FBCG vs. MAGS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) and MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FBCG returned 28.04%/yr vs 31.29%/yr for MAGS. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FBCG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for MAGS.

Performance

FBCG vs. MAGS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBCG achieves a 11.31% return, which is significantly higher than MAGS's -1.59% return.

FBCG

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -0.54%
• YTD: 11.31%
• 6M: 12.74%
• 1Y: 32.07%
• 3Y*: 28.04%
• 5Y*: 14.46%
• 10Y*: —

MAGS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -7.97%
• YTD: -1.59%
• 6M: -0.43%
• 1Y: 23.09%
• 3Y*: 31.29%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBCG vs. MAGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	11.31%	18.60%	39.05%	32.58%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	-1.59%	22.99%	63.97%	35.74%

Correlation

The correlation between FBCG and MAGS is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2023	0.88

The correlation between FBCG and MAGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

FBCG vs. MAGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBCG	MAGS
Technology	48.3%	15.3%
Consumer Cyclical	17.2%	10.3%
Communication Services	16.6%	9.1%
Healthcare	6.7%	-
Industrials	5.7%	-
Financial Services	2.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	-
Real Estate	0.7%	-
Basic Materials	0.6%	-
Utilities	0.5%	-
Energy	0.4%	-

Return for Risk

FBCG vs. MAGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 53
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 53
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 53

MAGS

MAGS Risk / Return Rank: 33
MAGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
MAGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Omega Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
MAGS Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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. MAGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS). 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.

	FBCG	MAGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	1.14	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	1.62	+0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.20	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.12	1.25	+0.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.07	4.21	+3.87

FBCG vs. MAGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is higher than the MAGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBCG and MAGS, 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

FBCG vs. MAGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBCG drawdown since its inception was -43.56%, which is greater than MAGS's maximum drawdown of -29.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBCG and MAGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBCG	MAGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.56%	-29.91%	-13.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.17%	-18.62%	+3.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.89%	-29.91%	+2.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.56%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.71%	-8.50%	+3.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.45%	-4.72%	-6.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.99%	5.50%	-1.51%

Volatility

FBCG vs. MAGS - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a higher volatility of 7.21% compared to Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) at 5.86%. This indicates that FBCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MAGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBCG	MAGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.21%	5.86%	+1.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.09%	15.07%	+0.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.38%	20.30%	-0.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.90%	25.97%	-0.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.77%	25.97%	-0.20%

FBCG vs. MAGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBCG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than MAGS's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBCG vs. MAGS - Dividend Comparison

FBCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than MAGS's 1.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	1.50%	1.48%	0.81%	0.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBCG and MAGS in my portfolio?

FBCG and MAGS have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBCG or MAGS?

FBCG has higher volatility (7.21%) compared to MAGS (5.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBCG dropped -43.56% vs MAGS's -29.91%.

Which ETF is better, FBCG or MAGS?

On 3-year performance, MAGS leads with 31.29% vs 28.04% for FBCG. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBCG or MAGS?

Over the 3-year period, MAGS has performed better with a 31.29% return vs 28.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBCG or MAGS?

MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

MAGS has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between FBCG and MAGS?

FBCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while MAGS is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for FBCG and 0.29% for MAGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 1.14), 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.