FBCG vs IVV
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FBCG or IVV?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.2%.
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 | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.57% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $7.3B | $882.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.04% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 245 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +15.38%Best | +12.76% |
| 1Y Return | +18.04%Best | +15.57% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +29.52%Best | +22.95% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.14%Best | +13.54% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.6% | 15.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -43.6% | -24.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,373Best | $18,869 |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.2% | 38.1%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 4, 2020 to Oct 1, 2026 (6.3 years).
FBCG vs IVV 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 6.3 years both funds cover.
FBCG vs IVV Performance
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FBCG returned +18.04% while IVV returned +15.57%. Year to date, FBCG is up 15.38% versus a gain of 12.76% for IVV.
Over three years, FBCG compounded at +29.52% per year against +22.95% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +14.14% and +13.54% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, FBCG has the edge at +20.08% annualized vs +16.73%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FBCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.6% compared with 15.4% for IVV. 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 -43.6% for FBCG and -24.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. 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 IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $57 vs $3 annually, a gap of $54 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FBCG currently yields 0.04% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
85.8% of FBCG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 67.5% of IVV's money is in holdings FBCG also owns.
Most of FBCG is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
119 positions in common, counted across the 246 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 505 in IVV, against full books of 245 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 378 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for FBCG (31.8% of the fund), and 77 for FBCG that do not appear in IVV (9.7%).
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 IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 14.90% | 8.00% | 6.90% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 9.31% | 7.39% | 1.92% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 9.27% | 3.00% | 6.27% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.94% | 5.57% | 0.63% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 5.86% | 3.80% | 2.06% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.38% | 2.59% | 1.79% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.31% | 2.15% | 0.16% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.71% | 1.34% | 1.37% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.97% | 1.66% | 0.31% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.28% | 1.56% | 0.28% |
85.8% of FBCG is already inside IVV.
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 IVV?
FBCG has an expense ratio of 0.57% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $54 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FBCG or IVV?
Over the past year FBCG returned +18.04% vs +15.57% for IVV, so FBCG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FBCG annualized +20.08% vs +16.73% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FBCG or IVV?
FBCG has been the more volatile fund at 22.6% annualized versus 15.4% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FBCG -43.6% vs IVV -24.5%.
Should I hold both FBCG and IVV?
FBCG and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 IVV?
85.8% of FBCG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 67.5% of IVV's is in holdings FBCG also owns. They hold 119 positions in common, counted across the 246 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, FBCG or IVV?
FBCG yields 0.04% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FBCG?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.