PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BAC vs. FBGRX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BAC vs. FBGRX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bank of America Corporation (BAC) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAC achieves a 3.72% return, which is significantly lower than FBGRX's 13.86% return. Over the past 10 years, BAC has underperformed FBGRX with an annualized return of 18.19%, while FBGRX has yielded a comparatively higher 21.66% annualized return.


BAC

1D
2.31%
1M
13.79%
YTD
3.72%
6M
3.46%
1Y
30.78%
3Y*
27.43%
5Y*
8.79%
10Y*
18.19%

FBGRX

1D
2.59%
1M
-0.87%
YTD
13.86%
6M
15.39%
1Y
38.88%
3Y*
30.04%
5Y*
15.33%
10Y*
21.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAC vs. FBGRX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BAC
Bank of America Corporation
3.72%28.04%33.85%4.83%-23.82%49.61%-11.63%46.19%-15.00%35.69%
FBGRX
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund
13.86%19.91%39.77%55.61%-38.45%22.64%62.20%33.43%1.02%36.01%

Correlation

The correlation between BAC and FBGRX is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.34

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 31, 1987

0.53

Over the past year, the correlation between BAC and FBGRX has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.53, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

BAC vs. FBGRX — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAC
BAC Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
BAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAC Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
BAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAC Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

FBGRX
FBGRX Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
FBGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
FBGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BAC vs. FBGRX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bank of America Corporation (BAC) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


BACFBGRXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.35

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.64

2.95

-1.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.21

12.23

-8.02

BAC vs. FBGRX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAC Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the FBGRX Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAC and FBGRX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BAC vs. FBGRX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAC drawdown since its inception was -93.10%, which is greater than FBGRX's maximum drawdown of -58.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAC and FBGRX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BACFBGRXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-93.10%

-58.64%

-34.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.93%

-12.65%

-5.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.51%

-27.07%

-0.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-46.64%

-43.08%

-3.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.95%

-43.08%

-5.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.36%

-3.97%

+3.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.30%

-12.52%

-15.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.96%

3.05%

+3.91%

Volatility

BAC vs. FBGRX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is 5.49%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX) has a volatility of 6.86%. This indicates that BAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBGRX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BACFBGRXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.49%

6.86%

-1.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.57%

14.15%

+2.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.62%

18.25%

+3.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.89%

24.99%

+1.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.68%

23.74%

+6.94%

Dividends

BAC vs. FBGRX - Dividend Comparison

BAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.72%, more than FBGRX's 1.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BAC
Bank of America Corporation
2.72%1.96%2.28%2.73%2.60%1.75%2.38%1.87%2.19%1.32%1.13%1.19%
FBGRX
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund
1.67%1.90%5.95%0.93%0.57%8.73%6.40%3.70%6.32%4.23%4.05%5.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


BAC and FBGRX have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FBGRX has higher volatility (6.86%) compared to BAC (5.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAC dropped -93.10% vs FBGRX's -58.64%.

FBGRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BAC and FBGRX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer