PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FBCG vs. CGDV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FBCG vs. CGDV - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBCG achieves a 11.60% return, which is significantly higher than CGDV's 10.15% return.


FBCG

1D
0.67%
1M
0.82%
YTD
11.60%
6M
10.83%
1Y
33.02%
3Y*
29.20%
5Y*
14.88%
10Y*

CGDV

1D
0.13%
1M
1.46%
YTD
10.15%
6M
10.88%
1Y
27.58%
3Y*
24.27%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FBCG vs. CGDV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FBCG
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF
11.60%18.60%39.05%57.98%-26.49%
CGDV
Capital Group Dividend Value ETF
10.15%25.50%20.10%28.81%-2.89%

Correlation

The correlation between FBCG and CGDV is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2022

0.79

The correlation between FBCG and CGDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

FBCG vs. CGDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FBCG
CGDV

Technology

48.3%
34.1%

Consumer Cyclical

17.2%
10.6%

Communication Services

16.6%
8.4%

Healthcare

6.7%
11.5%

Industrials

5.7%
13.2%

Financial Services

2.2%
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

1.3%
5.5%

Real Estate

0.7%
1.1%

Basic Materials

0.6%
2.9%

Utilities

0.5%
2.1%

Energy

0.4%
3.8%

Technology

FBCG
48.3%
CGDV
34.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FBCG
17.2%
CGDV
10.6%

Communication Services

FBCG
16.6%
CGDV
8.4%

Healthcare

FBCG
6.7%
CGDV
11.5%

Industrials

FBCG
5.7%
CGDV
13.2%

Financial Services

FBCG
2.2%
CGDV
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

FBCG
1.3%
CGDV
5.5%

Real Estate

FBCG
0.7%
CGDV
1.1%

Basic Materials

FBCG
0.6%
CGDV
2.9%

Utilities

FBCG
0.5%
CGDV
2.1%

Energy

FBCG
0.4%
CGDV
3.8%

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

FBCG vs. CGDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBCG
FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

CGDV
CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
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.

FBCG vs. CGDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). 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.


FBCGCGDVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.60

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.44

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.19

2.84

-0.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.45

13.37

-4.93

FBCG vs. CGDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the CGDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBCG and CGDV, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FBCGCGDVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

2.34

-0.60

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.80

1.21

-0.41

Drawdowns

FBCG vs. CGDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBCG drawdown since its inception was -43.56%, which is greater than CGDV's maximum drawdown of -21.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBCG and CGDV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FBCGCGDVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.56%

-21.82%

-21.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.17%

-9.75%

-5.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.89%

-14.28%

-13.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-43.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.46%

-2.22%

-2.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.47%

-3.61%

-7.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.92%

2.07%

+1.85%

Volatility

FBCG vs. CGDV - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a higher volatility of 6.44% compared to Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) at 3.60%. This indicates that FBCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FBCGCGDVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.44%

3.60%

+2.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.61%

9.47%

+5.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.05%

11.85%

+7.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

25.86%

15.51%

+10.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.76%

15.51%

+10.25%

FBCG vs. CGDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBCG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than CGDV's 0.33% expense ratio.


Dividends

FBCG vs. CGDV - Dividend Comparison

FBCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than CGDV's 1.19% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CGDV
Capital Group Dividend Value ETF
1.19%1.29%1.60%1.65%1.36%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


FBCG and CGDV have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FBCG has higher volatility (6.44%) compared to CGDV (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBCG dropped -43.56% vs CGDV's -21.82%.

On 3-year performance, FBCG leads with 29.20% vs 24.27% for CGDV. On fees, CGDV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, CGDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 29.20% return vs 24.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CGDV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

CGDV has the higher dividend yield at 1.19%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

FBCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CGDV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for FBCG and 0.33% for CGDV.

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 1.75), 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 FBCG and CGDV

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