SPLV vs VOO: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

SPLV and VOO are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SPLV is Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF, while VOO is Vanguard S&P 500 ETF. VOO is broader by holdings count, with 508 positions versus 108 for SPLV. VOO is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SPLV ahead on AIQ Score, 70 versus 54.

Market data as of Nov 7, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Nov 7, 2026
SPLV
Invesco
vs
VOO
Vanguard
SPLV
Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF
Issuer
Invesco
Inception
2011-05-05
VOO
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2010-09-07

What is the main difference between SPLV and VOO?

VOO holds 508 positions to SPLV's 108, and 16% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
SPLV
0.25%
VOO
0.03%
Lower annual fund costVOO
Holdings
SPLV
108
VOO
508
Broader reported basketVOO
1Y return
SPLV
+8.6%
VOO
+8.5%
Trailing performanceSPLV
Annualized volatility
SPLV
11.1%
VOO
13.6%
Lower realized volatilitySPLV
MetricSPLVVOO
Fund
Expense ratio0.25%0.03%
Holdings108508
Top-10 concentration12.6%37.6%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months2.15%1.1%
Average volume2,130,2646,909,667
Performance
1Y return+8.6%+8.5%
YTD return+7.6%+7.8%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+6%+11%
Risk
Annualized volatility11.1%13.6%
Max drawdown (1Y)-9.6%-9.2%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-17.3%-24.5%
Beta0.051.00
Sharpe ratio0.470.46
Sortino ratio0.850.63
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score70/10054/100
AIQ Edge Score10/106/10
Momentum76/10025/100
Risk Resilience60/10077/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF

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

SPLV leads

SPLV leads by 16 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, and the lead has widened from 2 points over 30 sessions.

Competitive: 2 of 3 evidence groups support SPLV, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 3Comparison trend: Strengthening
SPLV

Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF

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

Vanguard S&P 500 ETF

AIQ Score
54/100
AIQ Edge Score
6/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPLV over VOO, 70 versus 54 as of Nov 7, 2026. SPLV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while VOO 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 Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SPLV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 16 points over 30 sessions.

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

SPLV vs VOO: 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 wantSPLVVOOFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.25%0.03%VOO
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings108508VOO
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings12.6%37.6%SPLV
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield2.15%1.1%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%
VOO
+68.1%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

SPLV $13,383 · VOO $16,812

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 VOO 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
VOO advantage
  • Momentum76 vs 25
    SPLV +51
  • Risk Resilience60 vs 77
    VOO +17
  • Quality69 vs 77
    VOO +8

2 of 3 evidence groups favor SPLV. SPLV’s edge is concentrated in momentum; VOO 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.

VOO0 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 VOO 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.

VOO (Vanguard 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.

MeasureSPLVVOOWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.25%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings108508More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume2,130,2646,909,667Liquidity — 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%-9.2%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 40.5%
Utilities27.4% vs 1.9%
Real Estate16.1% vs 1.7%
Financial Services23.5% vs 11.1%
Communication Services0.0% vs 9.9%
Industrials13.1% vs 7.5%
Healthcare3.9% vs 9.3%
Consumer Cyclical3.8% vs 8.8%
SPLVVOO

How much of the same holdings they own

SPLV and VOO share 16.04% of their weighted exposure across 100 common holdings.

1 holding is unique to SPLV, and 405 holdings are unique to VOO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

VOO is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 37.65% of the fund, against 12.58% for SPLV (508 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

HoldingSPLVVOOShared
BRK-BBerkshire Hathaway Inc1.38%1.46%1.38%
JNJJohnson & Johnson1.14%0.96%0.96%
VVisa Inc0.95%0.93%0.93%
JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co0.89%1.46%0.89%
MAMastercard Inc0.93%0.72%0.72%
COSTCostco Wholesale Corp0.98%0.66%0.66%
BACBank of America Corp0.91%0.63%0.63%
CVXChevron Corp0.97%0.57%0.57%

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 VOO doesn’t

HoldingSPLVVOO
REGRegency Centers Corp1.28%0.02%
FEFirstEnergy Corp1.27%0.04%
DUKDuke Energy Corp1.26%0.15%
WECWEC Energy Group Inc1.26%0.06%
EVRGEvergy Inc1.25%0.03%
ATOAtmos Energy Corp1.24%0.04%

What VOO adds that SPLV doesn’t

HoldingVOOSPLV
NVDANVIDIA Corp7.55%Not held
AAPLApple Inc7.05%Not held
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.36%Not held
AMZNAmazon.com Inc4.13%Not held
GOOGLAlphabet Inc3.24%Not held
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.86%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 54
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsSPLVPrice vs 50-day 4.2% vs -4%; vs 200-day 3.3% vs 0.9%
Risk ResilienceVOORisk 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 VOO and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Competitive

The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.

  • The AIQ gap is wide at 16 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 SPLV.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jul 8 – Nov 6

SPLV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 16 points over 30 sessions.

Jul 8SPLV leads above the line · VOO leads belowNov 6
Today
SPLV +16
70 vs 54
7 sessions ago
SPLV +15
71 vs 56
30 sessions ago
SPLV +2
65 vs 63
90 sessions ago
VOO +4
58 vs 62

The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Oct 14 when SPLV moved ahead of VOO.

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
VOOConflicted

2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only VOO

  • 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).

VOONo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.3%, 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. 1VOO closes the Momentum gap — currently 51 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPLV's edge.
  2. 2VOO'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
MetricSPLVVOO
1 week (5 sessions)0.4%-2.7%
1 month (20 sessions)6.6%-5.5%
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
MetricSPLVVOO
RSI (14)66.334.9
ADX (14)4119.1
Price vs 50-day4.2%-4%
Price vs 200-day3.3%0.9%
Volatility (1M, annualized)15.8%19.8%

Risk

VOO is the more resilient
MetricSPLVVOO
Beta0.051
Sharpe ratio0.470.46
Sortino ratio0.850.63
Max drawdown-9.6%-9.2%
Current drawdown-2.1%-5.6%
Annualized volatility11.1%13.6%
Value at risk (95%)-1%-1.4%

Straight answers

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

What is the difference between SPLV and VOO?

VOO holds 508 positions to SPLV's 108, and 16% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do SPLV and VOO overlap?

SPLV and VOO share 16.04% of their weighted exposure across 100 common holdings. 1 holding is unique to SPLV, and 405 holdings are unique to VOO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, SPLV or VOO?

VOO holds more positions: 508 versus 108 for SPLV.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VOO has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% 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 1.1% for VOO.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

VOO 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 VOO.

Compare SPLV and VOO 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.