FLCG vs TCHP
Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF vs T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF
Which is better, FLCG or TCHP?
Nearly the same fund. FLCG costs less.
FLCG has a lower expense ratio. FLCG led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. FLCG is less concentrated, with 56.5% 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 | FLCG | TCHP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39%Best | 0.57% |
| AUM | $687M | $2.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.04% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 208 | 65 |
| YTD Return | +7.29%Best | +2.74% |
| 1Y Return | +9.89%Best | +5.10% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.81% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.18% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Best | 16.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -22.9%Tie | -22.9%Tie |
| $10,000 over 2.2 years | $14,083Best | $13,455 |
| Top 10 Weight | 56.5%Best | 59.3% |
| Fund Family | Federated Hermes | T.Rowe Price |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 30, 2024 | Aug 4, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 31, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.2 years).
FLCG 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 2.2 years both funds cover.
FLCG vs TCHP Performance
Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF (FLCG) is an ETF from Federated Hermes and T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF (TCHP) is an ETF from T.Rowe Price. Over the past year FLCG returned +9.89% while TCHP returned +5.10%. Year to date, FLCG is up 7.29% versus a gain of 2.74% for TCHP.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TCHP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.3% compared with 15.3% for FLCG. 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 -22.9% for FLCG 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 0.98. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLCG charges 0.39% per year while TCHP charges 0.57%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $57 annually, a gap of $18 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLCG currently yields 0.04% against 0.00% for TCHP.
Holdings Overlap
66.1% of FLCG's money is in holdings TCHP also owns. 67.4% of TCHP's money is in holdings FLCG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
22 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in FLCG and 62 in TCHP, against full books of 208 and 65.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 36 positions for TCHP that do not appear in our book for FLCG (28.7% of the fund), and 73 for FLCG that do not appear in TCHP (33.1%).
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 FLCG | Weight in TCHP | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 15.20% | 17.43% | 2.23% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 11.70% | 5.50% | 6.20% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.97% | 4.94% | 3.03% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.54% | 5.92% | 1.38% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.10% | 5.79% | 2.69% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.88% | 3.53% | 0.65% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.37% | 3.05% | 0.68% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 3.00% | 2.26% | 0.74% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 0.61% | 3.60% | 2.99% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 1.26% | 2.92% | 1.66% |
67.4% of TCHP is already inside FLCG.
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, FLCG or TCHP?
FLCG has an expense ratio of 0.39% while TCHP charges 0.57%. FLCG is the cheaper option, by $18 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FLCG or TCHP?
Over the past year FLCG returned +9.89% vs +5.10% for TCHP, so FLCG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FLCG annualized +16.84% vs +14.44% for TCHP. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FLCG or TCHP?
TCHP has been the more volatile fund at 16.3% annualized versus 15.3% for FLCG. Worst drawdown: FLCG -22.9% vs TCHP -22.9%.
Should I hold both FLCG and TCHP?
FLCG and TCHP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.98, 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 FLCG and TCHP?
67.4% of TCHP's money is in holdings FLCG also owns. 67.4% of TCHP's is in holdings FLCG also owns. They hold 22 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in FLCG and 62 in TCHP.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLCG or TCHP?
FLCG yields 0.04% while TCHP yields 0.00%, so FLCG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TCHP better than FLCG?
FLCG has a lower expense ratio. FLCG led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. FLCG is less concentrated, with 56.5% 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.