FASPX vs. FBGRX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

FASPX (Fidelity Advisor Value Strategies Fund Class M) and FBGRX (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund) are both mutual funds - FASPX is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund managed by Fidelity, while FBGRX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Fidelity. Over the past 10 years, FASPX returned 11.28%/yr vs 20.56%/yr for FBGRX. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FASPX charges 1.37%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for FBGRX.

Performance

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor Value Strategies Fund Class M (FASPX) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FASPX achieves a 28.64% return, which is significantly higher than FBGRX's 10.15% return. Over the past 10 years, FASPX has underperformed FBGRX with an annualized return of 11.28%, while FBGRX has yielded a comparatively higher 20.56% annualized return.

FASPX

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 2.03%
• 6M: 18.88%
• YTD: 28.64%
• 1Y: 43.27%
• 3Y*: 12.26%
• 5Y*: 10.01%
• 10Y*: 11.28%
• ALL TIME*: 8.66%

FBGRX

• 1D: 3.14%
• 1M: -4.18%
• 6M: 10.25%
• YTD: 10.15%
• 1Y: 24.18%
• 3Y*: 25.20%
• 5Y*: 13.50%
• 10Y*: 20.56%
• ALL TIME*: 13.47%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FASPX Fidelity Advisor Value Strategies Fund Class M	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
FBGRX Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FASPX Fidelity Advisor Value Strategies Fund Class M	28.64%	7.76%	-2.60%	19.93%	-7.82%	32.65%	7.70%	33.85%	-17.27%	17.34%
FBGRX Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund	10.15%	19.91%	39.77%	55.61%	-38.45%	22.64%	62.20%	33.43%	1.02%	36.01%

Correlation

The correlation between FASPX and FBGRX is 0.49, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.65
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 31, 1987	0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between FASPX and FBGRX has dropped to 0.49 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

FASPX vs. FBGRX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FASPX

FASPX Risk / Return Rank: 91
FASPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
FASPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
FASPX Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FASPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FASPX Martin Ratio Rank: 95

FBGRX

FBGRX Risk / Return Rank: 40
FBGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
FBGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
FBGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FBGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FBGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 45

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Value Strategies Fund Class M (FASPX) 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.

	FASPX	FBGRX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	1.09	+1.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.32	1.58	+1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.19	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.02	1.73	+2.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.48	6.19	+9.30

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FASPX Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is higher than the FBGRX Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FASPX 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.

Drawdowns

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FASPX drawdown since its inception was -70.11%, which is greater than FBGRX's maximum drawdown of -58.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FASPX and FBGRX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FASPX	FBGRX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.11%	-58.64%	-11.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.84%	-12.65%	+2.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.53%	-27.07%	-7.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.53%	-43.08%	+8.55%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.02%	-43.08%	-4.94%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.92%	-7.79%	+6.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.80%	-12.49%	+2.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.56%	3.54%	-0.98%

Volatility

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Advisor Value Strategies Fund Class M (FASPX) is 3.24%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX) has a volatility of 6.56%. This indicates that FASPX 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.

Volatility by Period

	FASPX	FBGRX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.24%	6.56%	-3.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.73%	16.09%	-4.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.01%	20.05%	-3.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.60%	25.24%	-4.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.96%	23.83%	-1.87%

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FASPX has a 1.37% expense ratio, which is higher than FBGRX's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

FASPX vs. FBGRX - Dividend Comparison

FASPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.25%, more than FBGRX's 1.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FASPX Fidelity Advisor Value Strategies Fund Class M	7.25%	9.32%	0.00%	2.40%	1.93%	7.80%	0.55%	4.98%	15.67%	7.26%	21.61%	0.80%
FBGRX Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund	1.72%	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

Can I hold both FASPX and FBGRX in my portfolio?

FASPX and FBGRX have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FASPX or FBGRX?

FBGRX has higher volatility (6.56%) compared to FASPX (3.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FASPX dropped -70.11% vs FBGRX's -58.64%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FASPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 1.09), 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.