BKT vs IVV
BKT vs IVV
BlackRock Income Trust Inc vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BKT | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.75% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $350M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 9.60% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 336 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +0.45% | +13.31% | |
| 1Y Return | -1.64% | +24.00% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.04% | +21.16% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -3.14% | +13.34% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -46.0% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 1, 1988 | May 15, 2000 |
BKT vs IVV Performance
BlackRock Income Trust Inc (BKT) is a ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BKT returned -1.64% while IVV returned +24.00%. Year to date, BKT is up 0.45% versus a gain of 13.31% for IVV.
Over three years, BKT compounded at +5.04% per year against +21.16% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -3.14% and +13.34% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs -0.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 9.2% for BKT. 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 -46.0% for BKT and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.25. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BKT charges 2.75% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $275 vs $3 annually, a gap of $272 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BKT currently yields 9.60% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BKT and IVV share 0 holdings out of 599 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BKT or IVV?
BKT has an expense ratio of 2.75% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $272 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BKT or IVV?
Over the past year BKT returned -1.64% vs +24.00% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), BKT annualized -0.35% vs +7.03% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BKT or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 9.2% for BKT. Worst drawdown: BKT -46.0% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BKT and IVV?
BKT and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.25, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BKT and IVV?
BKT and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 599 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BKT or IVV?
BKT yields 9.60% while IVV yields 1.09%, so BKT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.