FBCV vs. VOO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FBCV (Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF) and VOO (Vanguard S&P 500 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBCV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while VOO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. FBCV is actively managed, while VOO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FBCV returned 9.42%/yr vs 13.13%/yr for VOO. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FBCV charges 0.57%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VOO.

Performance

FBCV vs. VOO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). 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 VOO's 8.19% return.

FBCV

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

VOO

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: -1.34%
• YTD: 8.19%
• 6M: 7.24%
• 1Y: 23.69%
• 3Y*: 20.78%
• 5Y*: 13.13%
• 10Y*: 15.61%

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

FBCV vs. VOO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FBCV Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF	10.38%	16.36%	10.26%	5.45%	-2.26%	26.18%	17.93%
VOO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF	8.19%	17.82%	24.98%	26.32%	-18.17%	28.79%	21.37%

Correlation

The correlation between FBCV and VOO is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.75

The correlation between FBCV and VOO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

FBCV vs. VOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBCV	VOO
Financial Services	20.3%	10.9%
Healthcare	12.0%	8.3%
Industrials	11.9%	7.6%
Technology	11.8%	39.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.4%	9.8%
Communication Services	9.4%	10.5%
Consumer Defensive	9.4%	4.5%
Energy	8.3%	3.2%
Basic Materials	3.5%	1.7%
Utilities	2.3%	2.5%
Real Estate	0.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

FBCV vs. VOO — 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

VOO

VOO Risk / Return Rank: 59
VOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
VOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
VOO Omega Ratio Rank: 58
VOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
VOO Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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. VOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). 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	VOO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	1.91	+0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.37	2.60	+0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.35	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.47	2.67	+0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.11	11.96	+2.15

FBCV vs. VOO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBCV Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the VOO Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBCV and VOO, 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. VOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBCV drawdown since its inception was -15.55%, smaller than the maximum VOO drawdown of -33.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBCV and VOO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBCV	VOO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.55%	-33.99%	+18.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.04%	-8.90%	+1.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.32%	-18.69%	+4.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.55%	-24.52%	+8.97%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.11%	-3.14%	+2.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.43%	-3.68%	+0.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.73%	1.99%	-0.26%

Volatility

FBCV vs. VOO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) is 2.77%, while Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) has a volatility of 4.83%. This indicates that FBCV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBCV	VOO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.77%	4.83%	-2.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.85%	9.82%	-1.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.63%	12.46%	-1.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.80%	16.91%	-3.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.70%	18.02%	-3.32%

FBCV vs. VOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBCV has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is higher than VOO's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBCV vs. VOO - Dividend Comparison

FBCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%, more than VOO's 1.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBCV Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF	2.60%	2.95%	1.75%	1.68%	2.01%	3.13%	0.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VOO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF	1.05%	1.13%	1.24%	1.46%	1.69%	1.25%	1.54%	1.88%	2.06%	1.78%	2.02%	2.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBCV and VOO in my portfolio?

FBCV and VOO have a correlation of 0.69, 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 VOO?

VOO has higher volatility (4.83%) compared to FBCV (2.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBCV dropped -15.55% vs VOO's -33.99%.

Which ETF is better, FBCV or VOO?

On 5-year performance, VOO leads with 13.13% vs 9.42% for FBCV. On fees, VOO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, FBCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBCV or VOO?

Over the 5-year period, VOO has performed better with a 13.13% return vs 9.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBCV or VOO?

VOO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.57% for FBCV.

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

FBCV has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 1.05% for VOO.

What is the main difference between FBCV and VOO?

FBCV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while VOO is S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for FBCV and 0.03% for VOO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.91), 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.