FBCG vs IUSG: Differences, Returns & Fees
FBCG and IUSG hold 57% of their weight in the same names, and IUSG returned +15.9% over the year. Net assets: $7.6bn on Sep 30, 2026 for Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF, and $33.6bn on Oct 20, 2026 for iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF.
IUSG costs 0.53 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 1.9 points; IUSG is 4.5 times larger.
| FBCG | IUSG | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.57% | 0.04% |
| Net assets, as of Sep 30, 2026 | $7.6bn | $34.0bn |
| Total return, 1 year | +14.0% | +15.9% |
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | S&P 900 Growth Index |
| Holdings in common | 57% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 57.2% | 57.4% |
| Below its high | 5.8%, high on Oct 6, 2026 | 4.1%, high on Oct 6, 2026 |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 19, 2026.
FBCG and IUSG are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- What each follows. FBCG follows No index, actively managed and IUSG follows S&P 900 Growth Index.
- Cost. FBCG charges 0.57% of assets a year and IUSG 0.04%, a gap of 0.53 points.
- Size. FBCG has $7.6bn in net assets and IUSG $34.0bn (net assets, as of Sep 30, 2026); IUSG is 4.5 times larger.
Data as of Oct 20, 2026. The differences are picked by a fixed rule, in a fixed order; the PDF prints it. Page 2 has the returns, overlap, risks and sources.
Take this comparison to a client
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Not advice. The brief uses the figures on this page, with the data date and a report id. Saved comparisons are listed on your saved page; privacy.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, FBCG and IUSG hold 57% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 19, 2026.
half
57% in common
On the same fields
FBCG and IUSG on the fields both publish, as of Oct 20, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
About FBCG
FBCG is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +14.0% with distributions reinvested, against +15.9% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.57% a year. By its holdings filed for Jul 31, 2026, 85% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 230 positions, with the top ten at 57.2%. It sat 5.8% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
About IUSG
IUSG tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +15.9% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 19, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 402 positions, with the top ten at 57.4%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, FBCG or IUSG?
- In the year to Oct 20, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FBCG returned +14.0% and IUSG +15.9%.
- Which is cheaper, FBCG or IUSG?
- IUSG is cheaper, by 0.53 percentage points a year. That is about $53 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, FBCG against IUSG, data as of Oct 20, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fbcg-vs-iusg
ETFIQ. (Oct 20, 2026). FBCG against IUSG. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fbcg-vs-iusg
[FBCG against IUSG (ETFIQ, Oct 20, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fbcg-vs-iusg)
Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.