FBCG vs NBGX
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF vs Neuberger Berman Growth ETF
Which is better, FBCG or NBGX?
Nearly the same fund. NBGX costs less.
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.5%.
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 | NBGX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.57% | 0.44%Best |
| AUM | $7.6B | $15M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.03% | 0.38% |
| Holdings | 245 | 112 |
| YTD Return | +12.59%Best | +8.10% |
| 1Y Return | +17.09%Best | +9.56% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +27.54% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.04% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.9% | 15.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -27.9% | -21.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $13,296Best | $12,451 |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.5% | 53.4%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | Dec 18, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 19, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
FBCG vs NBGX 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 1.8 years both funds cover.
FBCG vs NBGX Performance
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust. Over the past year FBCG returned +17.09% while NBGX returned +9.56%. Year to date, FBCG is up 12.59% versus a gain of 8.10% for NBGX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FBCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.9% compared with 15.8% for NBGX. 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 -21.6% for NBGX. 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 NBGX charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $57 vs $44 annually, a gap of $13 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FBCG currently yields 0.03% against 0.38% for NBGX.
Holdings Overlap
69.1% of FBCG's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 83.0% of NBGX's money is in holdings FBCG also owns.
Most of NBGX is already inside FBCG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
34 positions in common, counted across the 200 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 58 in NBGX, against full books of 245 and 112.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 22 positions for NBGX that do not appear in our book for FBCG (13.9% of the fund), and 150 for FBCG that do not appear in NBGX (28.5%).
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 NBGX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 15.68% | 10.67% | 5.01% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 8.64% | 8.85% | 0.21% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 9.22% | 4.43% | 4.79% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.56% | 5.36% | 0.20% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.11% | 4.94% | 0.83% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.97% | 3.91% | 1.06% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.42% | 6.07% | 3.65% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.65% | 2.92% | 0.27% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.37% | 2.85% | 0.48% |
| 2330:TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd | 1.13% | 2.90% | 1.77% |
83.0% of NBGX 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 NBGX?
FBCG has an expense ratio of 0.57% while NBGX charges 0.44%. NBGX is the cheaper option, by $13 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FBCG or NBGX?
Over the past year FBCG returned +17.09% vs +9.56% for NBGX, so FBCG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FBCG annualized +17.15% vs +12.95% for NBGX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FBCG or NBGX?
FBCG has been the more volatile fund at 20.9% annualized versus 15.8% for NBGX. Worst drawdown: FBCG -27.9% vs NBGX -21.6%.
Should I hold both FBCG and NBGX?
FBCG and NBGX 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 NBGX?
83.0% of NBGX's money is in holdings FBCG also owns. 83.0% of NBGX's is in holdings FBCG also owns. They hold 34 positions in common, counted across the 200 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 58 in NBGX.
Which pays a higher dividend, FBCG or NBGX?
FBCG yields 0.03% while NBGX yields 0.38%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NBGX better than FBCG?
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.