FDG vs. AOTG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FDG (American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF) and AOTG (AOT Growth and Innovation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by American Century, while AOTG is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by AOT. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDG returned 22.99%/yr vs 23.03%/yr for AOTG. Their correlation of 0.90 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FDG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for AOTG.

Performance

FDG vs. AOTG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG) and AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDG achieves a 0.10% return, which is significantly lower than AOTG's 8.87% return.

FDG

• 1D: 3.17%
• 1M: -3.88%
• 6M: 0.24%
• YTD: 0.10%
• 1Y: 14.28%
• 3Y*: 22.99%
• 5Y*: 8.96%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.05%

AOTG

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: -3.36%
• 6M: 12.58%
• YTD: 8.87%
• 1Y: 20.85%
• 3Y*: 23.03%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 24.84%

*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)
AOTG AOT Growth and Innovation ETF	$288.05K	$245.53K	$342.43K
FDG American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF	$1.83M	$1.61M	$2.38M

FDG vs. AOTG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FDG American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF	0.10%	22.13%	45.89%	37.22%	-3.20%
AOTG AOT Growth and Innovation ETF	8.87%	25.26%	32.20%	54.58%	-11.14%

Correlation

The correlation between FDG and AOTG is 0.85, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 29, 2022	0.90

The correlation between FDG and AOTG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDG vs. AOTG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDG	AOTG
Technology	39.9%	69.1%
Communication Services	24.5%	13.4%
Consumer Cyclical	16.8%	6.6%
Healthcare	9.2%	0.2%
Industrials	5.5%	0.6%
Financial Services	3.5%	10.1%
Energy	0.6%	-
Utilities	0.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

FDG vs. AOTG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDG

FDG Risk / Return Rank: 24
FDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
FDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FDG Omega Ratio Rank: 23
FDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
FDG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

AOTG

AOTG Risk / Return Rank: 26
AOTG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
AOTG Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
AOTG Omega Ratio Rank: 27
AOTG Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
AOTG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

FDG vs. AOTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG) and AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG). 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.

	FDG	AOTG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.55	0.64	-0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.87	1.03	-0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.13	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.71	0.77	-0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.06	2.10	-0.04

FDG vs. AOTG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDG Sharpe Ratio is 0.55, which is comparable to the AOTG Sharpe Ratio of 0.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDG and AOTG, 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

FDG vs. AOTG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDG drawdown since its inception was -43.69%, which is greater than AOTG's maximum drawdown of -31.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDG and AOTG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDG	AOTG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.69%	-31.63%	-12.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.71%	-22.85%	+7.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.14%	-27.41%	+1.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.82%	-8.90%	-0.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.27%	-7.83%	-5.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.45%	8.39%	-2.94%

Volatility

FDG vs. AOTG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG) is 7.67%, while AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG) has a volatility of 10.41%. This indicates that FDG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AOTG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDG	AOTG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.67%	10.41%	-2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.13%	23.39%	-6.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.59%	27.67%	-7.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.09%	29.67%	-4.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.99%	29.67%	-4.68%

FDG vs. AOTG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than AOTG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDG vs. AOTG - Dividend Comparison

Neither FDG nor AOTG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
AOTG AOT Growth and Innovation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FDG American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDG and AOTG in my portfolio?

FDG and AOTG have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDG or AOTG?

AOTG has higher volatility (10.41%) compared to FDG (7.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDG dropped -43.69% vs AOTG's -31.63%.

Which ETF is better, FDG or AOTG?

On 3-year performance, AOTG leads with 23.03% vs 22.99% for FDG. On fees, FDG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, FDG has been the lower-risk option at 7.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDG or AOTG?

Over the 3-year period, AOTG has performed better with a 23.03% return vs 22.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDG or AOTG?

FDG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for AOTG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FDG or AOTG?

FDG and AOTG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FDG and AOTG?

FDG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while AOTG is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: American Century and AOT. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FDG and 0.75% for AOTG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AOTG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.64 vs 0.55), 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.