FFOG vs TCHP
Franklin Focused Dynamic Growth ETF vs T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF
Which is better, FFOG or TCHP?
Nearly the same fund. FFOG costs less.
FFOG has a lower expense ratio. FFOG led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. FFOG is less concentrated, with 55.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 59.3%.
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 | FFOG | TCHP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.41%Best | 0.57% |
| AUM | $386M | $2.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 43 | 65 |
| YTD Return | +8.34%Best | +2.74% |
| 1Y Return | +7.46%Best | +5.10% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.71%Best | +21.81% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.18% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.1% | 16.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -25.4% | -22.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $19,417Best | $17,860 |
| Top 10 Weight | 55.5%Best | 59.3% |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | T.Rowe Price |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 6, 2023 | Aug 4, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 6, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.9 years).
FFOG vs TCHP 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 2.9 years both funds cover.
FFOG vs TCHP Performance
Franklin Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FFOG) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF (TCHP) is an ETF from T.Rowe Price. Over the past year FFOG returned +7.46% while TCHP returned +5.10%. Year to date, FFOG is up 8.34% versus a gain of 2.74% for TCHP.
Over three years, FFOG compounded at +25.71% per year against +21.81% for TCHP.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFOG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.1% compared with 16.0% for TCHP. 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 -25.4% for FFOG and -22.9% for TCHP. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FFOG charges 0.41% per year while TCHP charges 0.57%. On a $10,000 position that is $41 vs $57 annually, a gap of $16 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFOG currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for TCHP.
Holdings Overlap
67.0% of FFOG's money is in holdings TCHP also owns. 67.2% of TCHP's money is in holdings FFOG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
19 positions in common, counted across the 41 positions we hold weights for in FFOG and 62 in TCHP, against full books of 43 and 65.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 42 positions for TCHP that do not appear in our book for FFOG (32.0% of the fund), and 16 for FFOG that do not appear in TCHP (25.0%).
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 FFOG | Weight in TCHP | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 10.05% | 17.43% | 7.38% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 7.96% | 5.50% | 2.46% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 8.49% | 3.60% | 4.89% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.50% | 4.94% | 0.56% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.90% | 5.92% | 2.02% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.45% | 5.79% | 2.34% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.98% | 3.53% | 1.45% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.79% | 2.92% | 0.13% |
| 2330:TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd | 4.29% | 0.91% | 3.38% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.01% | 3.05% | 1.04% |
67.2% of TCHP is already inside FFOG.
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, FFOG or TCHP?
FFOG has an expense ratio of 0.41% while TCHP charges 0.57%. FFOG is the cheaper option, by $16 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FFOG or TCHP?
Over the past year FFOG returned +7.46% vs +5.10% for TCHP, so FFOG leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FFOG or TCHP?
FFOG has been the more volatile fund at 20.1% annualized versus 16.0% for TCHP. Worst drawdown: FFOG -25.4% vs TCHP -22.9%.
Should I hold both FFOG and TCHP?
FFOG and TCHP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, 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 FFOG and TCHP?
67.2% of TCHP's money is in holdings FFOG also owns. 67.2% of TCHP's is in holdings FFOG also owns. They hold 19 positions in common, counted across the 41 positions we hold weights for in FFOG and 62 in TCHP.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFOG or TCHP?
FFOG yields 0.00% while TCHP yields 0.00%, so TCHP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TCHP better than FFOG?
FFOG has a lower expense ratio. FFOG led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. FFOG is less concentrated, with 55.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 59.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.