FBCV vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FBCV (Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBCV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FBCV returned 15.15%/yr vs 3.94%/yr for CAOS. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBCV charges 0.57%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

FBCV vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBCV achieves a 10.38% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.71% return.

FBCV

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 0.44%
• YTD: 10.38%
• 6M: 10.01%
• 1Y: 24.31%
• 3Y*: 15.15%
• 5Y*: 9.42%
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: -0.12%
• YTD: 0.71%
• 6M: 0.61%
• 1Y: 1.62%
• 3Y*: 3.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBCV vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FBCV Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF	10.38%	16.36%	10.26%	5.83%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.71%	2.55%	5.33%	7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between FBCV and CAOS is -0.23, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023	0.04

The correlation between FBCV and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to 0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FBCV vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBCV

FBCV Risk / Return Rank: 77
FBCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FBCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
FBCV Omega Ratio Rank: 76
FBCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
FBCV Martin Ratio Rank: 78

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 36
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

FBCV vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	FBCV	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	1.08	+1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.37	1.72	+1.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.22	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.47	2.15	+1.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.11	5.18	+8.93

FBCV vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBCV Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBCV and CAOS, 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

FBCV vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBCV drawdown since its inception was -15.55%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBCV and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBCV	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.55%	-3.89%	-11.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.04%	-0.76%	-6.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.32%	-3.60%	-10.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.55%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.11%	-1.18%	+0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.43%	-0.92%	-2.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.73%	0.32%	+1.41%

Volatility

FBCV vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) has a higher volatility of 2.77% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.32%. This indicates that FBCV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBCV	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.77%	0.32%	+2.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.85%	1.05%	+6.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.63%	1.50%	+9.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.80%	4.23%	+9.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.70%	4.23%	+10.47%

FBCV vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBCV has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is lower than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBCV vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

FBCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FBCV Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF	2.60%	2.95%	1.75%	1.68%	2.01%	3.13%	0.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBCV and CAOS in my portfolio?

FBCV and CAOS have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBCV or CAOS?

FBCV has higher volatility (2.77%) compared to CAOS (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBCV dropped -15.55% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, FBCV or CAOS?

On 3-year performance, FBCV leads with 15.15% vs 3.94% for CAOS. On fees, FBCV is cheaper at 0.57% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBCV or CAOS?

Over the 3-year period, FBCV has performed better with a 15.15% return vs 3.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBCV or CAOS?

FBCV is cheaper with a 0.57% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBCV or CAOS?

FBCV has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between FBCV and CAOS?

FBCV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for FBCV and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.08), 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.