FDVV vs. CGDV

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FDVV (Fidelity High Dividend ETF) and CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDVV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Core Dividend Index, while CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group. FDVV is passively managed, while CGDV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDVV returned 19.93%/yr vs 24.31%/yr for CGDV. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FDVV charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGDV.

Performance

FDVV vs. CGDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDVV achieves a 8.46% return, which is significantly lower than CGDV's 11.43% return.

FDVV

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 8.46%
• 6M: 7.70%
• 1Y: 21.26%
• 3Y*: 19.93%
• 5Y*: 13.59%
• 10Y*: —

CGDV

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: 1.08%
• YTD: 11.43%
• 6M: 10.45%
• 1Y: 26.38%
• 3Y*: 24.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FDVV vs. CGDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	8.46%	17.08%	21.81%	18.00%	-0.71%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	11.43%	25.50%	20.10%	28.81%	-0.44%

Correlation

The correlation between FDVV and CGDV is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022	0.91

The correlation between FDVV and CGDV shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (1 year) to 0.91 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FDVV vs. CGDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDVV	CGDV
Technology	30.5%	33.1%
Financial Services	17.0%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	13.6%	11.3%
Consumer Defensive	10.7%	6.0%
Real Estate	9.9%	1.1%
Utilities	8.6%	1.0%
Communication Services	3.6%	8.3%
Healthcare	3.0%	10.4%
Industrials	3.0%	12.9%
Basic Materials	-	2.8%
Energy	-	4.4%

Return for Risk

FDVV vs. CGDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDVV

FDVV Risk / Return Rank: 66
FDVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
FDVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
FDVV Omega Ratio Rank: 74
FDVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
FDVV Martin Ratio Rank: 59

CGDV

CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 72
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

FDVV vs. CGDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). 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.

	FDVV	CGDV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	2.17	-0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	2.98	-0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.40	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.30	2.72	-0.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.49	12.64	-3.16

FDVV vs. CGDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDVV Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is comparable to the CGDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDVV and CGDV, 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

FDVV vs. CGDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDVV drawdown since its inception was -40.25%, which is greater than CGDV's maximum drawdown of -21.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDVV and CGDV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDVV	CGDV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.25%	-21.82%	-18.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.30%	-9.75%	+0.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.90%	-14.28%	-1.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.18%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.25%	-1.46%	+0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.79%	-3.58%	-0.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.25%	2.09%	+0.16%

Volatility

FDVV vs. CGDV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) is 2.97%, while Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) has a volatility of 4.64%. This indicates that FDVV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDVV	CGDV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.97%	4.64%	-1.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.25%	9.90%	-1.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.14%	12.27%	-2.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.73%	15.57%	-0.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.97%	15.57%	+1.40%

FDVV vs. CGDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDVV has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than CGDV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDVV vs. CGDV - Dividend Comparison

FDVV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, more than CGDV's 1.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	1.17%	1.29%	1.60%	1.65%	1.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	2.86%	2.89%	2.94%	3.77%	3.44%	2.70%	3.19%	3.93%	4.05%	3.66%	1.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDVV and CGDV in my portfolio?

FDVV and CGDV have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDVV or CGDV?

CGDV has higher volatility (4.64%) compared to FDVV (2.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDVV dropped -40.25% vs CGDV's -21.82%.

Which ETF is better, FDVV or CGDV?

On 3-year performance, CGDV leads with 24.31% vs 19.93% for FDVV. On fees, FDVV is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FDVV has been the lower-risk option at 2.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDVV or CGDV?

Over the 3-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 24.31% return vs 19.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDVV or CGDV?

FDVV is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CGDV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FDVV or CGDV?

FDVV has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 1.17% for CGDV.

What is the main difference between FDVV and CGDV?

FDVV is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while CGDV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FDVV and 0.33% for CGDV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 2.11), 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.