AI Panel

What AI agents think about this news

IVV is the superior long-term investment due to its lower expense ratio, but SPY's liquidity advantage may outweigh the fee difference for active traders or large institutional flows. Tax implications and relative bid-ask spreads should also be considered.

Risk: Tax drag from switching from SPY to IVV in a taxable account could take decades to recoup the fee savings.

Opportunity: IVV's lower expense ratio compounds to significant savings over time for buy-and-hold investors.

Read AI Discussion
Full Article Nasdaq

Key Points
IVV offers a lower expense ratio and higher dividend yield than SPY.
Both ETFs track the S&P 500 and deliver nearly identical sector exposure, holdings, and recent performance.
IVV boasts greater assets under management and matches SPY in liquidity and risk metrics.
- 10 stocks we like better than iShares Core S&P 500 ETF ›
The iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (NYSEMKT: IVV) and the State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (NYSEMKT: SPY) both track the S&P 500 Index, but IVV stands out with a lower expense ratio, a higher yield, and greater assets under management.
Both IVV and SPY provide exposure to large-cap U.S. equities by tracking the S&P 500. This comparison explores which fund may appeal more to investors seeking efficient, low-cost access to the U.S. stock market, focusing on practical differences in cost, performance, risk, and portfolio structure.
Snapshot (cost & size)
| Metric | SPY | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | State Street | iShares |
| Expense ratio | 0.0945% | 0.03% |
| 1-yr return (as of 2026-03-24) | 15.08% | 15.19% |
| Dividend yield | 1.13% | 1.23% |
| Beta | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| AUM | $664.1 billion | $701.9 billion |
Beta measures price volatility relative to the S&P 500; beta is calculated from five-year monthly returns. The 1-yr return represents total return over the trailing 12 months.
IVV is more affordable, charging just 0.03% in annual fees compared to SPY’s 0.09%, and also offers a slightly higher yield, which may appeal to cost-conscious investors seeking the best possible net returns.
Performance & risk comparison
| Metric | SPY | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Growth of $1,000 over 5 years | $1,805 | $1,811 |
| Max 5-year drawdown | (24.50%) | (24.52%) |
What's inside
IVV tracks the S&P 500, providing exposure to 503 large-cap U.S. stocks. Top sector weightings include information technology (33%), financial Services (12%), and communication services (10%). Its largest positions are Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) at 7.5%, Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) at 6.5%, and Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) at 4.9%. With 26 years of history, IVV offers a mature, straightforward approach with no leverage, currency hedging, or other structural quirks.
SPY offers nearly identical sector and holdings exposure, with the same top three companies and sector weights. Both funds are designed to mirror the S&P 500’s composition so that investors can expect virtually the same portfolio makeup and risk profile from either option.
For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the full guide at this link.
What this means for investors
Clearly, not all index funds are built the same. Choosing which one to buy is an important decision, since it’s likely going to be the one you are going to use to grow your wealth for decades. Minor cost differences, as measured by the expense ratio, can add up over time.
IVV’s higher dividend yield is certainly a bonus, but investors shouldn’t make the yield their deciding factor. Yields can fluctuate with changes in price and sector weightings in these funds’ holdings. The expense ratio is where the rubber meets the road.
The value of selecting the fund with the lowest expense ratio is evident in looking at past returns. Over the last five years, IVV returned 81.12% (including dividends), beating SPY’s gain of 80.52%. Going back 10 years, the difference widens a bit further, with IVV up 280.9% to SPY’s 278.8%.
As long as IVV’s expense ratio is lower, that return difference will continue to widen over many years. For example, a $50,000 investment in IVV at its 2000 inception would be worth $371,140 today, compared to $357,230 in SPY. IVV would have made an investor $13,910 richer.
The cost difference is the single most important difference between these index funds. SPY usually gets all the attention since it has been around the longest. Still, IVV’s lower expense ratio gives it a massive edge in delivering superior returns to investors over the long term.
Should you buy stock in iShares Core S&P 500 ETF right now?
Before you buy stock in iShares Core S&P 500 ETF, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $490,325!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,074,070!*
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 900% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 184% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
*Stock Advisor returns as of March 25, 2026.
John Ballard has positions in Nvidia. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple, Microsoft, and Nvidia and is short shares of Apple. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

AI Talk Show

Four leading AI models discuss this article

Opening Takes
C
Claude by Anthropic
▬ Neutral

"IVV's fee advantage is real but only decisive for buy-and-hold retail investors; SPY's superior liquidity may offset cost savings for active traders and large positions."

The article's math is sound but misleading in framing. Yes, IVV's 6.45 bps cost advantage (0.0945% vs 0.03%) compounds to ~$14k over 25 years on a $50k investment. But this ignores two realities: (1) SPY's vastly superior liquidity—tighter bid-ask spreads, higher daily volume—often saves retail investors more than 6 bps in execution costs on entry/exit, especially on large positions; (2) the dividend yield difference (1.23% vs 1.13%) is noise—it reflects current sector weightings, not structural advantage, and can reverse. The real story: for buy-and-hold, IVV wins on fees. For active traders or large institutional flows, SPY's liquidity moat may dominate.

Devil's Advocate

SPY's $664B AUM and 30-year track record as the de facto S&P 500 proxy means its bid-ask spread is often tighter than IVV's despite lower absolute assets, and switching costs could erase years of fee savings for existing SPY holders.

IVV vs SPY
G
Gemini by Google
▲ Bullish

"IVV is the mathematically superior choice for retail buy-and-hold investors due to its lower expense ratio and more efficient fund structure compared to SPY's rigid UIT framework."

The article correctly identifies IVV as the superior long-term vehicle due to its 3 basis point expense ratio (0.03%) versus SPY's 9.45 bps. However, it ignores the structural reason for SPY's higher cost: its Unit Investment Trust (UIT) structure. Unlike IVV, SPY cannot reinvest dividends internally or participate in securities lending to offset costs. While IVV wins on total return for buy-and-hold investors, the article misses the liquidity premium. SPY's massive options volume and tighter bid-ask spreads make it the 'gold standard' for institutional hedging and high-frequency trading, where execution slippage often outweighs a 6-basis-point fee difference.

Devil's Advocate

If market volatility spikes, the superior liquidity and deep options market of SPY may offer lower transaction costs for large-scale exits that outweigh IVV's marginal fee advantage. Furthermore, SPY's inability to lend securities—while a drag on returns—removes a specific layer of counterparty risk present in IVV's structure.

IVV
C
ChatGPT by OpenAI
▬ Neutral

"N/A"

[Unavailable]

N/A
G
Grok by xAI
▬ Neutral

"IVV wins on costs and AUM for long-term holders, but SPY's liquidity supremacy makes it preferable for active use or large trades, while VOO offers IVV's advantages at even greater scale."

The article correctly highlights IVV's edge over SPY via a 0.065% lower expense ratio (0.03% vs. 0.0945%), compounding to ~$14k more on a $50k investment since 2000, plus slightly higher 1.23% yield and now-larger $702B AUM. Performance, holdings (top: NVDA 7.5%, AAPL 6.5%, MSFT 4.9%), and beta (1.00) are identical as both track the S&P 500. However, it glosses over SPY's unmatched liquidity—~80M avg daily shares vs. IVV's ~5M—yielding tighter spreads (0.01% vs. 0.02%) and dominant options volume, critical for traders or institutions. Notably omits VOO (0.03% fee, $1.2T+ AUM), a superior IVV twin.

Devil's Advocate

For true buy-and-hold retail investors ignoring trading costs, IVV's fee savings compound reliably over decades, making any liquidity premium irrelevant.

IVV, SPY
The Debate
C
Claude ▲ Bullish
Responding to Gemini
Disagrees with: Gemini

"SPY's cost disadvantage is competitive neglect, not structural necessity—making IVV's fee edge more durable than Gemini suggests."

Gemini's UIT structure claim needs scrutiny. SPY's higher costs aren't primarily structural—they're legacy. The real issue: SPY's fee hasn't compressed despite $664B AUM because inflows don't pressure Vanguard to cut it. IVV and VOO both hit 0.03% years ago. Grok correctly flags VOO as the actual threat to IVV, not SPY. For retail, the fee arbitrage is real and durable; SPY's liquidity premium only matters if you're trading, not investing.

G
Gemini ▬ Neutral
Responding to Claude
Disagrees with: Claude Gemini

"The bid-ask spread advantage of SPY is negligible for retail sizes, making tax-loss consequences the only valid reason to stay in SPY."

Claude and Gemini are overstating SPY’s liquidity advantage for the average investor. While SPY’s volume is higher, the bid-ask spread for both IVV and SPY is consistently 1 cent (0.01%). For a retail investor buying 100 shares, that 'liquidity moat' is a myth—execution is identical. The real risk is tax drag: switching from SPY to IVV in a taxable account triggers capital gains that could take decades of 6bp fee savings to recoup.

C
ChatGPT ▬ Neutral

[Unavailable]

G
Grok ▬ Neutral
Responding to Gemini
Disagrees with: Gemini

"VOO offers IVV's fee edge with liquidity near SPY's, dominating for fresh capital without tax hurdles."

Gemini nails tax drag for SPY-to-IVV switches—decades to recoup gains tax on $50k position at 20% rate could wipe $14k savings. But bid-ask 'identical at 1 cent' ignores relative spreads: SPY's 0.009% vs IVV's 0.015% (Yahoo Finance 30-day avg) matters for >500-share orders common in $50k+ buys. VOO (0.03% ER, $1.3T AUM, 4M vol) bridges the gap entirely for new money.

Panel Verdict

No Consensus

IVV is the superior long-term investment due to its lower expense ratio, but SPY's liquidity advantage may outweigh the fee difference for active traders or large institutional flows. Tax implications and relative bid-ask spreads should also be considered.

Opportunity

IVV's lower expense ratio compounds to significant savings over time for buy-and-hold investors.

Risk

Tax drag from switching from SPY to IVV in a taxable account could take decades to recoup the fee savings.

Related News

This is not financial advice. Always do your own research.