SBCFSeacoast Banking Corp Of Florida | 0.18% | 2.32% | 2.14% |
| VCTRVictory Receivables Corp | 0.21% | 2.10% | 1.89% |
| HWKNHawkins Inc | 0.10% | 2.20% | 2.10% |
| ATENA10 Networks Inc | 0.07% | 2.04% | 1.97% |
| KAIKadant Inc | 0.17% | 1.77% | 1.60% |
| MTRNMaterion Corp | 0.29% | 1.64% | 1.35% |
| NOGNorthern Oil And Gas Inc | 0.27% | 1.11% | 0.84% |
| TRNOTerreno Realty Corp | 0.23% | 1.13% | 0.90% |
| FELEFranklin Electric Co Inc | 0.20% | 1.08% | 0.88% |
| MATXMatson Inc | 0.74% | 0.50% | 0.24% |
20.0% of OSCV is already inside IJS.
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, IJS or OSCV?
IJS has an expense ratio of 0.18% while OSCV charges 0.79%. IJS is the cheaper option, by $61 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IJS or OSCV?
Over the past year IJS returned +17.84% vs +5.06% for OSCV, so IJS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), IJS annualized +6.43% vs +5.71% for OSCV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IJS or OSCV?
IJS has been the more volatile fund at 23.8% annualized versus 18.5% for OSCV. Worst drawdown: IJS -49.0% vs OSCV -42.8%.
Should I hold both IJS and OSCV?
IJS and OSCV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 IJS and OSCV?
20.0% of OSCV's money is in holdings IJS also owns. 20.0% of OSCV's is in holdings IJS also owns. They hold 16 positions in common, counted across the 460 positions we hold weights for in IJS and 70 in OSCV.
Which pays a higher dividend, IJS or OSCV?
IJS yields 1.45% while OSCV yields 1.17%, so IJS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is OSCV better than IJS?
IJS has a lower expense ratio. IJS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IJS is less concentrated, with 8.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 25.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.