FDIG vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FDIG (Fidelity Crypto Industry and Digital Payments ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDIG is a Blockchain fund tracking the Fidelity Crypto Industry and Digital Payments Index, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. FDIG is passively managed, while FBCG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDIG returned 36.48%/yr vs 27.58%/yr for FBCG. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDIG charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

FDIG vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Crypto Industry and Digital Payments ETF (FDIG) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDIG achieves a 17.50% return, which is significantly higher than FBCG's 10.08% return.

FDIG

• 1D: -1.95%
• 1M: 0.66%
• YTD: 17.50%
• 6M: 11.04%
• 1Y: 44.87%
• 3Y*: 36.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBCG

• 1D: -2.80%
• 1M: -1.48%
• YTD: 10.08%
• 6M: 9.15%
• 1Y: 31.50%
• 3Y*: 27.58%
• 5Y*: 13.39%
• 10Y*: —

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

FDIG vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FDIG Fidelity Crypto Industry and Digital Payments ETF	17.50%	19.92%	18.41%	166.00%	-59.37%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	10.08%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-25.32%

Correlation

The correlation between FDIG and FBCG is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2022	0.66

The correlation between FDIG and FBCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDIG vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDIG	FBCG
Financial Services	56.8%	2.2%
Technology	39.0%	48.9%
Utilities	1.6%	0.5%
Industrials	1.5%	5.6%
Communication Services	0.7%	17.1%
Consumer Cyclical	0.4%	17.2%
Basic Materials	-	0.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.3%
Energy	-	0.4%
Healthcare	-	5.6%
Real Estate	-	0.6%

Return for Risk

FDIG vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDIG

FDIG Risk / Return Rank: 24
FDIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
FDIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
FDIG Omega Ratio Rank: 25
FDIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FDIG Martin Ratio Rank: 18

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 46
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 45
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

FDIG vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Crypto Industry and Digital Payments ETF (FDIG) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG). 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.

	FDIG	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	1.59	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.45	2.17	-0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.28	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.97	2.09	-1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.82	7.85	-6.03

FDIG vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDIG Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDIG and FBCG, 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

FDIG vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDIG drawdown since its inception was -61.35%, which is greater than FBCG's maximum drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDIG and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDIG	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.35%	-43.56%	-17.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-46.69%	-15.17%	-31.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-49.66%	-27.89%	-21.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-43.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.18%	-5.76%	-16.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.48%	-11.42%	-16.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	24.69%	4.02%	+20.67%

Volatility

FDIG vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Crypto Industry and Digital Payments ETF (FDIG) has a higher volatility of 15.67% compared to Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) at 8.27%. This indicates that FDIG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDIG	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.67%	8.27%	+7.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	37.03%	15.50%	+21.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.67%	19.84%	+30.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.91%	26.00%	+34.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	60.91%	25.80%	+35.11%

FDIG vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDIG has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDIG vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

FDIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%
FDIG Fidelity Crypto Industry and Digital Payments ETF	1.39%	1.14%	1.17%	0.18%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDIG and FBCG in my portfolio?

FDIG and FBCG have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDIG or FBCG?

FDIG has higher volatility (15.67%) compared to FBCG (8.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDIG dropped -61.35% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, FDIG or FBCG?

On 3-year performance, FDIG leads with 36.48% vs 27.58% for FBCG. On fees, FDIG is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FBCG has been the lower-risk option at 8.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDIG or FBCG?

Over the 3-year period, FDIG has performed better with a 36.48% return vs 27.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDIG or FBCG?

FDIG is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FDIG or FBCG?

FDIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.39%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between FDIG and FBCG?

FDIG is categorized as Blockchain, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for FDIG and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs 0.89), 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.