IVVW vs. IVW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IVVW (iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF) and IVW (iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IVVW is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Enhanced 1% OTM BuyWrite Index, while IVW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IVVW returned 17.28% vs 26.74% for IVW. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IVVW charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IVW.

Performance

IVVW vs. IVW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IVVW achieves a 4.01% return, which is significantly lower than IVW's 8.67% return.

IVVW

• 1D: -1.24%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 4.01%
• 6M: 4.08%
• 1Y: 17.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IVW

• 1D: -2.32%
• 1M: -2.04%
• YTD: 8.67%
• 6M: 7.44%
• 1Y: 26.74%
• 3Y*: 25.36%
• 5Y*: 13.97%
• 10Y*: 17.93%

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

IVVW vs. IVW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IVVW iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF	4.01%	11.71%	12.76%
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	8.67%	21.95%	21.91%

Correlation

The correlation between IVVW and IVW is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2024	0.84

The correlation between IVVW and IVW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

IVVW vs. IVW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IVVW	IVW
Technology	38.4%	53.0%
Financial Services	11.0%	8.6%
Communication Services	10.8%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	8.4%
Healthcare	8.4%	5.7%
Industrials	7.9%	5.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	1.0%
Energy	3.2%	0.1%
Utilities	2.1%	1.2%
Real Estate	1.8%	0.5%
Basic Materials	1.7%	0.3%

Return for Risk

IVVW vs. IVW — Risk / Return Rank

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

IVVW

IVVW Risk / Return Rank: 73
IVVW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
IVVW Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
IVVW Omega Ratio Rank: 83
IVVW Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
IVVW Martin Ratio Rank: 83

IVW

IVW Risk / Return Rank: 45
IVW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
IVW Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Omega Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
IVW Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

IVVW vs. IVW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF (IVVW) and iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW). 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.

	IVVW	IVW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	1.58	+0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	2.16	+0.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.28	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.99	1.95	+1.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.95	7.75	+8.20

IVVW vs. IVW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IVVW Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is higher than the IVW Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IVVW and IVW, 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

IVVW vs. IVW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IVVW drawdown since its inception was -16.79%, smaller than the maximum IVW drawdown of -57.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IVVW and IVW.

Drawdown Indicators

	IVVW	IVW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.79%	-57.33%	+40.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.81%	-13.75%	+7.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.15%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-32.72%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-32.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.37%	-5.48%	+4.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.73%	-17.59%	+15.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.09%	3.46%	-2.37%

Volatility

IVVW vs. IVW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF (IVVW) is 3.45%, while iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) has a volatility of 7.23%. This indicates that IVVW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IVW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IVVW	IVW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.45%	7.23%	-3.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.91%	13.82%	-6.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.05%	17.06%	-9.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.69%	21.35%	-8.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.69%	20.70%	-8.01%

IVVW vs. IVW - Expense Ratio Comparison

IVVW has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IVW's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IVVW vs. IVW - Dividend Comparison

IVVW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.86%, more than IVW's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IVVW iShares S&P 500 BuyWrite ETF	19.86%	18.55%	13.72%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	0.37%	0.40%	0.43%	1.03%	0.92%	0.46%	0.82%	1.63%	1.28%	1.30%	1.51%	1.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IVVW and IVW in my portfolio?

IVVW and IVW have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IVVW or IVW?

IVW has higher volatility (7.23%) compared to IVVW (3.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IVVW dropped -16.79% vs IVW's -57.33%.

Which ETF is better, IVVW or IVW?

On 1-year performance, IVW leads with 26.74% vs 17.28% for IVVW. On fees, IVW is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IVVW has been the lower-risk option at 3.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IVVW or IVW?

Over the 1-year period, IVW has performed better with a 26.74% return vs 17.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IVVW or IVW?

IVW is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for IVVW.

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

IVVW has the higher dividend yield at 19.86%, compared with 0.37% for IVW.

What is the main difference between IVVW and IVW?

IVVW is categorized as Derivative Income, while IVW is Large Cap Growth Equities. IVVW tracks Cboe S&P 500 Enhanced 1% OTM BuyWrite Index, while IVW tracks S&P 500 Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for IVVW and 0.18% for IVW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IVVW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.58), 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.