IVV vs LCOW
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF
Which is better, IVV or LCOW?
Nearly the same fund. IVV costs less.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over the full window, LCOW over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 49.0%.
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 | IVV | LCOW |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.49% |
| AUM | $896.5B | $27M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.65% |
| Holdings | 508 | 202 |
| YTD Return | +13.59% | +14.27%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.54% | +17.75%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.46% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.6% | 10.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -8.9%Best | -10.6% |
| $10,000 over 1.4 years | $13,840Best | $13,563 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9%Best | 49.0% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Pacer ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 6, 2025 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 7, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.4 years).
IVV vs LCOW 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 1.4 years both funds cover.
IVV vs LCOW Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs. Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% while LCOW returned +17.75%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.59% versus a gain of 14.27% for LCOW.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.6% compared with 10.6% for LCOW. 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 -8.9% for IVV and -10.6% for LCOW. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while LCOW charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $49 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.65% for LCOW.
Holdings Overlap
43.8% of IVV's money is in holdings LCOW also owns. 99.9% of LCOW's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of LCOW is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
98 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 98 in LCOW, against full books of 508 and 202.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 0 positions for LCOW that do not appear in our book for IVV (0.0% of the fund), and 402 for IVV that do not appear in LCOW (55.6%).
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 LCOW | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.44% | 5.52% | 2.92% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.29% | 5.55% | 1.74% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.76% | 5.96% | 0.20% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.42% | 5.15% | 2.73% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.41% | 4.63% | 2.22% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.47% | 4.26% | 1.79% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 0.93% | 5.07% | 4.14% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 0.69% | 4.78% | 4.09% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 0.67% | 4.72% | 4.05% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.94% | 3.34% | 2.40% |
99.9% of LCOW 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 LCOW?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while LCOW charges 0.49%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or LCOW?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% vs +17.75% for LCOW, so LCOW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), IVV annualized +26.13% vs +24.32% for LCOW. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or LCOW?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 11.6% annualized versus 10.6% for LCOW. Worst drawdown: IVV -8.9% vs LCOW -10.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and LCOW?
IVV and LCOW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, 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 IVV and LCOW?
99.9% of LCOW's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 99.9% of LCOW's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 98 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 98 in LCOW.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or LCOW?
IVV yields 1.10% while LCOW yields 0.65%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LCOW better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over the full window, LCOW over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 49.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.