IVV vs QGRO
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs American Century US Quality Growth ETF
Which is better, IVV or QGRO?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, QGRO over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. QGRO is less concentrated, with 29.4% 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 | QGRO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.29% |
| AUM | $896.5B | $2.0B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.20% |
| Holdings | 508 | 427 |
| YTD Return | +13.59%Best | +2.25% |
| 1Y Return | +17.54%Best | +3.82% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.46%Best | +19.90% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28%Best | +10.36% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.8%Best | 19.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9% | -32.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,654Best | $16,370 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9% | 29.4%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | American Century Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 10, 2018 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 12, 2018 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.1 years).
IVV vs QGRO 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 8.1 years both funds cover.
IVV vs QGRO Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and American Century US Quality Growth ETF (QGRO) is an ETF from American Century Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% while QGRO returned +3.82%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.59% versus a gain of 2.25% for QGRO.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.46% per year against +19.90% for QGRO; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and +10.36% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, QGRO has the edge at +14.35% annualized vs +13.95%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QGRO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.2% compared with 16.8% 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 -32.6% for QGRO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.93. 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 QGRO charges 0.29%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $29 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.20% for QGRO.
Holdings Overlap
47.6% of IVV's money is in holdings QGRO also owns. 76.9% of QGRO's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of QGRO is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
111 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 188 in QGRO, against full books of 508 and 427.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 75 positions for QGRO that do not appear in our book for IVV (21.0% of the fund), and 389 for IVV that do not appear in QGRO (51.8%).
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 QGRO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.29% | 3.76% | 3.53% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 5.76% | 3.18% | 2.58% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.68% | 2.88% | 0.80% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc-cl A | 3.00% | 3.32% | 0.32% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.87% | 2.36% | 0.49% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.39% | 2.75% | 1.36% |
| METAMeta Platform Inc | 2.42% | 1.47% | 0.95% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 0.67% | 3.13% | 2.46% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 0.66% | 2.68% | 2.02% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc. | 0.32% | 2.75% | 2.43% |
76.9% of QGRO 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 QGRO?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QGRO charges 0.29%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $26 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or QGRO?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% vs +3.82% for QGRO, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), IVV annualized +13.95% vs +14.35% for QGRO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or QGRO?
QGRO has been the more volatile fund at 19.2% annualized versus 16.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs QGRO -32.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and QGRO?
IVV and QGRO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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 QGRO?
76.9% of QGRO's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 76.9% of QGRO's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 111 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 188 in QGRO.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QGRO?
IVV yields 1.10% while QGRO yields 0.20%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QGRO better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, QGRO over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. QGRO is less concentrated, with 29.4% 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.