IMTB vs IVV
IMTB vs IVV
iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IMTB offers more diversification with 1157 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IMTB | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.06% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $276M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.50% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 3,444 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -0.60% | +9.93% | |
| 1Y Return | +3.62% | +19.59% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.70% | +19.41% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.15% | +12.89% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -18.3% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 1, 2016 | May 15, 2000 |
IMTB vs IVV Performance
iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF (IMTB) 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 IMTB returned +3.62% while IVV returned +19.59%. Year to date, IMTB is down 0.60% versus a gain of 9.93% for IVV.
Over three years, IMTB compounded at +4.70% per year against +19.41% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +0.15% and +12.89% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.91% annualized vs +0.58%. 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 5.3% for IMTB. 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 -18.3% for IMTB 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 0.47. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IMTB charges 0.06% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $6 vs $3 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IMTB currently yields 4.50% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
IMTB and IVV share 0 holdings out of 1662 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, IMTB or IVV?
IMTB has an expense ratio of 0.06% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $3 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IMTB or IVV?
Over the past year IMTB returned +3.62% vs +19.59% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), IMTB annualized +0.58% vs +6.91% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IMTB or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 5.3% for IMTB. Worst drawdown: IMTB -18.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both IMTB and IVV?
IMTB and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.47, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IMTB and IVV?
IMTB and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1662 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IMTB or IVV?
IMTB yields 4.50% while IVV yields 1.09%, so IMTB 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.