FBCV vs REVS
Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF vs Columbia Research Enhanced Value ETF
Which is better, FBCV or REVS?
Nearly the same fund. REVS costs less.
REVS has a lower expense ratio. FBCV led over 1Y, REVS over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. FBCV is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.6%.
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 | FBCV | REVS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.57% | 0.19%Best |
| AUM | $184M | $370M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.25% | 1.84% |
| Holdings | 127 | 611 |
| YTD Return | +18.42%Best | +18.22% |
| 1Y Return | +24.20%Best | +23.33% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.61% | +20.60%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.11% | +12.45%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.6%Best | 14.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -15.6%Best | -18.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,186 | $17,980Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.3%Best | 33.6% |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Columbia Threadneedle Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | Sep 25, 2019 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 4, 2020 to Oct 14, 2026 (6.4 years).
FBCV vs REVS 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 6.4 years both funds cover.
FBCV vs REVS Performance
Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Columbia Research Enhanced Value ETF (REVS) is an ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Over the past year FBCV returned +24.20% while REVS returned +23.33%. Year to date, FBCV is up 18.42% versus a gain of 18.22% for REVS.
Over three years, FBCV compounded at +16.61% per year against +20.60% for REVS; over five years the annualized figures are +10.11% and +12.45% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, REVS has the edge at +15.66% annualized vs +13.75%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
REVS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.6% compared with 13.6% for FBCV. 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 -15.6% for FBCV and -18.0% for REVS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FBCV charges 0.57% per year while REVS charges 0.19%. On a $10,000 position that is $57 vs $19 annually, a gap of $38 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FBCV currently yields 1.25% against 1.84% for REVS.
Holdings Overlap
36.5% of FBCV's money is in holdings REVS also owns. 44.3% of REVS's money is in holdings FBCV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
45 positions in common, counted across the 133 positions we hold weights for in FBCV and 298 in REVS, against full books of 127 and 611.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 240 positions for REVS that do not appear in our book for FBCV (54.2% of the fund), and 68 for FBCV that do not appear in REVS (54.1%).
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 FBCV | Weight in REVS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.64% | 8.48% | 3.84% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.24% | 7.16% | 1.92% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 2.64% | 3.84% | 1.20% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.04% | 2.05% | 1.01% |
| COPConocophillips Common Stock USD 0.01 | 1.79% | 1.23% | 0.56% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 1.23% | 1.64% | 0.41% |
| NEMNewmont Corp Common | 0.97% | 1.43% | 0.46% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.60% | 1.62% | 1.02% |
| CVSCvs Health Corp | 0.72% | 1.50% | 0.78% |
| GILDGilead Sciences | 1.53% | 0.49% | 1.04% |
44.3% of REVS is already inside FBCV.
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, FBCV or REVS?
FBCV has an expense ratio of 0.57% while REVS charges 0.19%. REVS is the cheaper option, by $38 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FBCV or REVS?
Over the past year FBCV returned +24.20% vs +23.33% for REVS, so FBCV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FBCV annualized +13.75% vs +15.66% for REVS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FBCV or REVS?
REVS has been the more volatile fund at 14.6% annualized versus 13.6% for FBCV. Worst drawdown: FBCV -15.6% vs REVS -18.0%.
Should I hold both FBCV and REVS?
FBCV and REVS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, 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 FBCV and REVS?
44.3% of REVS's money is in holdings FBCV also owns. 44.3% of REVS's is in holdings FBCV also owns. They hold 45 positions in common, counted across the 133 positions we hold weights for in FBCV and 298 in REVS.
Which pays a higher dividend, FBCV or REVS?
FBCV yields 1.25% while REVS yields 1.84%, so REVS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is REVS better than FBCV?
REVS has a lower expense ratio. FBCV led over 1Y, REVS over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. FBCV is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.