ATFV vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ATFV (Alger 35 ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ATFV is passively managed, while FBCG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ATFV returned 15.56%/yr vs 15.84%/yr for FBCG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ATFV charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

ATFV vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ATFV achieves a 16.46% return, which is significantly higher than FBCG's 15.59% return.

ATFV

• 1D: -2.00%
• 1M: 8.35%
• YTD: 16.46%
• 6M: 16.04%
• 1Y: 48.62%
• 3Y*: 39.26%
• 5Y*: 15.56%
• 10Y*: —

FBCG

• 1D: -1.05%
• 1M: 7.84%
• YTD: 15.59%
• 6M: 15.51%
• 1Y: 39.38%
• 3Y*: 30.60%
• 5Y*: 15.84%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ATFV vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	16.46%	38.20%	46.14%	32.75%	-35.97%	4.19%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	15.59%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	14.82%

Correlation

The correlation between ATFV and FBCG is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021	0.89

The correlation between ATFV and FBCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

ATFV vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ATFV	FBCG
Technology	42.1%	48.3%
Communication Services	25.8%	16.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	17.2%
Healthcare	8.6%	6.7%
Industrials	8.2%	5.7%
Utilities	2.7%	0.5%
Financial Services	2.5%	2.2%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.3%
Energy	-	0.4%
Real Estate	-	0.7%

Return for Risk

ATFV vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ATFV

ATFV Risk / Return Rank: 56
ATFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
ATFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
ATFV Omega Ratio Rank: 55
ATFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
ATFV Martin Ratio Rank: 53

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 57
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 58
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 57

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ATFV vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	ATFV	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	2.14	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.84	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.36	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.67	2.61	+0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.15	10.14	-0.99
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ATFV vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ATFV Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ATFV and FBCG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ATFV	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	2.14	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59	0.62	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.83	-0.24

Drawdowns

ATFV vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ATFV drawdown since its inception was -45.34%, roughly equal to the maximum FBCG drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ATFV and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	ATFV	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.34%	-43.56%	-1.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.29%	-15.17%	-3.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.01%	-27.89%	-1.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.34%	-43.56%	-1.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.72%	-1.05%	-1.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.81%	-11.49%	-6.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.33%	3.90%	+1.43%

Volatility

ATFV vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) has a higher volatility of 7.65% compared to Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) at 4.79%. This indicates that ATFV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ATFV	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.65%	4.79%	+2.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.34%	13.89%	+3.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.00%	18.55%	+4.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.62%	25.79%	+0.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.55%	25.72%	+0.83%

ATFV vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

ATFV has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

ATFV vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

ATFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	0.17%	0.20%	0.16%	0.01%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ATFV and FBCG in my portfolio?

ATFV and FBCG have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ATFV or FBCG?

ATFV has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to FBCG (4.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ATFV dropped -45.34% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, ATFV or FBCG?

On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 15.84% vs 15.56% for ATFV. On fees, ATFV is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, FBCG has been the lower-risk option at 4.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ATFV or FBCG?

Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 15.84% return vs 15.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ATFV or FBCG?

ATFV is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ATFV or FBCG?

ATFV has the higher dividend yield at 0.17%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between ATFV and FBCG?

They also come from different issuers: Alger Group Holdings LLC and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ATFV and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 2.12), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.