FBCG vs FELG
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF vs Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, FBCG or FELG?
Nearly the same fund. FELG costs less.
FELG has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. FBCG is less concentrated, with 57.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FBCG | FELG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.57% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $7.6B | $5.8B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.03% | 0.35% |
| Holdings | 245 | 135 |
| YTD Return | +12.59%Best | +7.63% |
| 1Y Return | +17.09%Best | +10.39% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +27.54%Best | +22.35% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.04% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.6% | 15.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -27.9% | -23.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $19,502Best | $17,949 |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.5%Best | 58.3% |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Fidelity Investments (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | Nov 20, 2023 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 20, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.9 years).
FBCG vs FELG growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.9 years both funds cover.
FBCG vs FELG Performance
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US). Over the past year FBCG returned +17.09% while FELG returned +10.39%. Year to date, FBCG is up 12.59% versus a gain of 7.63% for FELG.
Over three years, FBCG compounded at +27.54% per year against +22.35% for FELG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FBCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.6% compared with 15.6% for FELG. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -27.9% for FBCG and -23.9% for FELG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.98. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FBCG charges 0.57% per year while FELG charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $57 vs $18 annually, a gap of $39 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FBCG currently yields 0.03% against 0.35% for FELG.
Holdings Overlap
73.6% of FBCG's money is in holdings FELG also owns. 83.1% of FELG's money is in holdings FBCG also owns.
Most of FELG is already inside FBCG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
56 positions in common, counted across the 200 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 127 in FELG, against full books of 245 and 135.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 56 positions for FELG that do not appear in our book for FBCG (16.5% of the fund), and 125 for FBCG that do not appear in FELG (22.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FBCG | Weight in FELG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corporation | 15.68% | 16.24% | 0.56% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 9.22% | 8.01% | 1.21% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc Cl A | 8.64% | 7.46% | 1.18% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.56% | 5.00% | 0.56% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.11% | 5.05% | 0.94% |
| MUMicron Technology Inc . | 2.37% | 4.02% | 1.65% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc Class A | 2.42% | 3.81% | 1.39% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.65% | 3.11% | 0.46% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.97% | 0.53% | 4.44% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.47% | 2.63% | 1.16% |
83.1% of FELG is already inside FBCG.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FBCG or FELG?
FBCG has an expense ratio of 0.57% while FELG charges 0.18%. FELG is the cheaper option, by $39 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FBCG or FELG?
Over the past year FBCG returned +17.09% vs +10.39% for FELG, so FBCG leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FBCG or FELG?
FBCG has been the more volatile fund at 18.6% annualized versus 15.6% for FELG. Worst drawdown: FBCG -27.9% vs FELG -23.9%.
Should I hold both FBCG and FELG?
FBCG and FELG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.98, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FBCG and FELG?
83.1% of FELG's money is in holdings FBCG also owns. 83.1% of FELG's is in holdings FBCG also owns. They hold 56 positions in common, counted across the 200 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 127 in FELG.
Which pays a higher dividend, FBCG or FELG?
FBCG yields 0.03% while FELG yields 0.35%, so FELG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FELG better than FBCG?
FELG has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. FBCG is less concentrated, with 57.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.