SPLV vs SPY: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

SPLV and SPY are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SPLV is Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF, while SPY is State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF. SPY is broader by holdings count, with 505 positions versus 108 for SPLV. SPY is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SPLV ahead on AIQ Score, 70 versus 56.

Market data as of Nov 7, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Nov 7, 2026
SPLV
Invesco
vs
SPY
SPDR
SPLV
Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF
Issuer
Invesco
Inception
2011-05-05
SPY
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
Issuer
SPDR
Inception
1993-01-22

What is the main difference between SPLV and SPY?

SPY holds 505 positions to SPLV's 108, and 16% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
SPLV
0.25%
SPY
0.09%
Lower annual fund costSPY
Holdings
SPLV
108
SPY
505
Broader reported basketSPY
1Y return
SPLV
+8.6%
SPY
+8.5%
Trailing performanceSPLV
Annualized volatility
SPLV
11.1%
SPY
13.6%
Lower realized volatilitySPLV
MetricSPLVSPY
Fund
Expense ratio0.25%0.09%
Holdings108505
Top-10 concentration12.6%38.2%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months2.15%1.03%
Average volume2,130,26444,337,691
Performance
1Y return+8.6%+8.5%
YTD return+7.6%+7.8%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+6%+10.9%
Risk
Annualized volatility11.1%13.6%
Max drawdown (1Y)-9.6%-9.1%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-17.3%-24.5%
Beta0.051.00
Sharpe ratio0.470.46
Sortino ratio0.850.63
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score70/10056/100
AIQ Edge Score10/106/10
Momentum76/10024/100
Risk Resilience60/10077/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF

Data as of Nov 7, 2026· market close· Coverage 63/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 6/10

SPLV leads

SPLV leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SPY.

Fragile: 2 of 3 evidence groups support SPLV, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 3Comparison trend: Reversed
SPLV

Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
70/100
AIQ Edge Score
10/10
SPY

State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF

AIQ Score
56/100
AIQ Edge Score
6/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPLV over SPY, 70 versus 56 as of Nov 7, 2026. SPLV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while SPY holds the stronger risk resilience profile. SPLV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor SPLV today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. SPLV lead: Reversed — SPY led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SPLV now leads by 14.

Compare Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

SPLV vs SPY: which fits what

Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.

If you wantSPLVSPYFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.25%0.09%SPY
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings108505SPY
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings12.6%38.2%SPLV
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield2.15%1.03%SPLV
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-17.3%-24.5%SPLV
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year11.1%13.6%SPLV

Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

SPLV
+33.8%
SPY
+67.7%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

SPLV $13,383 · SPY $16,768

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare SPLV and SPY against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

AIQ Factor Divergence

Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.

SPLV advantage
0
SPY advantage
  • Momentum76 vs 24
    SPLV +52
  • Risk Resilience60 vs 77
    SPY +17
  • Quality69 vs 84
    SPY +15

2 of 3 evidence groups favor SPLV. SPLV’s edge is concentrated in momentum; SPY keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-11-06, compared against the prior scored session 2026-11-05.

SPLV+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +1

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.

SPY0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -3, not enough on its own to move the overall score.

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

SPLV's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPLV and SPY both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

SPLV (Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.

SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureSPLVSPYWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.25%0.09%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings108505More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume2,130,26444,337,691Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility11.1%13.6%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-9.6%-9.1%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio0.470.46Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta0.051.00Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio.

Where the exposure actually sits

Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.

Technology0.0% vs 38.6%
Utilities27.4% vs 2.0%
Real Estate16.1% vs 1.7%
Financial Services23.5% vs 11.8%
Communication Services0.0% vs 8.9%
Healthcare3.9% vs 9.8%
Consumer Cyclical3.8% vs 9.0%
Industrials13.1% vs 8.0%
SPLVSPY

How much of the same holdings they own

SPLV and SPY share 15.61% of their weighted exposure across 100 common holdings.

1 holding is unique to SPLV, and 404 holdings are unique to SPY. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

SPY is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 38.17% of the fund, against 12.58% for SPLV (505 holdings vs 108). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.

Largest shared positions

HoldingSPLVSPYShared
BRK-BBERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC CL B1.38%1.42%1.38%
JNJJohnson & Johnson1.14%0.98%0.98%
VVisa Inc0.95%0.93%0.93%
JPMJPMORGAN CHASE + CO0.89%1.45%0.89%
MAMastercard Inc0.93%0.7%0.7%
BACBank of America Corp0.91%0.62%0.62%
COSTCostco Wholesale Corp0.98%0.61%0.61%
CVXChevron Corp0.97%0.61%0.61%

Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.

What SPLV adds that SPY doesn’t

HoldingSPLVSPY
REGRegency Centers Corp1.28%0.02%
FEFirstEnergy Corp1.27%0.04%
DUKDuke Energy Corp1.26%0.14%
WECWEC Energy Group Inc1.26%0.05%
EVRGEvergy Inc1.25%0.03%
ATOAtmos Energy Corp1.24%0.04%

What SPY adds that SPLV doesn’t

HoldingSPYSPLV
NVDANVIDIA CORP8.08%Not held
AAPLAPPLE INC7.33%Not held
MSFTMICROSOFT CORP5.59%Not held
AMZNAMAZON.COM INC3.77%Not held
GOOGLALPHABET INC CL A2.98%Not held
AVGOBROADCOM INC2.61%Not held

Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor SPLV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreSPLV70 vs 56
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsSPLVPrice vs 50-day 4.2% vs -4%; vs 200-day 3.3% vs 0.9%
Risk ResilienceSPYRisk Resilience 60 vs 77
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SPLV and SPY and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)

Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on SPLV.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jul 8 – Nov 6

SPLV lead: Reversed — SPY led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SPLV now leads by 14.

Jul 8SPLV leads above the line · SPY leads belowNov 6
Today
SPLV +14
70 vs 56
7 sessions ago
SPLV +12
71 vs 59
30 sessions ago
SPY +1
65 vs 66
90 sessions ago
SPY +6
58 vs 64

The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when SPLV moved ahead of SPY.

AIQ Signal Divergence

Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.

SPLVConflicted

3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only SPLV

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.90%)
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.7%)
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
SPYConflicted

2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only SPY

  • Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.83%)
  • BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
  • Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon

Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Contraction - Coiling.

SPLV leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.

Price vs model alignment

Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.

SPLVDivergence

Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.93%, AIQ +1 points).

SPYNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.31%, AIQ 0 points).

What would flip this result

A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.

  1. 1SPY closes the Momentum gap — currently 52 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPLV's edge.
  2. 2SPY's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
  3. 3SPLV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
  4. 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.

The full evidence

Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.

Performance

SPLV leads 5 of 6 windows
MetricSPLVSPY
1 week (5 sessions)0.4%-2.7%
1 month (20 sessions)6.6%-5.6%
3 months (63 sessions)1.5%-4.9%
6 months (126 sessions)5.8%-0.3%
Year to date7.6%7.8%
1 year (252 sessions)8.6%8.5%

Technicals

SPLV has the stronger structure
MetricSPLVSPY
RSI (14)66.334.9
ADX (14)4118
Price vs 50-day4.2%-4%
Price vs 200-day3.3%0.9%
Volatility (1M, annualized)15.8%19.9%

Risk

SPY is the more resilient
MetricSPLVSPY
Beta0.051
Sharpe ratio0.470.46
Sortino ratio0.850.63
Max drawdown-9.6%-9.1%
Current drawdown-2.1%-5.6%
Annualized volatility11.1%13.6%
Value at risk (95%)-1%-1.5%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between SPLV and SPY?

SPY holds 505 positions to SPLV's 108, and 16% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do SPLV and SPY overlap?

SPLV and SPY share 15.61% of their weighted exposure across 100 common holdings. 1 holding is unique to SPLV, and 404 holdings are unique to SPY. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, SPLV or SPY?

SPY holds more positions: 505 versus 108 for SPLV.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

SPY has the lower expense ratio, 0.09% a year against 0.25% for SPLV.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

SPLV, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 2.15% against 1.03% for SPY.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

SPY has been more volatile over the past year, at 13.6% annualized against 11.1% for SPLV.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

SPLV fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -17.3% against -24.5% for SPY.

Compare SPLV and SPY with others

Continue your research

This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.

How this comparison is scored

The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.

The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.

How to use side-by-side comparison →

This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.