FDG vs. FFOG

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

FDG (American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF) and FFOG (Franklin Focused Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by American Century, while FFOG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FDG returned 27.20% vs 23.27% for FFOG. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FDG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for FFOG.

Performance

FDG vs. FFOG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDG achieves a 3.76% return, which is significantly lower than FFOG's 9.25% return.

FDG

• 1D: -2.18%
• 1M: -4.66%
• YTD: 3.76%
• 6M: 2.48%
• 1Y: 27.20%
• 3Y*: 26.86%
• 5Y*: 10.32%
• 10Y*: —

FFOG

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 1.69%
• YTD: 9.25%
• 6M: 8.42%
• 1Y: 23.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FDG vs. FFOG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FDG American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF	3.76%	22.13%	45.89%	12.75%
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF	9.25%	17.09%	38.20%	12.25%

Correlation

The correlation between FDG and FFOG is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2023	0.92

The correlation between FDG and FFOG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDG vs. FFOG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDG	FFOG
Technology	37.7%	58.2%
Communication Services	21.5%	12.9%
Consumer Cyclical	17.1%	11.7%
Healthcare	13.2%	5.6%
Industrials	5.2%	6.1%
Financial Services	4.7%	2.4%
Energy	0.6%	0.7%
Utilities	0.1%	1.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

FDG vs. FFOG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDG

FDG Risk / Return Rank: 39
FDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
FDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
FDG Omega Ratio Rank: 39
FDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FDG Martin Ratio Rank: 38

FFOG

FFOG Risk / Return Rank: 27
FFOG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
FFOG Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FFOG Omega Ratio Rank: 30
FFOG Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
FFOG Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

FDG vs. FFOG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG) and Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG). 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	FFOG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	1.09	+0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.95	1.53	+0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.20	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.74	1.07	+0.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.92	3.13	+2.79

FDG vs. FFOG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDG Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is higher than the FFOG Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDG and FFOG, 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. FFOG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDG drawdown since its inception was -43.69%, which is greater than FFOG's maximum drawdown of -25.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDG and FFOG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDG	FFOG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.69%	-25.38%	-18.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.71%	-21.90%	+6.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.14%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.52%	-2.23%	-4.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.36%	-4.58%	-8.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.61%	7.45%	-2.84%

Volatility

FDG vs. FFOG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG) is 8.04%, while Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) has a volatility of 8.80%. This indicates that FDG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFOG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDG	FFOG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.04%	8.80%	-0.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.67%	17.14%	-1.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.09%	21.53%	-2.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.86%	24.10%	+0.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.98%	24.10%	+0.88%

FDG vs. FFOG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than FFOG's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDG vs. FFOG - Dividend Comparison

Neither FDG nor FFOG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FDG American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDG and FFOG in my portfolio?

FDG and FFOG have a correlation of 0.88, 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 FFOG?

FFOG has higher volatility (8.80%) compared to FDG (8.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDG dropped -43.69% vs FFOG's -25.38%.

Which ETF is better, FDG or FFOG?

On 1-year performance, FDG leads with 27.20% vs 23.27% for FFOG. On fees, FDG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, FDG has been the lower-risk option at 8.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDG or FFOG?

Over the 1-year period, FDG has performed better with a 27.20% return vs 23.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDG or FFOG?

FDG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for FFOG.

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

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

What is the main difference between FDG and FFOG?

FDG is categorized as Global Equities, while FFOG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: American Century and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FDG and 0.55% for FFOG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 1.09), 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.