FBCG vs. QWLD

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FBCG is actively managed, while QWLD is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FBCG returned 13.15%/yr vs 10.04%/yr for QWLD. Their 0.76 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FBCG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.

Performance

FBCG vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBCG achieves a 11.42% return, which is significantly higher than QWLD's 10.03% return.

FBCG

• 1D: 2.21%
• 1M: 0.02%
• 6M: 11.39%
• YTD: 11.42%
• 1Y: 24.47%
• 3Y*: 26.40%
• 5Y*: 13.15%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.73%

QWLD

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 2.22%
• 6M: 5.89%
• YTD: 10.03%
• 1Y: 19.80%
• 3Y*: 16.43%
• 5Y*: 10.04%
• 10Y*: 11.64%
• ALL TIME*: 10.53%

*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)
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	$37.99M	$34.97M	$38.44M
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	$247.86K	$289.30K	$1.06M

FBCG vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	11.42%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	41.44%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	10.03%	17.93%	14.44%	19.59%	-13.30%	21.57%	15.94%

Correlation

The correlation between FBCG and QWLD is 0.63, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.68
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.76

The correlation between FBCG and QWLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (1 year) to 0.77 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FBCG vs. QWLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBCG	QWLD
Technology	52.1%	24.9%
Consumer Cyclical	16.1%	6.3%
Communication Services	15.2%	9.5%
Industrials	5.8%	10.9%
Healthcare	5.6%	13.2%
Financial Services	2.2%	16.5%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	8.1%
Real Estate	0.6%	1.0%
Basic Materials	0.5%	2.5%
Utilities	0.4%	3.8%
Energy	0.3%	3.4%

Return for Risk

FBCG vs. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 46
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 44
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 48

QWLD

QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 81
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

FBCG vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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	QWLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	2.06	-0.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.71	2.91	-1.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.37	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.62	2.60	-0.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.52	11.35	-5.84

FBCG vs. QWLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the QWLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBCG and QWLD, 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. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBCG drawdown since its inception was -43.56%, which is greater than QWLD's maximum drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBCG and QWLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBCG	QWLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.56%	-31.89%	-11.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.17%	-7.66%	-7.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.89%	-12.40%	-15.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.56%	-22.84%	-20.72%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-31.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.62%	0.00%	-4.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.31%	-3.66%	-7.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.45%	1.75%	+2.70%

Volatility

FBCG vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a higher volatility of 6.68% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.28%. This indicates that FBCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBCG	QWLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.68%	2.28%	+4.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.57%	7.74%	+8.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.68%	9.70%	+10.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.11%	13.51%	+12.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.74%	15.12%	+10.62%

FBCG vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBCG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBCG vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison

FBCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than QWLD's 1.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	1.78%	1.85%	1.74%	1.78%	2.02%	1.77%	1.77%	2.13%	2.33%	2.73%	2.22%	3.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBCG and QWLD in my portfolio?

FBCG and QWLD have a correlation of 0.63, 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 QWLD?

FBCG has higher volatility (6.68%) compared to QWLD (2.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBCG dropped -43.56% vs QWLD's -31.89%.

Which ETF is better, FBCG or QWLD?

On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 13.15% vs 10.04% for QWLD. On fees, QWLD is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBCG or QWLD?

Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 13.15% return vs 10.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBCG or QWLD?

QWLD is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between FBCG and QWLD?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for FBCG and 0.30% for QWLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.19), 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.