IVV vs MHF
IVV vs MHF
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Western Asset Municipal High Income Fund Inc.
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 | IVV | MHF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.71% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $153M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 5.89% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 248 | |
| YTD Return | +11.54% | +2.92% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.48% | +6.38% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.86% | +8.20% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.02% | +1.06% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 10.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -44.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 28, 1988 |
IVV vs MHF Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Western Asset Municipal High Income Fund Inc. (MHF) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.48% while MHF returned +6.38%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.54% versus a gain of 2.92% for MHF.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.86% per year against +8.20% for MHF; over five years the annualized figures are +13.02% and +1.06% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.97% annualized vs +0.10%. 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 10.3% for MHF. 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 -56.5% for IVV and -44.6% for MHF. 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
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MHF charges 0.71%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $71 annually, a gap of $68 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 5.89% for MHF.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MHF share 0 holdings out of 631 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, IVV or MHF?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MHF charges 0.71%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $68 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MHF?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.48% vs +6.38% for MHF, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +6.97% vs +0.10% for MHF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MHF?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 10.3% for MHF. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MHF -44.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and MHF?
IVV and MHF 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 IVV and MHF?
IVV and MHF share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 631 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MHF?
IVV yields 1.09% while MHF yields 5.89%, so MHF 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.