NERD vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

NERD (Roundhill Video Games ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NERD is a Gaming fund actively managed by Roundhill Investments, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, NERD returned -8.51%/yr vs 14.46%/yr for FBCG. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NERD charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

NERD vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Video Games ETF (NERD) 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, NERD achieves a -18.01% return, which is significantly lower than FBCG's 11.31% return.

NERD

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: -3.77%
• YTD: -18.01%
• 6M: -19.37%
• 1Y: -21.07%
• 3Y*: 9.13%
• 5Y*: -8.51%
• 10Y*: —

FBCG

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -1.64%
• YTD: 11.31%
• 6M: 12.74%
• 1Y: 34.39%
• 3Y*: 28.04%
• 5Y*: 14.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

NERD vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
NERD Roundhill Video Games ETF	-18.01%	23.14%	28.52%	12.94%	-43.30%	-17.57%	60.00%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	11.31%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	41.44%

Correlation

The correlation between NERD 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	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.71

The correlation between NERD and FBCG shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NERD vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NERD	FBCG
Communication Services	91.1%	16.6%
Technology	3.9%	48.3%
Consumer Cyclical	3.9%	17.2%
Industrials	1.2%	5.7%
Financial Services	0.0%	2.2%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.3%
Energy	-	0.4%
Healthcare	-	6.7%
Real Estate	-	0.7%
Utilities	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

NERD vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

NERD

NERD Risk / Return Rank: 2
NERD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
NERD Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
NERD Omega Ratio Rank: 2
NERD Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
NERD Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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.

NERD vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Video Games ETF (NERD) 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.

	NERD	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.09	1.66	-2.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.50	2.24	-3.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.29	-0.46
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.69	2.12	-2.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.23	8.07	-9.30

NERD vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NERD Sharpe Ratio is -1.09, which is lower than the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NERD 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

NERD vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NERD drawdown since its inception was -65.58%, which is greater than FBCG's maximum drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NERD and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	NERD	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-65.58%	-43.56%	-22.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.19%	-15.17%	-16.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.19%	-27.89%	-3.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-58.08%	-43.56%	-14.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-46.82%	-4.71%	-42.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.92%	-11.45%	-24.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.50%	3.99%	+13.51%

Volatility

NERD vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Video Games ETF (NERD) is 4.21%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 7.21%. This indicates that NERD 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

	NERD	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.21%	7.21%	-3.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.00%	15.09%	-0.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.77%	19.38%	+0.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.51%	25.90%	-1.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.49%	25.77%	-0.28%

NERD vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

NERD has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

NERD vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

NERD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%
NERD Roundhill Video Games ETF	0.77%	0.63%	1.74%	1.07%	0.69%	0.02%	1.05%	0.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NERD and FBCG in my portfolio?

NERD 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, NERD or FBCG?

FBCG has higher volatility (7.21%) compared to NERD (4.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NERD dropped -65.58% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, NERD or FBCG?

On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 14.46% vs -8.51% for NERD. On fees, NERD is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, NERD has been the lower-risk option at 4.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NERD or FBCG?

Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 14.46% return vs -8.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NERD or FBCG?

NERD is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

NERD has the higher dividend yield at 0.77%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between NERD and FBCG?

NERD is categorized as Gaming, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill Investments and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for NERD and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs -1.09), 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.