TBG vs. FDVV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TBG (TBG Dividend Focus ETF) and FDVV (Fidelity High Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TBG is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by EA Series Trust, while FDVV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Core Dividend Index. TBG is actively managed, while FDVV is passively managed. Over the past year, TBG returned 18.63% vs 23.45% for FDVV. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TBG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for FDVV.

Performance

TBG vs. FDVV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TBG Dividend Focus ETF (TBG) and Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBG achieves a 10.42% return, which is significantly higher than FDVV's 8.39% return.

TBG

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 10.42%
• 6M: 9.88%
• 1Y: 18.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FDVV

• 1D: -1.12%
• 1M: 4.44%
• YTD: 8.39%
• 6M: 8.67%
• 1Y: 23.45%
• 3Y*: 20.08%
• 5Y*: 13.36%
• 10Y*: —

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

TBG vs. FDVV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TBG TBG Dividend Focus ETF	10.42%	7.50%	20.58%	9.66%
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	8.39%	17.08%	21.81%	10.12%

Correlation

The correlation between TBG and FDVV is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2023	0.79

The correlation between TBG and FDVV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

TBG vs. FDVV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TBG	FDVV
Healthcare	15.1%	3.1%
Energy	14.4%	-
Financial Services	13.8%	17.0%
Consumer Defensive	13.1%	11.0%
Real Estate	12.2%	10.1%
Technology	9.3%	29.1%
Utilities	6.8%	8.7%
Consumer Cyclical	5.5%	13.6%
Industrials	4.4%	3.4%
Communication Services	3.7%	3.7%
Basic Materials	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

TBG vs. FDVV — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBG

TBG Risk / Return Rank: 58
TBG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
TBG Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
TBG Omega Ratio Rank: 54
TBG Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
TBG Martin Ratio Rank: 55

FDVV

FDVV Risk / Return Rank: 64
FDVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
FDVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
FDVV Omega Ratio Rank: 71
FDVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
FDVV Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

TBG vs. FDVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TBG Dividend Focus ETF (TBG) and Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV). 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.

	TBG	FDVV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.97	2.35	-0.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.87	3.28	-0.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.43	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.05	2.53	+0.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.44	10.54	-1.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TBG vs. FDVV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TBG Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is comparable to the FDVV Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TBG and FDVV, 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

	TBG	FDVV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.97	2.35	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.91	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.58	0.79	+0.79

Drawdowns

TBG vs. FDVV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBG drawdown since its inception was -14.76%, smaller than the maximum FDVV drawdown of -40.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBG and FDVV.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBG	FDVV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.76%	-40.25%	+25.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.13%	-9.30%	+3.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.90%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-1.12%	-0.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.11%	-3.81%	+1.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.98%	2.23%	-0.25%

Volatility

TBG vs. FDVV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for TBG Dividend Focus ETF (TBG) is 2.65%, while Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) has a volatility of 3.14%. This indicates that TBG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FDVV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TBG	FDVV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.65%	3.14%	-0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.64%	7.99%	-1.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.53%	10.06%	-0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.22%	14.75%	-2.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.22%	17.00%	-4.78%

TBG vs. FDVV - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FDVV's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBG vs. FDVV - Dividend Comparison

TBG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, less than FDVV's 2.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	2.72%	2.89%	2.94%	3.77%	3.44%	2.70%	3.19%	3.93%	4.05%	3.66%	1.04%
TBG TBG Dividend Focus ETF	2.69%	2.80%	2.33%	0.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBG and FDVV in my portfolio?

TBG and FDVV have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TBG or FDVV?

FDVV has higher volatility (3.14%) compared to TBG (2.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBG dropped -14.76% vs FDVV's -40.25%.

Which ETF is better, TBG or FDVV?

On 1-year performance, FDVV leads with 23.45% vs 18.63% for TBG. On fees, FDVV is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, TBG has been the lower-risk option at 2.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TBG or FDVV?

Over the 1-year period, FDVV has performed better with a 23.45% return vs 18.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBG or FDVV?

FDVV is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for TBG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TBG or FDVV?

FDVV has the higher dividend yield at 2.72%, compared with 2.69% for TBG.

What is the main difference between TBG and FDVV?

TBG is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while FDVV is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: EA Series Trust and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for TBG and 0.29% for FDVV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FDVV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.97), 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.