IVV vs. CGDV

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

IVV (iShares Core S&P 500 ETF) and CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IVV is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group. IVV is passively managed, while CGDV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IVV returned 20.95%/yr vs 24.15%/yr for CGDV. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IVV charges 0.03%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGDV.

Performance

IVV vs. CGDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IVV achieves a 9.08% return, which is significantly lower than CGDV's 11.55% return.

IVV

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: -0.85%
• YTD: 9.08%
• 6M: 9.43%
• 1Y: 25.77%
• 3Y*: 20.95%
• 5Y*: 13.42%
• 10Y*: 15.47%

CGDV

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 11.55%
• 6M: 12.50%
• 1Y: 28.33%
• 3Y*: 24.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IVV vs. CGDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IVV iShares Core S&P 500 ETF	9.08%	17.85%	24.93%	26.31%	-7.82%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	11.55%	25.50%	20.10%	28.81%	-0.44%

Correlation

The correlation between IVV and CGDV is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022	0.92

The correlation between IVV and CGDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

IVV vs. CGDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IVV	CGDV
Technology	39.0%	34.1%
Financial Services	11.1%	6.8%
Communication Services	10.6%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	10.6%
Healthcare	8.3%	11.5%
Industrials	7.8%	13.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	5.5%
Energy	3.1%	3.8%
Utilities	2.1%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.1%
Basic Materials	1.7%	2.9%

Return for Risk

IVV vs. CGDV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IVV

IVV Risk / Return Rank: 70
IVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
IVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
IVV Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
IVV Martin Ratio Rank: 76

CGDV

CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 78
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

IVV vs. CGDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). 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.

	IVV	CGDV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	2.27	-0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	3.11	-0.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.42	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.76	2.83	-0.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.43	13.19	-0.75

IVV vs. CGDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IVV Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is comparable to the CGDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IVV and CGDV, 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

IVV vs. CGDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IVV drawdown since its inception was -55.25%, which is greater than CGDV's maximum drawdown of -21.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IVV and CGDV.

Drawdown Indicators

	IVV	CGDV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.25%	-21.82%	-33.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.89%	-9.75%	+0.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.75%	-14.28%	-4.47%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.53%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.35%	-0.98%	-1.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.77%	-3.60%	-7.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	2.09%	-0.12%

Volatility

IVV vs. CGDV - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) have volatilities of 4.37% and 4.52%, 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

	IVV	CGDV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.37%	4.52%	-0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.59%	9.80%	-0.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.28%	12.13%	+0.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.95%	15.57%	+1.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.08%	15.57%	+2.51%

IVV vs. CGDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

IVV has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than CGDV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

IVV vs. CGDV - Dividend Comparison

IVV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, less than CGDV's 1.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	1.17%	1.29%	1.60%	1.65%	1.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IVV iShares Core S&P 500 ETF	1.08%	1.17%	1.30%	1.44%	1.66%	1.20%	1.57%	1.85%	2.21%	1.75%	2.01%	2.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IVV and CGDV in my portfolio?

IVV and CGDV have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IVV or CGDV?

CGDV has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to IVV (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IVV dropped -55.25% vs CGDV's -21.82%.

Which ETF is better, IVV or CGDV?

On 3-year performance, CGDV leads with 24.15% vs 20.95% for IVV. On fees, IVV is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, IVV has been the lower-risk option at 4.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IVV or CGDV?

Over the 3-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 24.15% return vs 20.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IVV or CGDV?

IVV is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CGDV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IVV or CGDV?

CGDV has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 1.08% for IVV.

What is the main difference between IVV and CGDV?

IVV is categorized as S&P 500, while CGDV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for IVV and 0.33% for CGDV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 2.00), 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.