IVV vs OMFS
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Which is better, IVV or OMFS?
Large Cap Blend against Small Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. OMFS is less concentrated, with 12.0% 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 | IVV | OMFS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.39% |
| AUM | $896.5B | $264M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 1.30% |
| Holdings | 508 | 2,228 |
| YTD Return | +13.59%Best | +8.89% |
| 1Y Return | +17.54%Best | +10.32% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.46%Best | +14.55% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28%Best | +4.67% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.2%Best | 21.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -42.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,654Best | $12,564 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9% | 12.0%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 8, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 10, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.9 years).
IVV vs OMFS 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 8.9 years both funds cover.
IVV vs OMFS Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% while OMFS returned +10.32%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.59% versus a gain of 8.89% for OMFS.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.46% per year against +14.55% for OMFS; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and +4.67% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +14.01% annualized vs +9.11%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
OMFS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.3% compared with 16.2% 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 -42.5% for OMFS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while OMFS charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $39 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 1.30% for OMFS.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 506 holdings in IVV and 933 in OMFS, totalling 99.9% and 96.5% of the two funds. That is not enough of OMFS to divide by, so no overlap percentage is shown here. Within what we can see, 1 positions appear in both.
1 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 933 in OMFS, against full books of 508 and 2,228.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 882 positions for OMFS that do not appear in our book for IVV (93.3% of the fund), and 499 for IVV that do not appear in OMFS (99.4%).
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 OMFS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AOSAo Smith Corp. | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.00% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and OMFS you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or OMFS?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while OMFS charges 0.39%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or OMFS?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% vs +10.32% for OMFS, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IVV annualized +14.01% vs +9.11% for OMFS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or OMFS?
OMFS has been the more volatile fund at 21.3% annualized versus 16.2% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs OMFS -42.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and OMFS?
IVV and OMFS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or OMFS?
IVV yields 1.10% while OMFS yields 1.30%, so OMFS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is OMFS better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. OMFS is less concentrated, with 12.0% 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.