FIVA vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FIVA (Fidelity International Value Factor ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FIVA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Fidelity International Value Factor Index, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. FIVA is passively managed, while FBCG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FIVA returned 13.11%/yr vs 13.39%/yr for FBCG. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FIVA charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

FIVA vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity International Value Factor ETF (FIVA) 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, FIVA achieves a 13.25% return, which is significantly higher than FBCG's 10.08% return.

FIVA

• 1D: -2.31%
• 1M: 1.70%
• YTD: 13.25%
• 6M: 13.22%
• 1Y: 37.08%
• 3Y*: 22.73%
• 5Y*: 13.11%
• 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)

FIVA vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FIVA Fidelity International Value Factor ETF	13.25%	45.83%	2.53%	20.38%	-10.37%	15.90%	15.79%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	10.08%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	41.44%

Correlation

The correlation between FIVA and FBCG is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.57

The correlation between FIVA and FBCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

FIVA vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FIVA	FBCG
Financial Services	27.4%	2.2%
Industrials	16.5%	5.6%
Technology	15.2%	48.9%
Healthcare	8.0%	5.6%
Basic Materials	7.7%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	6.6%	17.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	1.3%
Energy	4.9%	0.4%
Utilities	3.3%	0.5%
Communication Services	3.0%	17.1%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.6%

Return for Risk

FIVA vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FIVA

FIVA Risk / Return Rank: 73
FIVA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FIVA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
FIVA Omega Ratio Rank: 73
FIVA Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
FIVA Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

FIVA vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity International Value Factor ETF (FIVA) 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.

	FIVA	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	1.59	+0.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.21	2.17	+1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.28	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.18	2.09	+1.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.44	7.85	+4.58

FIVA vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FIVA Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is higher than the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FIVA 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

FIVA vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FIVA drawdown since its inception was -39.76%, smaller than the maximum FBCG drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FIVA and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FIVA	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.76%	-43.56%	+3.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.71%	-15.17%	+3.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.77%	-27.89%	+13.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.70%	-43.56%	+14.86%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.31%	-5.76%	+3.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.73%	-11.42%	+3.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.99%	4.02%	-1.03%

Volatility

FIVA vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity International Value Factor ETF (FIVA) is 6.05%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 8.27%. This indicates that FIVA 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

	FIVA	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.05%	8.27%	-2.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.46%	15.50%	-2.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.95%	19.84%	-3.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.45%	26.00%	-9.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.95%	25.80%	-7.85%

FIVA vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FIVA has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FIVA vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

FIVA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.66%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%
FIVA Fidelity International Value Factor ETF	2.66%	2.68%	3.52%	3.63%	3.62%	3.76%	2.46%	3.61%	3.28%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FIVA and FBCG in my portfolio?

FIVA and FBCG have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FIVA or FBCG?

FBCG has higher volatility (8.27%) compared to FIVA (6.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FIVA dropped -39.76% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, FIVA or FBCG?

On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 13.39% vs 13.11% for FIVA. On fees, FIVA is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, FIVA has been the lower-risk option at 6.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FIVA or FBCG?

Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 13.39% return vs 13.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FIVA or FBCG?

FIVA is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

FIVA has the higher dividend yield at 2.66%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between FIVA and FBCG?

FIVA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FIVA and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FIVA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 1.59), 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.