FBCG vs VTI

FBCG vs VTI

Which is better, FBCG or VTI?

Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, VTI over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92.

Lower Fees: VTIHigher Returns: split

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

MetricFBCGVTI
Expense Ratio0.57%0.03%Best
AUM$6.9B$666.9B
Dividend Yield0.04%1.03%
Holdings2453,543
YTD Return+11.37%+11.65%Best
1Y Return+16.36%+17.34%Best
3Y Return (annualized)+25.93%Best+20.35%
5Y Return (annualized)+12.56%Best+11.72%
Volatility (annualized)22.8%15.7%Best
Max Drawdown-43.6%-25.4%Best
$10,000 over 5 years$18,068Best$17,404
Fund FamilyFidelity Investments (US)Vanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap GrowthLarge Cap Blend
InceptionJun 2, 2020May 24, 2001

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 4, 2020 to Sep 10, 2026 (6.3 years).

FBCG vs VTI 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 VTI Performance

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year FBCG returned +16.36% while VTI returned +17.34%. Year to date, FBCG is up 11.37% versus a gain of 11.65% for VTI.

Over three years, FBCG compounded at +25.93% per year against +20.35% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +12.56% and +11.72% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, FBCG has the edge at +19.60% annualized vs +16.13%.

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 15.7% for VTI. 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 -25.4% for VTI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.92. 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 VTI 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 1.03% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

FBCG already in VTI91.6%

At least 91.6% of FBCG's money is in holdings VTI also owns.

Stated as a floor: for VTI, our book for it covers 90.6% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.

Most of FBCG is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

188 positions in common, counted across the 242 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 2,787 in VTI, against full books of 245 and 3,543.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in FBCGWeight in VTIDifference
NVDANvidia Corp.13.94%6.32%7.62%
AAPLApple, Inc9.13%5.84%3.29%
GOOGLAlphabet A Usd 0.0018.51%2.88%5.63%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc6.63%3.17%3.46%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 373.68%3.81%0.13%
AVGOBroadcom Inc3.79%2.46%1.33%
LLYEli Lilly & Co.2.72%1.40%1.32%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.2.05%1.79%0.26%
TSLATesla Inc1.62%1.63%0.01%
GOOGAlphabet Inc0.30%2.27%1.97%

91.6% of FBCG is already inside VTI.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

FBCGVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, FBCG or VTI?

FBCG has an expense ratio of 0.57% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $54 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, FBCG or VTI?

Over the past year FBCG returned +16.36% vs +17.34% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FBCG annualized +19.60% vs +16.13% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, FBCG or VTI?

FBCG has been the more volatile fund at 22.8% annualized versus 15.7% for VTI. Worst drawdown: FBCG -43.6% vs VTI -25.4%.

Should I hold both FBCG and VTI?

FBCG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 VTI?

At least 91.6% of FBCG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. Our book for VTI is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 188 positions in common, counted across the 242 positions we hold weights for in FBCG and 2,787 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, FBCG or VTI?

FBCG yields 0.04% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than FBCG?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. FBCG led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, VTI over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.