IGV
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
IGV vs XLK: One Software Book, or the Whole Tech Sector?
A head-to-head of iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF and the Technology Select Sector SPDR covering concentration, cost, and overlap.
Updated November 6, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- IGVInvestors who want targeted technology exposure and accept its concentration.
- XLKInvestors who want higher current income (0.54% while IGV makes no distribution).
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
XLK
Safe
High confidence
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  IGV |  XLK |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF | State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF |
| Issuer | iShares | State Street |
| Underlying index | S&P North American Expanded Technology Software Index | Technology Select Sector Index |
| Last Close | $98.88 as of November 6, 2026 | $164.74 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | 0.54% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | 0.02% | 0.51% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | 99 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | — | 0.53% |
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.08% |
| AUM | $12.4B | $110B |
| Distribution frequency | None | Quarterly |
| Objective | Seeks to track an index of North American companies in the software industry, along with select interactive media and services firms. | Track the Technology Select Sector Index, providing exposure to the information technology constituents of the S&P 500. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 07/10/2001 | 12/16/1998 |
| Beta | 1.25 | 1.56 |
| Last dividend | — | $0.221 |
| Ex-dividend date | 06/15/2026 | 09/21/2026 |
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
IGV has lagged XLK over the trailing twelve months, posting a -9.52% total return against 14.53%. The lead holds up over 10 years too: XLK has compounded at 22.95% a year, against 16.38% for IGV. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | 1Y cumulative | 3Y annualized | 5Y annualized | 10Y annualized | Since Jul 2001 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IGV | -6.43% | -9.52% | 12.47% | 2.49% | 16.38% | 9.61% | 27.3% | 0.28 | 0.40 | -36.6% |
| XLK | 14.84% | 14.53% | 24.76% | 15.39% | 22.95% | 11.70% | 25.9% | 0.70 | 0.97 | -25.7% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 6, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Jul 2001” measures every fund from July 17, 2001 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Not a distribution payer
IGV (iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. IGV is not a payer. The blank yield is not a zero yield.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineChoose IGV if you want targeted technology exposure and accept its concentration. Choose XLK if you want higher current income (0.54% while IGV makes no distribution).
IGV vs XLK: software or the tech sector?
XLK already includes many software names. IGV concentrates there. Breadth versus a software sleeve is the decision.
| IGV | XLK | |
|---|---|---|
| What it owns | Expanded tech-software names | Technology Select Sector Index |
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.08% |
| Distribution rate | — | 0.54% |
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs468
Total AUM$4.56T
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
iShares, operated by BlackRock, is one of the largest and most established ETF providers globally, known for offering broad, liquid index-tracking funds across nearly all asset classes and investment styles. The lineup encompasses a comprehensive range of strategies including core equity and bond exposure, dividend and income-focused funds, covered call strategies, ESG and thematic investments, factor-based approaches, alternatives, commodities, and municipal bonds, serving both individual and institutional investors. With numerous popular ticker symbols and extensive diversification across geographies, sectors, and investment objectives, iShares provides one of the market's widest selections of ETFs for building diversified portfolios.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on IGV.
ETFs186
Total AUM$2.09T
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Their 88-fund lineup spans diverse strategies including sector exposure (Select Sector SPDR), income generation (Income and Select Sector SPDR Premium Income families), commodities (including the widely-held GLD gold ETF), bonds, ESG-focused investments, and thematic allocations, with popular tickers like DIA (Diamonds Trust), FEZ (Eurozone exposure), and JNK (high-yield bonds) among their most recognized funds. The issuer is characterized by its comprehensive coverage across multiple market segments and its emphasis on both traditional index-based products and specialized strategies like covered call income funds and factor-based investing.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on XLK.
Quick verdict
IGV (iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF) and XLK (State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
XLK currently shows a 0.54% distribution yield. IGV has not yet established a full distribution history, so a comparable yield figure is not available.
XLK is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.08% compared to 0.38%.
They have different reference exposures: IGV is linked to S&P North American Expanded Technology Software Index while XLK is linked to Technology Select Sector Index, which means their performance drivers differ.
XLK is the larger fund by assets ($110B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Who should choose each?
Choose IGV
iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF
- Want targeted technology exposure and accept the concentration that comes with it.
- Prefer lower market sensitivity — a beta of 1.25 vs 1.56 for XLK.
Choose XLK
State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
- Want higher current income — XLK yields 0.54% while IGV makes no distribution.
- Want targeted technology exposure and accept the concentration that comes with it.
- Want to keep costs low — a 0.08% expense ratio vs 0.38% for IGV.
Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
2 shared positions
IGV 17.2% of its top-10 weight
XLK 14.9% of its top-10 weight
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at current distribution rates, IGV has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available, while XLK would pay about $54.00 a year (about $13.50 per quarterly distribution).
IGV yield—
XLK yield0.54%
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, IGV would cost approximately $380 in fees vs $80 for XLK (simplified, not compounded). The $300.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
IGV ER0.38%
XLK ER0.08%
Strategy & risk
IGV tracks S&P North American Expanded Technology Software Index with a technology approach, while XLK tracks Technology Select Sector Index with a technology approach. Beta is 1.25 for IGV and 1.56 for XLK, making IGV the less sensitive to market moves of the two by this measure.
IGV beta1.25
XLK beta1.56
Fund details
IGV is managed by iShares (launched 07/10/2001) with $12.4B in assets. XLK is managed by State Street (launched 12/16/1998) with $110B in assets.
IGV AUM$12.4B
XLK AUM$110B
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between IGV and XLK?
IGV (iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF) concentrates in software names. XLK (State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF) holds the technology select sector, which already includes many of those software names plus hardware and semis. Cost is 0.38% versus 0.08%; distributions are — and 0.54% as of November 2026. Breadth versus a software sleeve is the decision.
Which of IGV or XLK pays more dividend income?
XLK currently reports a distribution yield, while IGV has not yet established a full distribution history. A direct income comparison is not yet meaningful — check back once both funds have published several consecutive distributions.
Can I hold both IGV and XLK?
Yes. Their disclosed top-10 holdings share only 2 positions, so combining both adds mostly distinct underlying names — see the holdings-overlap section above. Overlap outside the disclosed top 10 can still exist.
Which has lower fees, IGV or XLK?
IGV has an expense ratio of 0.38% while XLK charges 0.08%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in IGV vs XLK generate?
At current distribution rates, IGV does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate. $10,000 in XLK would pay about $54.00 a year (about $13.50 per quarterly distribution).
Which has performed better historically, IGV or XLK?
IGV has lagged XLK over the trailing twelve months, posting a -9.52% total return against 14.53%. The lead holds up over 10 years too: XLK has compounded at 22.95% a year, against 16.38% for IGV. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare XLK with
Popular comparisons
Dividend dates and history
IGV vs XLK — at a glance
Generated November 7, 2026.
Overview
IGV and XLK are both technology-focused equity ETFs, but they serve different segments of the sector. IGV targets software, interactive media, and services companies across North America using the S&P Expanded Technology Software Index, while XLK provides exposure to the full Technology Select Sector of the S&P 500, including semiconductors, hardware, and IT services. The key distinction is breadth: XLK captures the entire S&P 500 tech footprint, whereas IGV narrows to software and select digital services.
How they differ
XLK is substantially larger, with $110B in assets compared to $12.4B for IGV, and carries a 0.08% expense ratio versus 0.38% for IGV—a 0.3 percentage-point gap that favors XLK for cost-conscious investors. IGV's software-only mandate introduces sector concentration, while XLK's broader S&P 500 tech exposure includes semiconductor and hardware companies that IGV excludes entirely.
Who each is best for
- IGV: Fits investors who believe software and digital services will outpace hardware and semiconductors and are comfortable with a concentrated bet on that thesis; also suits those prioritizing capital appreciation over current income.
- XLK: Designed for investors seeking diversified technology exposure across semiconductors, software, hardware, and IT services in a single holding; fits those valuing low costs and a modest dividend yield alongside market-tracking performance.
Key risks to know
- Sector concentration (IGV). Narrowing to software and interactive media means IGV lacks the diversification of hardware and semiconductor holdings that XLK includes. A downturn affecting software valuations or spending would hit IGV more acutely.
- Semiconductor and hardware exposure gap (IGV). Because IGV excludes chip makers and equipment vendors, investors get no upside from semiconductor cycles that may drive XLK gains, and miss diversification into that critical tech subsector.
- Valuation risk in large-cap tech (XLK). XLK's exposure to mega-cap software and cloud leaders—often trading at premium valuations—carries concentration risk in a handful of stocks, despite XLK's broader sector approach.
- Duration of holdings. IGV began in 07/10/2001; XLK in 12/16/1998, so both have extensive track records. However, software valuations and competitive dynamics have shifted dramatically since inception, making historical performance a limited guide.
Bottom line
If you want broad, low-cost technology sector exposure with a modest dividend, XLK's larger asset base, 0.08% fee, and 0.54% yield make it the cleaner choice. If you believe software and services will outpace semiconductors and are willing to accept higher volatility and no current income, IGV's narrower focus offers concentrated upside—but verify that the extra beta and lack of hardware/chip exposure align with your conviction. Past performance does not predict future results.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Learn the method
The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.