Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
FBCG vs NOBL: how they differ
FBCG and NOBL hold 2% of their weight in the same names, and FBCG returned more over the year.
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, FBCG and NOBL hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | FBCG | NOBL |
|---|---|---|
| LOWES COS INC | 0.48% | 1.25% |
| ABBVIE INC | 0.42% | 1.56% |
| TARGET CORP | 0.42% | 1.41% |
| JOHNSON and JOHNSON | 0.23% | 1.47% |
| CARDINAL HEALTH INC | 0.20% | 1.41% |
| CATERPILLAR INC | 0.16% | 1.61% |
| EXXON MOBIL CORP | 0.14% | 1.44% |
| CHEVRON CORP NEW | 0.11% | 1.44% |
| KIMBERLY-CLARK CORP | 0.09% | 1.49% |
| PEPSICO INC | 0.09% | 1.37% |
| PROCTER and GAMBLE CO | 0.07% | 1.48% |
| Only in FBCG | Only in NOBL |
|---|---|
| NVIDIA CORP 14.62% | Nucor Corp. 1.77% |
| APPLE INC 9.64% | West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc. 1.73% |
| ALPHABET INC 9.10% | International Business Machines Corp. 1.71% |
| AMAZON.COM INC 8.43% | Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. 1.68% |
| MICROSOFT CORP 5.20% | Franklin Resources, Inc. 1.67% |
| META PLATFORMS INC 3.90% | Colgate-Palmolive Co. 1.62% |
| BROADCOM INC 3.74% | Automatic Data Processing, Inc. 1.61% |
| ELI LILLY and CO 2.25% | Hormel Foods Corp. 1.61% |
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 Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF | NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Fidelity | ProShares |
| What it is | Blue Chip Growth | S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.3% | +9.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −0.2 pts | −8.1 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.57% | 0.35% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 86.8% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 214 | 69 |
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.
NOBL in plain words
NOBL is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.35% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 69 positions, with the top ten at 16.6%. It sat 4.8% below its high of Aug 24, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, FBCG or NOBL?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FBCG returned +17.3% and NOBL returned +9.4%, so FBCG returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, FBCG or NOBL?
- FBCG charges 0.57% a year and NOBL charges 0.35%, so NOBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do FBCG and NOBL overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 87% of FBCG and 100% of NOBL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 2% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, FBCG against NOBL, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FBCG-NOBL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources