IVW vs. FCNTX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IVW (iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF) and FCNTX (Fidelity Contrafund) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, IVW returned 17.93%/yr vs 18.01%/yr for FCNTX. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IVW charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FCNTX.

Performance

IVW vs. FCNTX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) and Fidelity Contrafund (FCNTX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with IVW having a 8.67% return and FCNTX slightly lower at 8.62%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IVW having a 17.93% annualized return and FCNTX not far ahead at 18.01%.

IVW

• 1D: -2.32%
• 1M: -2.04%
• YTD: 8.67%
• 6M: 7.44%
• 1Y: 26.74%
• 3Y*: 25.36%
• 5Y*: 13.97%
• 10Y*: 17.93%

FCNTX

• 1D: -2.12%
• 1M: 1.97%
• YTD: 8.62%
• 6M: 7.74%
• 1Y: 22.83%
• 3Y*: 26.52%
• 5Y*: 14.58%
• 10Y*: 18.01%

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

IVW vs. FCNTX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	8.67%	21.95%	35.82%	29.83%	-29.50%	31.80%	33.19%	30.77%	-0.21%	27.21%
FCNTX Fidelity Contrafund	8.62%	21.76%	36.00%	38.67%	-28.31%	24.52%	32.48%	30.00%	-3.81%	32.18%

Correlation

The correlation between IVW and FCNTX is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2000	0.93

The correlation between IVW and FCNTX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

IVW vs. FCNTX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IVW	FCNTX
Technology	53.0%	25.5%
Communication Services	15.8%	20.8%
Financial Services	8.6%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	10.3%
Healthcare	5.7%	7.4%
Industrials	5.3%	5.8%
Utilities	1.2%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	3.0%
Real Estate	0.5%	0.3%
Basic Materials	0.3%	1.7%
Energy	0.1%	1.6%

Return for Risk

IVW vs. FCNTX — Risk / Return Rank

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

IVW

IVW Risk / Return Rank: 45
IVW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
IVW Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Omega Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
IVW Martin Ratio Rank: 48

FCNTX

FCNTX Risk / Return Rank: 37
FCNTX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
FCNTX Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
FCNTX Omega Ratio Rank: 34
FCNTX Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FCNTX Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

IVW vs. FCNTX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) and Fidelity Contrafund (FCNTX). 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.

	IVW	FCNTX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	1.61	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.22	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.29	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.95	2.14	-0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.75	8.97	-1.22

IVW vs. FCNTX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IVW Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is comparable to the FCNTX Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IVW and FCNTX, 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

IVW vs. FCNTX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IVW drawdown since its inception was -57.33%, which is greater than FCNTX's maximum drawdown of -49.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IVW and FCNTX.

Drawdown Indicators

	IVW	FCNTX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.33%	-49.19%	-8.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.75%	-11.30%	-2.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.15%	-19.75%	-2.40%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.72%	-32.59%	-0.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.72%	-32.59%	-0.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.48%	-2.59%	-2.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.59%	-8.15%	-9.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	2.69%	+0.77%

Volatility

IVW vs. FCNTX - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) has a higher volatility of 7.23% compared to Fidelity Contrafund (FCNTX) at 6.33%. This indicates that IVW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCNTX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IVW	FCNTX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.23%	6.33%	+0.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.82%	11.87%	+1.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.06%	15.10%	+1.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.35%	19.32%	+2.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.70%	19.76%	+0.94%

IVW vs. FCNTX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IVW has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FCNTX's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

IVW vs. FCNTX - Dividend Comparison

IVW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than FCNTX's 4.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCNTX Fidelity Contrafund	4.30%	5.21%	4.19%	3.78%	11.87%	10.80%	8.01%	4.16%	7.46%	6.08%	3.81%	5.33%
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	0.37%	0.40%	0.43%	1.03%	0.92%	0.46%	0.82%	1.63%	1.28%	1.30%	1.51%	1.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IVW and FCNTX in my portfolio?

IVW and FCNTX have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IVW or FCNTX?

IVW has higher volatility (7.23%) compared to FCNTX (6.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IVW dropped -57.33% vs FCNTX's -49.19%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCNTX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.61 vs 1.58), 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.