EEMO vs. FBCG

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

EEMO (Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P Momentum Emerging Plus LargeMidCap Index, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. EEMO is passively managed, while FBCG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, EEMO returned 4.09%/yr vs 13.84%/yr for FBCG. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEMO charges 0.31%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

EEMO vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) 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, EEMO achieves a 18.93% return, which is significantly higher than FBCG's 10.76% return.

EEMO

• 1D: -4.15%
• 1M: -13.95%
• 6M: 12.58%
• YTD: 18.93%
• 1Y: 23.55%
• 3Y*: 15.80%
• 5Y*: 4.09%
• 10Y*: 6.73%

FBCG

• 1D: -2.16%
• 1M: -2.16%
• 6M: 10.10%
• YTD: 10.76%
• 1Y: 23.79%
• 3Y*: 25.20%
• 5Y*: 13.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

EEMO vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF	18.93%	10.99%	9.88%	13.90%	-18.73%	-5.57%	36.16%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	10.76%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	41.44%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMO and FBCG is 0.66, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.60
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.62

The correlation between EEMO and FBCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMO vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEMO	FBCG
Technology	53.0%	48.9%
Financial Services	15.2%	2.2%
Basic Materials	11.0%	0.5%
Industrials	9.1%	5.6%
Consumer Cyclical	3.3%	17.2%
Healthcare	2.3%	5.6%
Energy	2.0%	0.4%
Utilities	1.5%	0.5%
Communication Services	1.3%	17.1%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	1.3%
Real Estate	0.4%	0.6%

Return for Risk

EEMO vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMO

EEMO Risk / Return Rank: 29
EEMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
EEMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
EEMO Omega Ratio Rank: 30
EEMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
EEMO Martin Ratio Rank: 37

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 39
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 37
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

EEMO vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) 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.

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.

	EEMO	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	1.18	-0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.15	1.68	-0.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.21	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.21	1.58	-0.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.63	5.72	-1.09

EEMO vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMO Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMO 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.

Drawdowns

EEMO vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMO drawdown since its inception was -48.47%, which is greater than FBCG's maximum drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMO and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEMO	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.47%	-43.56%	-4.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.53%	-15.17%	-4.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.06%	-27.89%	+1.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.77%	-43.56%	+12.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.57%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.53%	-5.18%	-14.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.08%	-11.35%	-8.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.10%	4.17%	+0.93%

Volatility

EEMO vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) has a higher volatility of 17.83% compared to Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) at 6.58%. This indicates that EEMO'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

	EEMO	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.83%	6.58%	+11.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.11%	16.12%	+15.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.33%	20.20%	+13.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.77%	26.06%	-4.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.74%	25.75%	-3.01%

EEMO vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMO has a 0.31% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEMO vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

EEMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.91%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF	1.91%	2.31%	2.57%	3.65%	3.82%	1.51%	1.53%	2.13%	13.10%	5.13%	1.55%	2.92%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EEMO and FBCG in my portfolio?

EEMO and FBCG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EEMO or FBCG?

EEMO has higher volatility (17.83%) compared to FBCG (6.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMO dropped -48.47% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, EEMO or FBCG?

On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 13.84% vs 4.09% for EEMO. On fees, EEMO is cheaper at 0.31% per year. On volatility, FBCG has been the lower-risk option at 6.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEMO or FBCG?

Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 13.84% return vs 4.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEMO or FBCG?

EEMO is cheaper with a 0.31% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

EEMO has the higher dividend yield at 1.91%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between EEMO and FBCG?

EEMO is categorized as Momentum, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.31% for EEMO and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.18 vs 0.71), 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.