PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RECS vs. IVV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RECS vs. IVV - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RECS achieves a 6.61% return, which is significantly lower than IVV's 10.85% return. Over the past 10 years, RECS has underperformed IVV with an annualized return of 9.89%, while IVV has yielded a comparatively higher 15.54% annualized return.


RECS

1D
-0.75%
1M
4.11%
YTD
6.61%
6M
6.84%
1Y
25.02%
3Y*
21.66%
5Y*
14.04%
10Y*
9.89%

IVV

1D
-0.76%
1M
4.97%
YTD
10.85%
6M
10.87%
1Y
28.00%
3Y*
22.43%
5Y*
13.88%
10Y*
15.54%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RECS vs. IVV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RECS
Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF
6.61%19.30%26.27%23.19%-14.39%32.73%15.35%-0.93%0.00%0.00%
IVV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
10.85%17.85%24.93%26.31%-18.16%28.76%18.40%31.07%-4.49%21.75%

Correlation

The correlation between RECS and IVV is 0.94, 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

0.94

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.96

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.96

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2001

0.45

Over the past year, RECS and IVV have become more correlated (0.94) than their long-term average of 0.45, meaning their price movements have been converging.

RECS vs. IVV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RECS
IVV

Technology

33.6%
35.6%

Financial Services

13.2%
11.8%

Communication Services

11.0%
11.2%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
10.1%

Healthcare

9.9%
8.5%

Industrials

6.7%
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

5.0%
4.9%

Energy

3.4%
3.5%

Real Estate

2.3%
1.9%

Utilities

2.2%
2.4%

Basic Materials

2.1%
1.8%

Technology

RECS
33.6%
IVV
35.6%

Financial Services

RECS
13.2%
IVV
11.8%

Communication Services

RECS
11.0%
IVV
11.2%

Consumer Cyclical

RECS
10.6%
IVV
10.1%

Healthcare

RECS
9.9%
IVV
8.5%

Industrials

RECS
6.7%
IVV
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

RECS
5.0%
IVV
4.9%

Energy

RECS
3.4%
IVV
3.5%

Real Estate

RECS
2.3%
IVV
1.9%

Utilities

RECS
2.2%
IVV
2.4%

Basic Materials

RECS
2.1%
IVV
1.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

RECS vs. IVV — Risk / Return Rank

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

RECS
RECS Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
RECS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RECS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
RECS Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
RECS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
RECS Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank

IVV
IVV Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
IVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
IVV Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
IVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
IVV Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RECS vs. IVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV). 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.


RECSIVVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.43

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.85

3.17

-0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.27

14.71

-2.44

RECS vs. IVV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RECS Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is comparable to the IVV Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RECS and IVV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RECSIVVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.13

2.39

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

0.83

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.86

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.45

-0.08

Drawdowns

RECS vs. IVV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RECS drawdown since its inception was -34.29%, smaller than the maximum IVV drawdown of -55.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RECS and IVV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RECSIVVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.29%

-55.25%

+20.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.82%

-8.89%

+0.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.60%

-18.75%

+0.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.08%

-24.53%

+2.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.29%

-33.90%

-0.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.93%

-0.76%

-0.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.28%

-10.78%

+9.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.04%

1.91%

+0.13%

Volatility

RECS vs. IVV - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) have volatilities of 2.97% and 2.87%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RECSIVVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.97%

2.87%

+0.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.84%

8.90%

-0.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.78%

11.80%

-0.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.38%

16.88%

-0.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.22%

18.05%

-1.83%

RECS vs. IVV - Expense Ratio Comparison

RECS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than IVV's 0.03% 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

RECS vs. IVV - Dividend Comparison

RECS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than IVV's 1.06% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IVV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
1.06%1.17%1.30%1.44%1.66%1.20%1.57%1.85%2.21%1.75%2.01%2.27%
RECS
Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF
1.04%1.11%1.09%1.00%1.41%20.64%1.09%0.49%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, RECS and IVV move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

RECS has higher volatility (2.97%) compared to IVV (2.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RECS dropped -34.29% vs IVV's -55.25%.

On 10-year performance, IVV leads with 15.54% vs 9.89% for RECS. On fees, IVV is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, IVV has been the lower-risk option at 2.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IVV has performed better with a 15.54% return vs 9.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IVV is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for RECS.

IVV has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 1.04% for RECS.

RECS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while IVV is S&P 500. RECS tracks Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index, while IVV tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for RECS and 0.03% for IVV.

IVV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 2.13), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RECS and IVV

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer