FMIL vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FMIL (Fidelity New Millennium ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FMIL is a Large Cap Blend 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 5 years, FMIL returned 15.85%/yr vs 15.84%/yr for FBCG. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.59% expense ratio.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMIL achieves a 10.26% return, which is significantly lower than FBCG's 15.59% return.

FMIL

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 3.15%
• YTD: 10.26%
• 6M: 11.18%
• 1Y: 26.96%
• 3Y*: 23.20%
• 5Y*: 15.85%
• 10Y*: —

FBCG

• 1D: -1.05%
• 1M: 7.84%
• YTD: 15.59%
• 6M: 15.51%
• 1Y: 39.38%
• 3Y*: 30.60%
• 5Y*: 15.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

FMIL vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FMIL Fidelity New Millennium ETF	10.26%	17.67%	27.89%	25.07%	-0.04%	24.53%	18.76%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	15.59%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	42.99%

Correlation

The correlation between FMIL and FBCG is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020	0.76

The correlation between FMIL and FBCG shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (all time) to 0.91 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FMIL vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMIL	FBCG
Technology	32.4%	48.3%
Communication Services	11.9%	16.6%
Financial Services	11.1%	2.2%
Industrials	10.8%	5.7%
Consumer Cyclical	10.4%	17.2%
Healthcare	8.2%	6.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	1.3%
Energy	4.6%	0.4%
Utilities	2.5%	0.5%
Basic Materials	1.8%	0.6%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.7%

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: 61
FMIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
FMIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
FMIL Omega Ratio Rank: 62
FMIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
FMIL Martin Ratio Rank: 67

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 57
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 58
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
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.

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	2.12	2.14	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	2.84	+0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.36	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.71	2.61	+0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.30	10.14	+2.16
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 2.12, which is comparable to the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMIL 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

	FMIL	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	2.14	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	0.62	+0.32
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.17	0.83	+0.34

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	-9.98%	-15.17%	+5.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.72%	-27.89%	+8.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.72%	-43.56%	+23.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-1.05%	+0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.99%	-11.49%	+8.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.20%	3.90%	-1.70%

Volatility

FMIL vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity New Millennium ETF (FMIL) is 3.15%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 4.79%. 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	3.15%	4.79%	-1.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.73%	13.89%	-4.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.80%	18.55%	-5.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.92%	25.79%	-8.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.65%	25.72%	-8.07%

FMIL vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FMIL vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

FMIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, 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%
FMIL Fidelity New Millennium ETF	1.00%	1.10%	0.82%	0.57%	1.67%	1.68%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMIL and FBCG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, FMIL and FBCG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FMIL or FBCG?

FBCG has higher volatility (4.79%) compared to FMIL (3.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMIL dropped -19.72% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, FMIL or FBCG?

On 5-year performance, FMIL leads with 15.85% vs 15.84% for FBCG. Both ETFs have the same 0.59% expense ratio. On volatility, FMIL has been the lower-risk option at 3.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMIL or FBCG?

Over the 5-year period, FMIL has performed better with a 15.85% return vs 15.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMIL or FBCG?

FMIL and FBCG have the same expense ratio: 0.59% per year.

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

FMIL has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between FMIL and FBCG?

FMIL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 2.12), 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.