IVV vs KBWP
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF
Which is better, IVV or KBWP?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV 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 60.7%.
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 | IVV | KBWP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.35% |
| AUM | $896.5B | $282M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 2.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 54 |
| YTD Return | +13.59%Best | +4.32% |
| 1Y Return | +17.54%Best | +5.71% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.46%Best | +15.40% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28%Best | +12.48% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1%Best | 15.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -40.3% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,654Best | $18,004 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9%Best | 60.7% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 2, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 2, 2010 to Oct 14, 2026 (15.9 years).
IVV vs KBWP 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 15.9 years both funds cover.
IVV vs KBWP Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco KBW Property & Casualty Insurance ETF (KBWP) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% while KBWP returned +5.71%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.59% versus a gain of 4.32% for KBWP.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.46% per year against +15.40% for KBWP; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and +12.48% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.85% annualized vs +11.67%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
KBWP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.7% compared with 14.1% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -40.3% for KBWP. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.57. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KBWP charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $35 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 2.00% for KBWP.
Holdings Overlap
1.1% of IVV's money is in holdings KBWP also owns. 75.3% of KBWP's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of KBWP is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
15 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 25 in KBWP, against full books of 508 and 54.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 10 positions for KBWP that do not appear in our book for IVV (24.7% of the fund), and 485 for IVV that do not appear in KBWP (98.4%).
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 IVV | Weight in KBWP | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CBChubbltd. | 0.18% | 8.37% | 8.19% |
| TRVTravelers Cos., Inc. | 0.11% | 8.43% | 8.32% |
| PGRProgressive Corp. | 0.19% | 8.26% | 8.07% |
| AONAon Plc Class A Ordinary Share | 0.09% | 7.17% | 7.08% |
| WRBWr Berkley Corp. | 0.02% | 4.37% | 4.35% |
| AIGAmerican International Group Inc | 0.06% | 4.20% | 4.14% |
| ACGLArch Capital Group Ltd | 0.05% | 4.09% | 4.04% |
| CINFCincinnati Financial Corp. | 0.04% | 4.10% | 4.06% |
| EGEverest Group Ltd Common Stock | 0.02% | 3.99% | 3.97% |
| HIGHartford Financial Services Group Inc. | 0.05% | 3.93% | 3.88% |
75.3% of KBWP 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, IVV or KBWP?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KBWP charges 0.35%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or KBWP?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% vs +5.71% for KBWP, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IVV annualized +12.85% vs +11.67% for KBWP. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or KBWP?
KBWP has been the more volatile fund at 15.7% annualized versus 14.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs KBWP -40.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and KBWP?
IVV and KBWP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.57, 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 IVV and KBWP?
75.3% of KBWP's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 75.3% of KBWP's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 25 in KBWP.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KBWP?
IVV yields 1.10% while KBWP yields 2.00%, so KBWP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is KBWP better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV 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 60.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.