IVV vs PMO
IVV vs PMO
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Putnam Municipal Opportunities Trust
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 | PMO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.02% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $4,829 | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 4.04% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 288 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | +0.30% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.70% | +10.75% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.49% | +5.92% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.43% | -1.95% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 11.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -50.4% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Putnam Investments | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 28, 1993 |
IVV vs PMO Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Putnam Municipal Opportunities Trust (PMO) is a ETF from Putnam Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% while PMO returned +10.75%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a gain of 0.30% for PMO.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.49% per year against +5.92% for PMO; over five years the annualized figures are +13.43% and -1.95% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.05% annualized vs -0.05%. 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 11.5% for PMO. 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 -50.4% for PMO. 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 0.33. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while PMO charges 1.02%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $102 annually, a gap of $99 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 4.04% for PMO.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and PMO share 0 holdings out of 615 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 PMO?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while PMO charges 1.02%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $99 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or PMO?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% vs +10.75% for PMO, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +7.05% vs -0.05% for PMO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or PMO?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 11.5% for PMO. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs PMO -50.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and PMO?
IVV and PMO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.33, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and PMO?
IVV and PMO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 615 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or PMO?
IVV yields 1.09% while PMO yields 4.04%, so PMO 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.