FGSI vs. IVVW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FGSI (First Trust Vest Growth Strength & Target Income ETF) and IVVW (iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. FGSI is actively managed, while IVVW is passively managed. Over the past year, FGSI returned 11.13% vs 18.56% for IVVW. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FGSI charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IVVW.

Performance

FGSI vs. IVVW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Vest Growth Strength & Target Income ETF (FGSI) and iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF (IVVW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FGSI achieves a 8.34% return, which is significantly higher than IVVW's 7.09% return.

FGSI

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 1.55%
• 6M: 6.78%
• YTD: 8.34%
• 1Y: 11.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.03%

IVVW

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: 1.31%
• 6M: 6.25%
• YTD: 7.09%
• 1Y: 18.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.42%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FGSI First Trust Vest Growth Strength & Target Income ETF	$3.03K	$2.79K	$11.92K
IVVW iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF	$1.59M	$1.91M	$2.60M

FGSI vs. IVVW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FGSI First Trust Vest Growth Strength & Target Income ETF	8.34%	4.53%
IVVW iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF	7.09%	11.99%

Correlation

The correlation between FGSI and IVVW is 0.76, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.73

The correlation between FGSI and IVVW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

FGSI vs. IVVW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FGSI	IVVW
Technology	31.9%	36.9%
Healthcare	18.2%	9.4%
Financial Services	16.0%	12.5%
Consumer Cyclical	13.3%	8.9%
Industrials	11.3%	7.8%
Communication Services	5.2%	9.7%
Energy	4.8%	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	4.8%
Basic Materials	1.6%	1.8%
Real Estate	-	2.0%
Utilities	-	2.6%

Return for Risk

FGSI vs. IVVW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FGSI

FGSI Risk / Return Rank: 34
FGSI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
FGSI Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
FGSI Omega Ratio Rank: 30
FGSI Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FGSI Martin Ratio Rank: 38

IVVW

IVVW Risk / Return Rank: 87
IVVW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
IVVW Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
IVVW Omega Ratio Rank: 91
IVVW Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
IVVW Martin Ratio Rank: 92

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FGSI vs. IVVW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Vest Growth Strength & Target Income ETF (FGSI) and iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF (IVVW). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FGSI	IVVW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.81	2.05	-1.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.20	2.83	-1.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.43	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.23	3.02	-1.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.01	15.69	-11.68

FGSI vs. IVVW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FGSI Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the IVVW Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGSI and IVVW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FGSI vs. IVVW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGSI drawdown since its inception was -8.25%, smaller than the maximum IVVW drawdown of -16.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGSI and IVVW.

Drawdown Indicators

	FGSI	IVVW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.25%	-16.79%	+8.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.25%	-5.81%	-2.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.11%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.84%	-1.68%	-0.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.53%	1.12%	+1.41%

Volatility

FGSI vs. IVVW - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Vest Growth Strength & Target Income ETF (FGSI) and iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF (IVVW) have volatilities of 3.01% and 2.90%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FGSI	IVVW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.01%	2.90%	+0.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.13%	7.28%	+2.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.64%	8.56%	+4.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.34%	12.56%	-0.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.34%	12.56%	-0.22%

FGSI vs. IVVW - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGSI has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IVVW's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

FGSI vs. IVVW - Dividend Comparison

FGSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.19%, less than IVVW's 19.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FGSI First Trust Vest Growth Strength & Target Income ETF	8.19%	4.20%	0.00%
IVVW iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF	19.01%	18.55%	13.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FGSI and IVVW in my portfolio?

FGSI and IVVW have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FGSI or IVVW?

FGSI has higher volatility (3.01%) compared to IVVW (2.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FGSI dropped -8.25% vs IVVW's -16.79%.

Which ETF is better, FGSI or IVVW?

On 1-year performance, IVVW leads with 18.56% vs 11.13% for FGSI. On fees, IVVW is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, IVVW has been the lower-risk option at 2.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FGSI or IVVW?

Over the 1-year period, IVVW has performed better with a 18.56% return vs 11.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FGSI or IVVW?

IVVW is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FGSI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FGSI or IVVW?

IVVW has the higher dividend yield at 19.01%, compared with 8.19% for FGSI.

What is the main difference between FGSI and IVVW?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FGSI and 0.25% for IVVW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IVVW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 0.81), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.