CMBS vs IVV
CMBS vs IVV
iShares CMBS ETF 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 | CMBS | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $473M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.57% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 467 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +0.01% | +13.52% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.21% | +23.63% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.28% | +21.26% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.52% | +13.52% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.9% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -16.4% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 14, 2012 | May 15, 2000 |
CMBS vs IVV Performance
iShares CMBS ETF (CMBS) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CMBS returned +2.21% while IVV returned +23.63%. Year to date, CMBS is up 0.01% versus a gain of 13.52% for IVV.
Over three years, CMBS compounded at +5.28% per year against +21.26% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +0.52% and +13.52% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +0.82%. 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 3.9% for CMBS. 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 -16.4% for CMBS 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 0.28. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CMBS charges 0.25% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $3 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CMBS currently yields 3.57% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
CMBS and IVV share 1 holdings out of 948 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in CMBS | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XTSLA | 0.62% | 0.15% | 0.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CMBS or IVV?
CMBS has an expense ratio of 0.25% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $22 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CMBS or IVV?
Over the past year CMBS returned +2.21% vs +23.63% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), CMBS annualized +0.82% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CMBS or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 3.9% for CMBS. Worst drawdown: CMBS -16.4% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both CMBS and IVV?
CMBS and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.28, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CMBS and IVV?
CMBS and IVV share 1 common holdings with a 0.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 948 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CMBS or IVV?
CMBS yields 3.57% while IVV yields 1.09%, so CMBS 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.