Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

FBCG vs FNDX: how they differ

FBCG and FNDX hold 24% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FBCG and FNDX hold 24% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FBCG and FNDX both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFBCGFNDX
APPLE INC9.64%4.64%
ALPHABET INC9.10%2.38%
MICROSOFT CORP5.20%2.33%
AMAZON.COM INC8.43%1.86%
META PLATFORMS INC3.90%1.24%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC0.82%1.60%
BROADCOM INC3.74%0.65%
NVIDIA CORP14.62%0.55%
ABBVIE INC0.42%0.53%
TARGET CORP0.42%0.40%
ORACLE CORP0.49%0.38%
TESLA INC1.45%0.34%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FBCGOnly in FNDX
APPLOVIN CORP 1.26%Intel Corp 2.57%
TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MFG CO LTD 1.12%Alphabet Inc 1.90%
CELESTICA INC 0.88%Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.41%
LUMENTUM HOLDINGS INC 0.82%JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.38%
SHARKNINJA INC 0.67%Walmart Inc 1.01%
ASTERA LABS INC 0.54%Verizon Communications Inc 0.99%
CARVANA CO 0.51%CVS Health Corp 0.91%
FTAI AVIATION LTD 0.49%Cisco Systems Inc 0.90%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

FBCG and FNDX on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FBCG
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFidelitySchwab
What it isBlue Chip GrowthFundamental U.S. Large Company
Total return, 1 year+17.3%+26.1%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.2 pts+8.6 pts
Expense ratio0.57%0.25%
Already in the S&P 50086.8%91.2%
Holdings214733

FBCG in plain words

FBCG is an index equity fund tracking the Blue Chip Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.57% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 214 positions, with the top ten at 61.2%. It sat 3.7% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

FNDX in plain words

FNDX is an index equity fund tracking the Fundamental U.S. Large Company. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +26.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 733 positions, with the top ten at 22.5%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FBCG or FNDX?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FBCG returned +17.3% and FNDX returned +26.1%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FBCG or FNDX?
FBCG charges 0.57% a year and FNDX charges 0.25%, so FNDX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FBCG and FNDX overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 87% of FBCG and 91% of FNDX by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 24% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

FBCG against FNDX, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, FBCG against FNDX, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FBCG-FNDX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources