FMIL vs. FBCG

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity New Millennium ETF (FMIL) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG).

FMIL and FBCG are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FMIL is an actively managed fund by Fidelity. It was launched on Jun 3, 2020. FBCG is an actively managed fund by Fidelity. It was launched on Jun 3, 2020.

Performance

FMIL vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

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

FMIL vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FMIL Fidelity New Millennium ETF	-3.67%	17.67%	27.89%	25.07%	-0.04%	24.53%	18.76%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	-8.61%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	42.99%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMIL achieves a -3.67% return, which is significantly higher than FBCG's -8.61% return.

FMIL

• 1D: 3.48%
• 1M: -5.49%
• YTD: -3.67%
• 6M: -0.80%
• 1Y: 19.26%
• 3Y*: 19.56%
• 5Y*: 14.40%
• 10Y*: —

FBCG

• 1D: 4.81%
• 1M: -5.43%
• YTD: -8.61%
• 6M: -6.56%
• 1Y: 25.45%
• 3Y*: 25.41%
• 5Y*: 10.98%
• 10Y*: —

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

FMIL vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FMIL and FBCG have an expense ratio of 0.59%.

FMIL

Fidelity New Millennium ETF

FBCG

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF

Return for Risk

FMIL vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMIL

FMIL Risk / Return Rank: 66
FMIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FMIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
FMIL Omega Ratio Rank: 65
FMIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
FMIL Martin Ratio Rank: 72

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 64
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 62
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

FMIL vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity New Millennium ETF (FMIL) 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.

	FMIL	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.04	0.97	+0.06
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.55	1.54	+0.01
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.22	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	1.65	0.00
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.14	5.92	+1.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FMIL vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMIL Sharpe Ratio is 1.04, which is comparable to the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMIL and FBCG, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FMIL	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.04	0.97	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85	0.43	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.04	0.67	+0.38

Correlation

The correlation between FMIL and FBCG is 0.75, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

FMIL vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

FMIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, more than FBCG's 0.05% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FMIL Fidelity New Millennium ETF	1.14%	1.10%	0.82%	0.57%	1.67%	1.68%	0.89%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.05%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%

Drawdowns

FMIL vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMIL drawdown since its inception was -19.72%, smaller than the maximum FBCG drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMIL and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMIL	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.72%	-43.56%	+23.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.92%	-15.17%	+3.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.72%	-43.56%	+23.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.85%	-11.09%	+4.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.05%	-11.79%	+8.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.76%	4.23%	-1.47%

Volatility

FMIL vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity New Millennium ETF (FMIL) is 6.13%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 8.22%. This indicates that FMIL 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

	FMIL	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.13%	8.22%	-2.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.24%	14.74%	-4.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.67%	26.28%	-7.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.94%	25.82%	-8.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.78%	25.92%	-8.14%