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 IDEV: how they differ

FBCG and IDEV hold 1% of their weight in the same names, and IDEV returned more over the year.

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF and iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FBCG and IDEV hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FBCG and IDEV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFBCGIDEV
SHOPIFY INC0.25%0.52%
CELESTICA INC0.88%0.17%
SUNCOR ENERGY INC0.12%0.28%
AGNICO EAGLE MINES LTD0.08%0.33%
CANADIAN PACIFIC KANSAS CITY LTD0.07%0.27%
FIRST QUANTUM MINERALS LTD0.08%0.06%
ARITZIA INC0.39%0.04%
IAMGOLD CORP0.09%0.03%
SEA LTD0.00%0.12%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FBCGOnly in IDEV
NVIDIA CORP 14.62%ASML Holding N.V. 1.95%
APPLE INC 9.64%HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.09%
ALPHABET INC 9.10%ASTRAZENECA PLC 1.02%
AMAZON.COM INC 8.43%Novartis AG 0.97%
MICROSOFT CORP 5.20%SHELL PLC 0.90%
META PLATFORMS INC 3.90%Nestle S.A. 0.90%
BROADCOM INC 3.74%ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 0.87%
ELI LILLY and CO 2.25%Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 0.78%

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.

FBCG and IDEV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FBCG
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF
IDEV
iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFidelityiShares
What it isBlue Chip GrowthCore MSCI International Developed Markets
Total return, 1 year+17.3%+18.7%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.2 pts+1.2 pts
Expense ratio0.57%0.04%
Already in the S&P 50086.8%0.1%
Holdings2142268

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.

IDEV in plain words

IDEV is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI International Developed Markets. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2268 positions, with the top ten at 10.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FBCG or IDEV?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FBCG returned +17.3% and IDEV returned +18.7%, so IDEV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FBCG or IDEV?
FBCG charges 0.57% a year and IDEV charges 0.04%, so IDEV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FBCG and IDEV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 87% of FBCG and 0% of IDEV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% 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 IDEV, 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 IDEV, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FBCG-IDEV Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources