FELG vs. BIBL
FELG (Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FELG is actively managed, while BIBL is passively managed. Over the past year, FELG returned 20.00% vs 40.13% for BIBL. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FELG charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.
Performance
FELG vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FELG achieves a 2.26% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 24.57% return.
FELG
- 1D
- -1.73%
- 1M
- -3.56%
- YTD
- 2.26%
- 6M
- 0.98%
- 1Y
- 20.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BIBL
- 1D
- -2.18%
- 1M
- 4.42%
- YTD
- 24.57%
- 6M
- 23.10%
- 1Y
- 40.13%
- 3Y*
- 22.41%
- 5Y*
- 10.30%
- 10Y*
- —
FELG vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF | 2.26% | 18.44% | 35.45% | 4.37% |
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF | 24.57% | 17.27% | 12.49% | 9.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between FELG and BIBL is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023 | 0.68 |
The correlation between FELG and BIBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
FELG vs. BIBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FELG
BIBL
Technology
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
FELG
BIBL
Communication Services
FELG
BIBL
-
Consumer Cyclical
FELG
BIBL
Healthcare
FELG
BIBL
Industrials
FELG
BIBL
Financial Services
FELG
BIBL
Consumer Defensive
FELG
BIBL
Utilities
FELG
BIBL
Energy
FELG
BIBL
Real Estate
FELG
BIBL
Basic Materials
FELG
BIBL
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
FELG vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank
FELG
BIBL
FELG vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). 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.
| FELG | BIBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.42 | -0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.24 | 4.51 | -3.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.14 | 19.18 | -15.04 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FELG vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FELG drawdown since its inception was -23.89%, smaller than the maximum BIBL drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FELG and BIBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FELG | BIBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.89% | -36.12% | +12.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.17% | -8.94% | -7.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.60% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -30.85% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.32% | -2.18% | -4.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.54% | -7.00% | +3.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.84% | 2.10% | +2.74% |
Volatility
FELG vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) is 6.15%, while Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) has a volatility of 6.91%. This indicates that FELG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BIBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FELG | BIBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.15% | 6.91% | -0.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.66% | 13.67% | -1.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.29% | 16.47% | -0.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.00% | 19.76% | +0.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.00% | 21.11% | -1.11% |
FELG vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
FELG has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
FELG vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison
FELG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than BIBL's 0.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF | 0.95% | 1.01% | 0.92% | 1.02% | 0.98% | 17.87% | 1.67% | 1.30% | 1.49% | 0.31% |
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.36% | 0.38% | 0.44% | 0.11% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FELG and BIBL have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BIBL has higher volatility (6.91%) compared to FELG (6.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FELG dropped -23.89% vs BIBL's -36.12%.
On 1-year performance, BIBL leads with 40.13% vs 20.00% for FELG. On fees, FELG is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, FELG has been the lower-risk option at 6.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BIBL has performed better with a 40.13% return vs 20.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FELG is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for BIBL.
BIBL has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.36% for FELG.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FELG and 0.35% for BIBL.
BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 1.24), 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.
Find the right allocation for FELG and BIBL
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