FBCG vs QQQ
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, FBCG or QQQ?
Nearly the same fund. QQQ costs less.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 3Y, QQQ over 1Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.9%.
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 | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.57% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $6.9B | $486.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.04% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 245 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +13.48% | +17.54%Best |
| 1Y Return | +20.70% | +25.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +26.39%Best | +24.63% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.55% | +14.18%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.8% | 20.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -43.6% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,060 | $19,407Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 53.9% | 46.5%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 4, 2020 to Sep 4, 2026 (6.3 years).
FBCG vs QQQ 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 QQQ Performance
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FBCG returned +20.70% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, FBCG is up 13.48% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.
Over three years, FBCG compounded at +26.39% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +12.55% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +20.21% annualized vs +20.02%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FBCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.8% compared with 20.4% for QQQ. 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 -35.1% for QQQ. 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
FBCG charges 0.57% per year while QQQ 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 0.04% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
68.7% of FBCG's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 76.4% of QQQ's money is in holdings FBCG also owns.
Most of QQQ is already inside FBCG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
49 positions in common, counted across the 242 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 245 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 49 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for FBCG (22.6% of the fund), and 140 for FBCG that do not appear in QQQ (26.6%).
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 QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 13.94% | 8.44% | 5.50% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 9.13% | 7.27% | 1.86% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc.Class A | 8.51% | 3.36% | 5.15% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 6.63% | 4.67% | 1.96% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 3.68% | 5.76% | 2.08% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.79% | 3.16% | 0.63% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.05% | 4.43% | 2.38% |
| METAMeta Platform Inc | 1.76% | 2.78% | 1.02% |
| TSLATesla Motors Inc | 1.62% | 2.56% | 0.94% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 0.68% | 3.45% | 2.77% |
76.4% of QQQ 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 QQQ?
FBCG has an expense ratio of 0.57% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $39 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FBCG or QQQ?
Over the past year FBCG returned +20.70% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FBCG annualized +20.02% vs +20.21% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FBCG or QQQ?
FBCG has been the more volatile fund at 22.8% annualized versus 20.4% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: FBCG -43.6% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both FBCG and QQQ?
FBCG and QQQ 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 FBCG and QQQ?
76.4% of QQQ's money is in holdings FBCG also owns. 76.4% of QQQ's is in holdings FBCG also owns. They hold 49 positions in common, counted across the 242 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, FBCG or QQQ?
FBCG yields 0.04% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than FBCG?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 3Y, QQQ over 1Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.