By Kestutis Balciunas·Reviewed August 26, 2026

SPDR vs iShares S&P 500 ETF 2026: SPYL vs CSPX Compared

SPDR’s SPYL charges 0.03% and iShares’ CSPX charges 0.07%, so SPDR wins on cost by 4 basis points — €40 a year per €100,000. CSPX wins on everything else that is measurable: €132.6bn of assets against SPYL’s €16.1bn, a 2010 launch against 2023, and a 1–2 bp Xetra spread against 2–4 bp. If you buy monthly in small amounts, the tighter spread can eat the fee saving; if you buy in size and hold for decades, take the 0.03%. Both are Irish-domiciled, physically replicating, accumulating and track the identical index.

To see what a few basis points really cost over 30 years, the TER drag calculator projects the gap in euros.

TER, fund size and launch dates below were read on 26 August 2026 from the justETF profiles for IE000XZSV718 and IE00B5BMR087, cross-checked against the issuers’ own product pages. Spreads and tracking difference are observed ranges, not published figures.

SPDR’s IE000XZSV718 and the iShares Core IE00B5BMR087 both compete inside the wider UCITS S&P 500 shelf. For the bigger picture, see our European ETF providers compared 2026 hub. Moreover, to weigh S&P 500 against truly global core options, read our VWCE vs all-world comparison hub.

For European investors seeking long-term S&P 500 exposure, the SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (IE000XZSV718) is the cheaper of the two at 0.03% against 0.07% for the iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (IE00B5BMR087) — a saving of €40 a year on €100,000. Both ETFs track the same index with nearly identical performance. However, the cost difference compounds significantly over two decades. Consequently, buy-and-hold investors save thousands of euros when they treat the S&P 500 as a portfolio core building block.

Understanding the Two Contenders

The SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (IE000XZSV718) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (IE00B5BMR087) both give European investors synthetic-free, full-replication exposure to America’s 500 largest publicly listed companies. Both are accumulating, Irish-domiciled UCITS funds. However, they sit at very different points on the size-versus-cost frontier. SPYL is SPDR’s lean, ultra-cheap challenger. State Street launched it specifically to compete with the iShares incumbent on headline TER. By contrast, iShares CSPX is the most-traded S&P 500 UCITS in Europe by a wide margin. It boasts a 14-year track record. Additionally, institutional desks have spent a decade building around its exceptional secondary-market liquidity.

The strategic question for a European retail investor is straightforward. Does the 4 basis-point cost advantage of SPYL outweigh the liquidity, tracking precision and broker-availability moat that CSPX has built? For most long-term passive investors holding through a low-cost EU broker, the answer is yes. In practice, the compounding math of a lower TER over 20 years dominates a one-time spread of a few basis points. However, CSPX’s liquidity premium is genuinely worth paying for active rebalancers and tactical traders. The same applies to anyone holding inside a regulated wrapper that limits which ETFs settle smoothly. Both funds replicate the S&P 500 in the Bogleheads-style sense — own the market, hold for decades, ignore the noise. Therefore, the choice is mostly about cost mechanics and operational comfort rather than investment philosophy.

This same logic underpins our broader provider comparison in Vanguard vs iShares. There, the same TER-versus-liquidity tradeoff plays out across multiple equity sleeves.

Does the SPDR fund really cost less than the iShares one?

Yes, but only at fund level. SPYL’s 0.03% against CSPX’s 0.07% is a real 4-basis-point saving, worth €40 a year per €100,000 held. Against that, CSPX quotes 1–2 bp on Xetra where SPYL quotes 2–4 bp, so a monthly buyer crossing a 2 bp wider spread twelve times a year gives back roughly half of the annual saving before it is even earned. The fee winner and the total-cost winner are not the same fund for everybody.

Both ETFs are full-replication, Irish-domiciled, USD-base UCITS. Yet they trade in EUR on Xetra, Borsa Italiana and Euronext. Additionally, they have separate USD and GBP listings on the London Stock Exchange. We cross-referenced both against the Morningstar UK ETF screener. The SPYL spread sat in the 2–4 bps range during liquid US hours. By contrast, CSPX consistently traded at 1–2 bps. This reflects its multi-decade head start. Notably, nearly every European market-maker quotes it.

The table below crystallises the head-to-head. AUM, TER and replication method come directly from the provider factsheets and KIDs. Tracking difference reflects 3-year annualised data from justETF. We observed spreads midpoint-to-midpoint during 14:30–21:00 CET when US futures are active.

Key things to know about spdr vs. ishares

The headline TER gap is 4 basis points. It looks small in any single year. However, it grows cumulatively meaningful over a multi-decade holding period. The tracking-difference column matters even more. SPYL actually runs slightly ahead of CSPX on net-of-fees tracking. The lower fee mostly converts into lower drag. Securities lending revenue gets rebated to both funds. Consequently, both come in tracking the gross index more tightly than their headline TER would suggest. For investors who want a direct sibling comparison to Vanguard’s S&P 500 sleeve, our breakdown in VUSA vs CSPX vs VUAA covers the three-way matrix in detail.

Liquidity matters in two distinct ways. First, the bid-ask spread you pay on entry and exit — the round-trip cost. CSPX’s 1–2 bps spread effectively recovers about half a year of TER savings on a single trade. However, this only matters if you trade rather than dollar-cost-average. Second, large-block execution: CSPX’s €106bn AUM means even a €1m order rarely moves the screen. By contrast, SPYL’s €9bn book is shallower. Moreover, it relies more on authorised participants to create units in real time. For retail-sized monthly contributions of €500–€5,000, both prove effectively frictionless. The fee-analysis perspective mirrors what we documented in the SXR8 vs VUAA S&P 500 ETF fee analysis. Notably, the headline TER almost always wins for buy-and-hold passive investors at retail scale.

Tax Footprint by Country: DE / FR / IT / NL

For the regulatory backdrop on UCITS share classes and KID disclosures, we cross-checked the canonical sources. These include the ESMA register, the SPDR SPY5/SPYL KID PDF on ssga.com and the iShares CSPX KID on ishares.com. Additionally, BaFin publishes the supervisory framework for German Teilfreistellung. The fund-level US withholding tax treaty rate (15% on US dividends, applied at the Irish UCITS layer) is identical for SPYL and CSPX. Importantly, Ireland’s tax treaty network is the structural reason both funds exist in Dublin in the first place.

Selection criteria: the fund comparison criteria explains exactly how funds earn a place in this comparison.

The country-by-country picture for the four largest retail markets in continental Europe appears below. These are accumulating share-class treatments for a tax-resident individual holding inside a standard taxable brokerage account, not a pension wrapper.

Rates referenced here follow our 2026 ETF tax data, checked against official sources.

Key things to know about spdr vs. ishares

Germany’s Teilfreistellung is the standout structural advantage in this list. Both SPYL and CSPX hold more than 50% equities. Therefore, they qualify as Aktienfonds under InvStG. German residents get a 30% partial exemption on both the Vorabpauschale and on realised capital gains. This materially reduces the effective tax rate compared to a non-fund equivalent. France is the polar opposite. The PEA wrapper is the most tax-efficient retail equity account. However, it excludes non-EU underlyings. Consequently, neither SPYL nor CSPX can sit inside it. Investors pay 31.4% PFU on any gain in a standard CTO account. Italy applies the 26% capital-gains rate plus a 0.2% annual stamp duty (imposta di bollo) on the position value. This acts as a small but persistent drag.

The Netherlands taxes the assumed return rather than the realised one. Therefore, accumulating funds are neither penalised nor preferred relative to distributing ones. This quirk makes both SPYL and CSPX equally Box-3-neutral.

None of these tax frameworks alter the SPYL-vs-CSPX preference order. Both funds are accumulating, Ireland-domiciled UCITS with identical fund-level US withholding tax treatment. Therefore, the 4bp TER advantage of SPYL flows through to investors in every one of these jurisdictions the same way. Where the tax frameworks genuinely matter is the choice between accumulating and distributing share classes. Additionally, they matter for choosing between an S&P 500 sleeve and a broader UCITS basket. We explore both topics further in our UCITS ETF complete guide for European investors.

How They Sit Inside The Wider European Cluster

SPYL and CSPX are not the only S&P 500 UCITS on the European shelf. Zooming out helps frame the choice. Vanguard’s VUSA (distributing) and VUAA (accumulating) sit at 0.07% TER with strong tracking. Invesco’s MXFP synthetic-replication SP500 ETF undercuts on US dividend withholding through a swap-based structure. Additionally, Xtrackers’ XDPU offers another 0.07% accumulating option. Within the SPDR brand, SPYL sits alongside SPY5 (a sibling distributing share class) and broader sleeves we cover in the best State Street SPDR ETFs review. On the iShares side, CSPX is just one entry in a much larger family of low-cost core ETFs. Our best iShares ETFs for European investors roundup details them all.

The strategic question for most investors is not actually “SPYL or CSPX” — both are excellent. The real question is whether an S&P 500 sleeve should anchor the portfolio at all. Or whether a global FTSE All-World tracker like VWCE (covered in depth in our VWCE comparison hub) better matches a Bogleheads-style total-market philosophy. For an investor convinced that US large-cap exposure is the right call, picking the lower-TER, equally-replicated SPYL is the rational default. Notably, this is exactly the same logic that drove the original SPYL vs CSPX flow into SPYL during 2023–2025.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is State Street the same as SPDR?

Yes. SPDR is State Street Global Advisors’ ETF brand, and the funds now carry both names — the fund in this comparison is formally the State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Unhedged (Acc). If a screener shows you “State Street SPDR” where you expected plain “SPDR”, nothing has changed about the fund; only the naming convention has. State Street is the third-largest ETF issuer in the world and launched the first US ETF in 1993.

What is the difference between an ETF and a SPDR?

There is none in structure. A SPDR is an ETF — the word is a brand, not a fund type, and it started as an acronym for Standard & Poor’s Depositary Receipts. Comparing “an ETF” with “a SPDR” is like comparing a car with a Volkswagen. What actually differs between funds is the index, the domicile, the replication method, the TER and the share class.

Which is better, SPDR or Vanguard, for an S&P 500 UCITS ETF?

On price, SPDR: SPYL at 0.03% undercuts Vanguard’s VUAA at 0.07%. On scale, Vanguard: VUAA holds roughly €30bn against SPYL’s €16.1bn, and Vanguard has run its S&P 500 UCITS line since 2012. Both are Irish-domiciled and accumulate. Since the index is identical, the honest answer is the same as for SPDR vs iShares: buy whichever your broker sells commission-free, and only chase the 0.03% if you are dealing in size.

Is the US-listed SPY ETF the same as iShares IUSA or SPDR SPYL for European investors?

No. SPY is a US-listed 1940-Act fund. It generally cannot be distributed to retail EU residents under PRIIPs rules. The UCITS-equivalents are SPDR SPYL (IE000XZSV718), iShares IUSA (IE0031442068) and iShares CSPX (IE00B5BMR087).

Accumulating vs distributing — which S&P 500 UCITS share class should I pick?

Accumulating (SPYL or CSPX) reinvests dividends inside the fund. Moreover, it defers a personal taxable event in most EU jurisdictions. Distributing (SPY5 or VUSA) pays cash dividends to your brokerage account. This is easier to track for income-focused investors. However, it creates a taxable event each distribution.

Does the 0.04% TER difference between SPDR and iShares actually matter?

On a 10,000 EUR lump sum with 10% gross return, the TER gap compounds to ~485 EUR after 20 years. On a 100,000 EUR portfolio it scales to ~4,850 EUR. Small at any single point in time. However, it proves meaningful over a buy-and-hold horizon.

How does German Teilfreistellung work for these S&P 500 UCITS ETFs?

Both SPYL and CSPX get a 30% partial tax exemption before Abgeltungsteuer of 25% plus Soli. They qualify as equity funds (Aktienfonds) under InvStG with more than 50% equity holdings. Importantly, the exemption applies both to Vorabpauschale and to realised gains.

Are SPYL and CSPX truly UCITS and protected under EU rules?

Yes. Both are Ireland-domiciled UCITS ETFs. Their KIDs are filed under PRIIPs. Additionally, they are ring-fenced from the fund manager’s balance sheet and held in segregated custody with State Street and BlackRock respectively. Crucially, UCITS structures are recognised across all EU/EEA member states.

Which broker is best for buying SPYL or CSPX as a European investor?

Any MiFID II-regulated EU broker with Xetra, Borsa Italiana or Euronext access — see our best European ETF brokers 2026 hub.

Kestutis Balciunas
European UCITS/ETF investor with 11+ years building a global dividend and index portfolio, and founder of Financial Expert Class. I write every guide here from first-hand experience investing across EU brokers and tax regimes — not theory. More about me →