PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCMQX vs. FBGRX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor California Municipal Income Fund Class I (FCMQX) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCMQX achieves a 1.30% return, which is significantly lower than FBGRX's 18.48% return. Over the past 10 years, FCMQX has underperformed FBGRX with an annualized return of 1.99%, while FBGRX has yielded a comparatively higher 21.81% annualized return.


FCMQX

1D
0.08%
1M
0.58%
YTD
1.30%
6M
1.64%
1Y
7.25%
3Y*
4.10%
5Y*
0.90%
10Y*
1.99%

FBGRX

1D
0.24%
1M
5.99%
YTD
18.48%
6M
18.98%
1Y
44.47%
3Y*
32.59%
5Y*
16.72%
10Y*
21.81%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FCMQX
Fidelity Advisor California Municipal Income Fund Class I
1.30%5.61%1.40%6.08%-9.67%1.31%4.40%7.51%0.61%5.78%
FBGRX
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund
18.48%19.91%39.77%55.61%-38.45%22.64%62.20%33.43%1.02%36.01%

Correlation

The correlation between FCMQX and FBGRX is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.11

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.09

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.04

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 1988

0.00

The correlation between FCMQX and FBGRX shifts across timeframes, from 0.00 (all time) to 0.11 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

FCMQX vs. FBGRX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCMQX
FCMQX Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
FCMQX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCMQX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCMQX Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
FCMQX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCMQX Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

FBGRX
FBGRX Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
FBGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
FBGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor California Municipal Income Fund Class I (FCMQX) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX). 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.


FCMQXFBGRXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.67

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.66

1.43

+0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.16

3.47

-1.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.09

14.71

-7.61

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCMQX Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the FBGRX Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCMQX and FBGRX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FCMQXFBGRXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.57

2.52

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.23

0.68

-0.45

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

0.92

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

0.68

-0.01

Drawdowns

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCMQX drawdown since its inception was -23.20%, smaller than the maximum FBGRX drawdown of -58.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCMQX and FBGRX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCMQXFBGRXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.20%

-58.64%

+35.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.41%

-12.65%

+9.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.40%

-27.07%

+21.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.05%

-43.08%

+29.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-14.05%

-43.08%

+29.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.92%

-0.07%

-0.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.00%

-12.53%

+8.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.04%

2.98%

-1.94%

Volatility

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Advisor California Municipal Income Fund Class I (FCMQX) is 1.14%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund (FBGRX) has a volatility of 4.16%. This indicates that FCMQX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBGRX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCMQXFBGRXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.14%

4.16%

-3.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.24%

13.01%

-10.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.88%

17.41%

-14.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.98%

24.87%

-20.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.05%

23.68%

-19.63%

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCMQX has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than FBGRX's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCMQX vs. FBGRX - Dividend Comparison

FCMQX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.93%, more than FBGRX's 1.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FBGRX
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund
1.60%1.90%5.95%0.93%0.57%8.73%6.40%3.70%6.32%4.23%4.05%5.30%
FCMQX
Fidelity Advisor California Municipal Income Fund Class I
2.93%3.74%2.29%2.36%1.61%2.20%2.70%2.74%2.93%3.42%3.41%2.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


FCMQX and FBGRX have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FBGRX has higher volatility (4.16%) compared to FCMQX (1.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCMQX dropped -23.20% vs FBGRX's -58.64%.

FCMQX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 2.52), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCMQX and FBGRX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer