VOT vs. FBCG
VOT (Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VOT is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Mid Cap Growth Index, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. VOT is passively managed, while FBCG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, VOT returned 6.19%/yr vs 14.88%/yr for FBCG. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. VOT charges 0.05%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.
Performance
VOT vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, VOT achieves a 5.49% return, which is significantly lower than FBCG's 11.60% return.
VOT
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 1.80%
- YTD
- 5.49%
- 6M
- 3.73%
- 1Y
- 7.75%
- 3Y*
- 15.09%
- 5Y*
- 6.19%
- 10Y*
- 11.95%
FBCG
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 0.82%
- YTD
- 11.60%
- 6M
- 10.83%
- 1Y
- 33.02%
- 3Y*
- 29.20%
- 5Y*
- 14.88%
- 10Y*
- —
VOT vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 5.49% | 10.72% | 16.38% | 23.10% | -28.87% | 20.50% | 29.59% |
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF | 11.60% | 18.60% | 39.05% | 57.98% | -39.10% | 21.34% | 42.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between VOT and FBCG is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020 | 0.87 |
The correlation between VOT and FBCG shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (1 year) to 0.87 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
VOT vs. FBCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
VOT
FBCG
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Financial Services
Real Estate
Communication Services
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Technology
VOT
FBCG
Industrials
VOT
FBCG
Consumer Cyclical
VOT
FBCG
Healthcare
VOT
FBCG
Financial Services
VOT
FBCG
Real Estate
VOT
FBCG
Communication Services
VOT
FBCG
Utilities
VOT
FBCG
Energy
VOT
FBCG
Basic Materials
VOT
FBCG
Consumer Defensive
VOT
FBCG
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
VOT vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank
VOT
FBCG
VOT vs. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) 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.
| VOT | FBCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.31 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.49 | 2.19 | -1.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.46 | 8.45 | -6.99 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| VOT | FBCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 | 1.75 | -1.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 | 0.58 | -0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.44 | 0.80 | -0.36 |
Drawdowns
VOT vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum VOT drawdown since its inception was -60.16%, which is greater than FBCG's maximum drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VOT and FBCG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| VOT | FBCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -60.16% | -43.56% | -16.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.96% | -15.17% | -0.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.77% | -27.89% | +6.12% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.19% | -43.56% | +6.37% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.19% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.48% | -4.46% | +0.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.96% | -11.47% | +1.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.33% | 3.92% | +1.41% |
Volatility
VOT vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) is 5.45%, while Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) has a volatility of 6.44%. This indicates that VOT 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| VOT | FBCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.45% | 6.44% | -0.99% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.85% | 14.61% | -1.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.20% | 19.05% | -2.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.41% | 25.86% | -4.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.02% | 25.76% | -4.74% |
VOT vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison
VOT has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
VOT vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison
VOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, 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% |
VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 0.63% | 0.64% | 0.67% | 0.71% | 0.78% | 0.34% | 0.56% | 0.78% | 0.84% | 0.72% | 0.81% | 0.81% |
Frequently Asked Questions
VOT and FBCG have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FBCG has higher volatility (6.44%) compared to VOT (5.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VOT dropped -60.16% vs FBCG's -43.56%.
On 5-year performance, FBCG leads with 14.88% vs 6.19% for VOT. On fees, VOT is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, VOT has been the lower-risk option at 5.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FBCG has performed better with a 14.88% return vs 6.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VOT is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FBCG.
VOT has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.04% for FBCG.
VOT is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while FBCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for VOT and 0.59% for FBCG.
FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 0.48), 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.
Find the right allocation for VOT and FBCG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer