FFLV vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FFLV (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FFLV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FFLV returned 29.12% vs 38.56% for FBCG. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FFLV charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

FFLV vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF (FFLV) 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, FFLV achieves a 12.45% return, which is significantly lower than FBCG's 15.85% return.

FFLV

• 1D: 1.11%
• 1M: 2.55%
• YTD: 12.45%
• 6M: 14.00%
• 1Y: 29.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBCG

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 6.79%
• YTD: 15.85%
• 6M: 15.22%
• 1Y: 38.56%
• 3Y*: 30.88%
• 5Y*: 15.89%
• 10Y*: —

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

FFLV vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FFLV Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF	12.45%	16.04%	8.04%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	15.85%	18.60%	25.08%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLV and FBCG is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2024	0.46

Return for Risk

FFLV vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFLV

FFLV Risk / Return Rank: 80
FFLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
FFLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FFLV Omega Ratio Rank: 77
FFLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
FFLV Martin Ratio Rank: 81

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 59
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 60
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

FFLV vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF (FFLV) 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.

	FFLV	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	2.09	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.70	2.79	+0.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.36	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.04	2.55	+1.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.73	9.93	+5.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFLV vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLV Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLV 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FFLV	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	2.09	+0.47
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.62	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.15	0.83	+0.32

Drawdowns

FFLV vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLV drawdown since its inception was -16.71%, smaller than the maximum FBCG drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLV and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFLV	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.71%	-43.56%	+26.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.24%	-15.17%	+7.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.89%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-43.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.83%	+0.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.99%	-11.48%	+8.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.86%	3.90%	-2.04%

Volatility

FFLV vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF (FFLV) is 2.89%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 4.71%. This indicates that FFLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FFLV	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.89%	4.71%	-1.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.45%	13.89%	-5.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.41%	18.53%	-7.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.22%	25.78%	-11.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.22%	25.72%	-11.50%

FFLV vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLV has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFLV vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

FFLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, 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%
FFLV Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF	1.45%	1.60%	1.46%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFLV and FBCG in my portfolio?

FFLV and FBCG have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFLV or FBCG?

FBCG has higher volatility (4.71%) compared to FFLV (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLV dropped -16.71% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, FFLV or FBCG?

On 1-year performance, FBCG leads with 38.56% vs 29.12% for FFLV. On fees, FFLV is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, FFLV has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFLV or FBCG?

Over the 1-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 38.56% return vs 29.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFLV or FBCG?

FFLV is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

FFLV has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between FFLV and FBCG?

FFLV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLV and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 2.09), 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.