IVV vs STK
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Columbia Seligman Premium Technology Growth Fund
Which is better, IVV or STK?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over the full window, STK over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.5%.
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 | STK |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 1.13% |
| AUM | $896.5B | $1.0B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 3.23% |
| Holdings | 508 | 71 |
| YTD Return | +13.59% | +47.78%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.54% | +58.35%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.46% | +37.27%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28% | +20.65%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.3%Best | 22.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -42.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,654 | $25,564Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9%Best | 41.5% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Columbia Threadneedle Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 25, 2009 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 25, 2009 to Oct 14, 2026 (16.9 years).
IVV vs STK 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 16.9 years both funds cover.
IVV vs STK Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Columbia Seligman Premium Technology Growth Fund (STK) is an ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% while STK returned +58.35%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.59% versus a gain of 47.78% for STK.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.46% per year against +37.27% for STK; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and +20.65% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.67% annualized vs +9.37%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
STK has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.8% compared with 14.3% 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 -42.8% for STK. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while STK charges 1.13%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $113 annually, a gap of $110 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 3.23% for STK.
Holdings Overlap
40.2% of IVV's money is in holdings STK also owns. 75.3% of STK's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of STK is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
The two holdings books were reported 62 days apart, IVV as of Oct 1, 2026 and STK as of Jul 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
39 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 62 in STK, against full books of 508 and 71.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 19 positions for STK that do not appear in our book for IVV (16.8% of the fund), and 461 for IVV that do not appear in STK (59.2%).
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 STK | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.44% | 4.79% | 3.65% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.29% | 3.03% | 4.26% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.76% | 3.17% | 2.59% |
| BECfd Bloom Energy Corp- A | 0.12% | 8.02% | 7.90% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.47% | 5.36% | 2.89% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.00% | 3.90% | 0.90% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 0.64% | 5.05% | 4.41% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.41% | 1.95% | 0.46% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.68% | 0.64% | 3.04% |
| WDCWestern Digital Corp. | 0.25% | 3.01% | 2.76% |
75.3% of STK 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 STK?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while STK charges 1.13%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $110 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or STK?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% vs +58.35% for STK, so STK leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), IVV annualized +12.67% vs +9.37% for STK. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or STK?
STK has been the more volatile fund at 22.8% annualized versus 14.3% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs STK -42.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and STK?
IVV and STK have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, 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 STK?
75.3% of STK's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 75.3% of STK's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 39 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 62 in STK.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or STK?
IVV yields 1.10% while STK yields 3.23%, so STK currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is STK better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over the full window, STK over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.