EQAL vs IVV
Invesco Russell 1000 Equal Weight ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, EQAL or IVV?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. EQAL is less concentrated, with 5.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EQAL | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $796M | $882.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.64% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 2,024 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +11.47% | +14.21%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.86% | +16.27%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.98% | +23.01%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.90% | +13.64%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.2% | 15.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -40.9% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,960 | $18,952Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 5.0%Best | 38.1% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 23, 2014 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 29, 2014 to Oct 8, 2026 (11.8 years).
EQAL vs IVV growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 11.8 years both funds cover.
EQAL vs IVV Performance
Invesco Russell 1000 Equal Weight ETF (EQAL) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year EQAL returned +12.86% while IVV returned +16.27%. Year to date, EQAL is up 11.47% versus a gain of 14.21% for IVV.
Over three years, EQAL compounded at +15.98% per year against +23.01% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +6.90% and +13.64% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.50% annualized vs +8.22%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EQAL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.2% compared with 15.0% for IVV. 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 -40.9% for EQAL and -33.9% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EQAL charges 0.20% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $3 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EQAL currently yields 1.64% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
52.3% of EQAL's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 96.1% of IVV's money is in holdings EQAL also owns.
Most of IVV is already inside EQAL. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
488 positions in common, counted across the 1,009 positions we hold weights for in EQAL and 505 in IVV, against full books of 2,024 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 11 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for EQAL (3.2% of the fund), and 492 for EQAL that do not appear in IVV (44.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EQAL | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.07% | 8.00% | 7.93% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.07% | 7.39% | 7.32% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 0.08% | 5.57% | 5.49% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 0.06% | 3.80% | 3.74% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 0.06% | 3.00% | 2.94% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.06% | 2.59% | 2.53% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 0.07% | 2.15% | 2.08% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.06% | 1.66% | 1.60% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 0.05% | 1.56% | 1.51% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 0.07% | 1.44% | 1.37% |
96.1% of IVV is already inside EQAL.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EQAL or IVV?
EQAL has an expense ratio of 0.20% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EQAL or IVV?
Over the past year EQAL returned +12.86% vs +16.27% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), EQAL annualized +8.22% vs +12.50% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EQAL or IVV?
EQAL has been the more volatile fund at 17.2% annualized versus 15.0% for IVV. Worst drawdown: EQAL -40.9% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both EQAL and IVV?
EQAL and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between EQAL and IVV?
96.1% of IVV's money is in holdings EQAL also owns. 96.1% of IVV's is in holdings EQAL also owns. They hold 488 positions in common, counted across the 1,009 positions we hold weights for in EQAL and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, EQAL or IVV?
EQAL yields 1.64% while IVV yields 1.06%, so EQAL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than EQAL?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. EQAL is less concentrated, with 5.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.