IAK vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

IAK (iShares U.S. Insurance ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IAK is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Insurance Index, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. IAK is passively managed, while FBCG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, IAK returned 13.37%/yr vs 14.46%/yr for FBCG. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IAK charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

IAK vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK) 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, IAK achieves a 1.11% return, which is significantly lower than FBCG's 11.31% return.

IAK

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 4.20%
• YTD: 1.11%
• 6M: 0.88%
• 1Y: 4.33%
• 3Y*: 18.27%
• 5Y*: 13.37%
• 10Y*: 12.67%

FBCG

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -0.54%
• YTD: 11.31%
• 6M: 12.74%
• 1Y: 32.07%
• 3Y*: 28.04%
• 5Y*: 14.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

IAK vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	1.11%	9.50%	28.25%	11.28%	11.33%	26.84%	20.76%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	11.31%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	41.44%

Correlation

The correlation between IAK and FBCG is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.06
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.26

The correlation between IAK and FBCG shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.27 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IAK vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IAK	FBCG
Financial Services	99.5%	2.2%
Healthcare	0.5%	6.7%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Communication Services	-	16.6%
Consumer Cyclical	-	17.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.3%
Energy	-	0.4%
Industrials	-	5.7%
Real Estate	-	0.7%
Technology	-	48.3%
Utilities	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

IAK vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IAK

IAK Risk / Return Rank: 15
IAK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
IAK Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
IAK Omega Ratio Rank: 13
IAK Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
IAK Martin Ratio Rank: 16

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 53
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 53
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

IAK vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK) 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.

	IAK	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.29	1.66	-1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.50	2.24	-1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.29	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	2.12	-1.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.27	8.07	-6.80

IAK vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IAK Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is lower than the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IAK 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

IAK vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IAK drawdown since its inception was -77.38%, which is greater than FBCG's maximum drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAK and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	IAK	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-77.38%	-43.56%	-33.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.62%	-15.17%	+7.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.58%	-27.89%	+16.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.76%	-43.56%	+28.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.23%	-4.71%	+4.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.11%	-11.45%	-4.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.41%	3.99%	-0.58%

Volatility

IAK vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK) is 5.49%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 7.21%. This indicates that IAK 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

	IAK	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.49%	7.21%	-1.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.75%	15.09%	-4.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.10%	19.38%	-4.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.14%	25.90%	-7.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.92%	25.77%	-4.85%

IAK vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IAK has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

IAK vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

IAK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	2.60%	1.69%	1.49%	1.44%	1.69%	2.26%	2.07%	1.84%	2.33%	1.62%	1.68%	1.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IAK and FBCG in my portfolio?

IAK and FBCG have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IAK or FBCG?

FBCG has higher volatility (7.21%) compared to IAK (5.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IAK dropped -77.38% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, IAK or FBCG?

On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 14.46% vs 13.37% for IAK. On fees, IAK is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, IAK has been the lower-risk option at 5.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IAK or FBCG?

Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 14.46% return vs 13.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IAK or FBCG?

IAK is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

IAK has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between IAK and FBCG?

IAK is categorized as Financials Equities, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for IAK and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 0.29), 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.