VFMV vs. FBCG

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

VFMV (Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VFMV is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Vanguard, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, VFMV returned 9.37%/yr vs 13.00%/yr for FBCG. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. VFMV charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

VFMV vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG). 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 VFMV having a 9.62% return and FBCG slightly lower at 9.50%.

VFMV

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 2.40%
• 6M: 6.67%
• YTD: 9.62%
• 1Y: 13.50%
• 3Y*: 13.82%
• 5Y*: 9.37%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.94%

FBCG

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -4.26%
• 6M: 9.12%
• YTD: 9.50%
• 1Y: 21.54%
• 3Y*: 25.46%
• 5Y*: 13.00%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.53%

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

VFMV vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF	9.62%	10.52%	16.91%	8.86%	-5.73%	20.75%	12.78%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	9.50%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	41.44%

Correlation

The correlation between VFMV and FBCG is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.60

Over the past year, the correlation between VFMV and FBCG has dropped to 0.38 - well below their long-term average of 0.60, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

VFMV vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VFMV	FBCG
Technology	25.1%	52.1%
Communication Services	10.7%	15.2%
Financial Services	10.6%	2.2%
Industrials	10.1%	5.8%
Healthcare	10.1%	5.6%
Consumer Defensive	9.5%	1.3%
Consumer Cyclical	6.9%	16.1%
Utilities	6.7%	0.4%
Real Estate	6.4%	0.6%
Energy	3.9%	0.3%
Basic Materials	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

VFMV vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

VFMV

VFMV Risk / Return Rank: 63
VFMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
VFMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
VFMV Omega Ratio Rank: 60
VFMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
VFMV Martin Ratio Rank: 66

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 38
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 37
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

VFMV vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) 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.

	VFMV	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.54	1.07	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.25	1.54	+0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.19	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.26	1.43	+0.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.68	5.13	+3.55

VFMV vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VFMV Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is higher than the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VFMV 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

VFMV vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VFMV drawdown since its inception was -33.64%, smaller than the maximum FBCG drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VFMV and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	VFMV	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.64%	-43.56%	+9.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.00%	-15.17%	+9.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.35%	-27.89%	+17.54%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.41%	-43.56%	+28.15%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.51%	-6.26%	+5.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.60%	-11.34%	+7.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.56%	4.21%	-2.65%

Volatility

VFMV vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) is 1.91%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 6.51%. This indicates that VFMV 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

	VFMV	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.91%	6.51%	-4.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.44%	16.08%	-9.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.80%	20.27%	-11.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.74%	26.04%	-14.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.18%	25.74%	-11.56%

VFMV vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

VFMV has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

VFMV vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

VFMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF	1.77%	2.12%	1.46%	2.20%	2.08%	1.31%	2.14%	2.43%	2.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VFMV and FBCG in my portfolio?

VFMV and FBCG have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VFMV or FBCG?

FBCG has higher volatility (6.51%) compared to VFMV (1.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VFMV dropped -33.64% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which ETF is better, VFMV or FBCG?

On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 13.00% vs 9.37% for VFMV. On fees, VFMV is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, VFMV has been the lower-risk option at 1.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VFMV or FBCG?

Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 13.00% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VFMV or FBCG?

VFMV is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.

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

VFMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.

What is the main difference between VFMV and FBCG?

VFMV is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for VFMV and 0.59% for FBCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VFMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 vs 1.07), 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.