FBOT vs. VGT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FBOT (Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF) and VGT (Vanguard Information Technology ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. FBOT is actively managed, while VGT is passively managed. Over the past year, FBOT returned 39.88% vs 60.15% for VGT. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FBOT charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for VGT.

Performance

FBOT vs. VGT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF (FBOT) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBOT achieves a 20.06% return, which is significantly lower than VGT's 31.64% return.

FBOT

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 5.52%
• YTD: 20.06%
• 6M: 21.90%
• 1Y: 39.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VGT

• 1D: -1.48%
• 1M: 18.07%
• YTD: 31.64%
• 6M: 30.51%
• 1Y: 60.15%
• 3Y*: 33.48%
• 5Y*: 22.23%
• 10Y*: 25.78%

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

FBOT vs. VGT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FBOT Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF	20.06%	19.15%	12.58%	-1.03%
VGT Vanguard Information Technology ETF	31.64%	21.77%	29.30%	12.90%

Correlation

The correlation between FBOT and VGT is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2023	0.82

The correlation between FBOT and VGT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

FBOT vs. VGT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBOT	VGT
Industrials	51.0%	0.4%
Technology	37.5%	98.5%
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	0.1%
Communication Services	4.2%	0.5%
Healthcare	0.9%	0.0%
Basic Materials	-	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	0.3%
Financial Services	-	0.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FBOT vs. VGT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBOT

FBOT Risk / Return Rank: 56
FBOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
FBOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
FBOT Omega Ratio Rank: 54
FBOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
FBOT Martin Ratio Rank: 59

VGT

VGT Risk / Return Rank: 76
VGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
VGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
VGT Omega Ratio Rank: 78
VGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
VGT Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

FBOT vs. VGT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF (FBOT) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT). 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.

	FBOT	VGT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.98	2.95	-0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	3.63	-0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.47	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.64	3.69	-1.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.50	11.77	-1.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FBOT vs. VGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBOT Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is lower than the VGT Sharpe Ratio of 2.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBOT and VGT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FBOT	VGT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.98	2.95	-0.97
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.89	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.05	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.81	0.68	+0.13

Drawdowns

FBOT vs. VGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBOT drawdown since its inception was -23.61%, smaller than the maximum VGT drawdown of -54.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBOT and VGT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBOT	VGT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.61%	-54.63%	+31.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.17%	-16.40%	+1.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.23%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.07%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.07%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-1.48%	+1.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.15%	-7.95%	+2.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.81%	5.13%	-1.32%

Volatility

FBOT vs. VGT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF (FBOT) is 5.59%, while Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) has a volatility of 6.39%. This indicates that FBOT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBOT	VGT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.59%	6.39%	-0.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.00%	16.07%	-0.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.25%	20.57%	-0.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.95%	25.18%	-4.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.95%	24.60%	-3.65%

FBOT vs. VGT - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBOT has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than VGT's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBOT vs. VGT - Dividend Comparison

FBOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, more than VGT's 0.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBOT Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF	0.59%	0.81%	0.31%	0.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VGT Vanguard Information Technology ETF	0.31%	0.40%	0.60%	0.65%	0.91%	0.64%	0.82%	1.11%	1.29%	0.99%	1.31%	1.28%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBOT and VGT in my portfolio?

FBOT and VGT have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBOT or VGT?

VGT has higher volatility (6.39%) compared to FBOT (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBOT dropped -23.61% vs VGT's -54.63%.

Which ETF is better, FBOT or VGT?

On 1-year performance, VGT leads with 60.15% vs 39.88% for FBOT. On fees, VGT is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FBOT has been the lower-risk option at 5.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBOT or VGT?

Over the 1-year period, VGT has performed better with a 60.15% return vs 39.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBOT or VGT?

VGT is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FBOT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBOT or VGT?

FBOT has the higher dividend yield at 0.59%, compared with 0.31% for VGT.

What is the main difference between FBOT and VGT?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FBOT and 0.09% for VGT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 1.98), 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.