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 VB: how they differ

FBCG and VB hold 6% of their weight in the same names, and FBCG returned more over the year.

Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF and Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FBCG and VB hold 6% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FBCG and VB both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFBCGVB
ASTERA LABS INC0.54%0.45%
TWILIO INC0.38%0.38%
AFFIRM HOLDINGS INC0.24%0.26%
CARPENTER TECHNOLOGY CORP0.23%0.35%
NRG ENERGY INC0.18%0.38%
JABIL INC0.16%0.49%
MACOM TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS HOLDINGS INC0.16%0.32%
NEXTPOWER INC0.15%0.21%
ECHOSTAR CORP0.12%0.17%
TEXAS ROADHOUSE INC0.11%0.15%
RBC BEARINGS INC0.10%0.25%
REGAL REXNORD CORP0.10%0.19%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FBCGOnly in VB
NVIDIA CORP 14.62%Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd 0.55%
APPLE INC 9.64%REVOLUTION Medicines Inc 0.46%
ALPHABET INC 9.10%Natera Inc 0.45%
AMAZON.COM INC 8.43%EMCOR Group Inc 0.45%
MICROSOFT CORP 5.20%MKS Instruments Inc 0.37%
META PLATFORMS INC 3.90%Flex Ltd 0.36%
BROADCOM INC 3.74%Casey's General Stores Inc 0.36%
ELI LILLY and CO 2.25%Atmos Energy Corp 0.35%

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 Jun 30, 2026.

FBCG and VB on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FBCG
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF
VB
Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFidelityVanguard
What it isBlue Chip GrowthSmall-Cap
Total return, 1 year+17.3%+15.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.2 pts−2.3 pts
Expense ratio0.57%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50086.8%21.7%
Holdings2141311

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.

VB in plain words

VB is an index equity fund tracking the Small-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +15.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 22% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1311 positions, with the top ten at 4.3%. It sat 5.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FBCG or VB?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FBCG returned +17.3% and VB returned +15.2%, so FBCG returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FBCG or VB?
FBCG charges 0.57% a year and VB charges 0.03%, so VB is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FBCG and VB overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 87% of FBCG and 22% of VB by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 6% 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 VB, 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 VB, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FBCG-VB Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources