SPLV vs SPYM ETF Comparison
Compare SPLV and SPYM across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between SPLV and SPYM?
SPLV is Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF, while SPYM is State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF. SPLV is tied to Equity; SPYM is tied to Equity. SPYM is broader by holdings count, with 505 positions versus 101 for SPLV. SPYM is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | SPLV | SPYM | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.25% | 0.02% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $7.2B | $170.4B | Fund |
| Holdings | 101 | 505 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 24.5% | 58.5% | Fund |
| Average volume | 2,845,952 | 100 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Equity | Equity | Fund |
| Annualized volatility | 10.6% | 13.1% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -7.9% | -9.1% | Risk |
| Beta | 0.01 | 1.00 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.05 | 0.92 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | -0.09 | 1.39 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 58/100 | 62/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 7/10 | 9/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 39/100 | 59/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 67/100 | 89/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF vs State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF
SPYM leads
SPYM leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum.
Fragile: 3 of 3 evidence groups support SPYM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPYM over SPLV, 62 versus 58 as of Sep 5, 2026. SPYM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. SPYM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor SPYM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. SPYM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF and State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare SPLV and SPYM against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
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.
- Risk Resilience15%67 vs 89SPYM +22
- Momentum25%39 vs 59SPYM +20
- Quality30%70 vs 75SPYM +5
3 of 3 evidence groups favor SPYM. SPYM’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No new signals fired.
SPYM's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPLV and SPYM both carry a full feed there.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
SPYMSPYM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
SPYMSPYM on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
SPYMSPYM on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | SPLV | SPYM | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.25% | 0.02% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $7.2B | $170.4B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 104 | 505 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 2,845,952 | 100 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 10.6% | 13.1% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -7.9% | -9.1% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.05 | 0.92 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.01 | 1.00 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
SPLV and SPYM share 24.6% of their weighted exposure across 99 common holdings.
SPYM is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 58.47% of the fund, against 24.47% for SPLV (505 holdings vs 101). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
2 holdings are unique to SPLV and 406 to SPYM. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | SPLV | SPYM | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| BRK-BBerkshire Hathaway Inc | 2.72% | 2.79% | 2.72% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 2.33% | 2.01% | 2.01% |
| BACBank of America Corp | 1.78% | 1.23% | 1.23% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 1.89% | 1.19% | 1.19% |
| KOCoca-Cola Co/The | 2.19% | 1.03% | 1.03% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Co/The | 2.11% | 1.03% | 1.03% |
| VVisa Inc | 0.96% | 0.94% | 0.94% |
| JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co | 0.89% | 1.46% | 0.89% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
ETF comparison questions
Short answers to the fund-specific questions behind this comparison.
Which ETF is more diversified, SPLV or SPYM?
SPYM currently has more reported holdings, with 505 positions versus 101.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
SPYM has the lower reported expense ratio in the current fund profile.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
The current dataset does not show a higher-yield winner.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
SPYM has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
SPLV has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
SPYM currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 62 to 58.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor SPYM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SPYM | 58 vs 62 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | SPYM | Price vs 50-day -1.6% vs 1.9%; vs 200-day 1.6% vs 8.7% |
| Risk Resilience | SPYM | Risk Resilience 67 vs 89 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SPLV and SPYM and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 3 of 3 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 SPYM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3SPYM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SPYM +4
- 58 vs 62
- 7 sessions ago
- SPYM +2
- 59 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- SPYM +2
- 64 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- SPLV +12
- 68 vs 56
The lead changed hands 13 times in this window, most recently on Aug 27 when SPYM moved ahead of SPLV.
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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.61%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.96%)
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.28%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
SPYM 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.66%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.37%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1SPLV closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPYM's edge.
- 2SPLV's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3SPYM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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.
Technicals
SPYM has the stronger structure| Metric | SPLV | SPYM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.8 | 46.8 |
| ADX (14) | 10.5 | 13.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.6% | 1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.6% | 8.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 8.2% | 8.3% |
Risk
SPYM is the more resilient| Metric | SPLV | SPYM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.01 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.05 | 0.92 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.09 | 1.39 |
| Max drawdown | -7.9% | -9.1% |
| Current drawdown | -3.5% | -0.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 10.6% | 13.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SPLV or SPYM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SPYM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 62 against SPLV's 58. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is SPLV or SPYM the better buy right now?
SPYM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 3 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SPYM over SPLV?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SPYM leads Risk Resilience by 22 points; SPYM leads Momentum by 20 points; SPYM leads Quality by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, SPLV or SPYM?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, SPLV or SPYM?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, SPLV or SPYM?
SPYM on the Momentum factor, by 20 points. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, SPLV or SPYM?
SPYM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPYM on Risk Resilience, by 22 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is SPLV more profitable than SPYM?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is SPYM's lead over SPLV getting stronger or weaker?
SPYM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 13 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-27, when SPYM moved ahead of SPLV.
What would change the SPLV vs SPYM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SPLV closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPYM's edge; SPLV's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; SPYM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about SPLV and SPYM?
SPLV: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. SPYM: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on SPLV is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SPYM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SPLV and SPYM with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.