Which returned more over the last year, FBCG or SLV?

In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FBCG returned +9.5% and SLV +14.9%.

Which is cheaper, FBCG or SLV?

SLV is cheaper, by 0.07 percentage points a year. That is about $7 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's own filings.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

Across categories

FBCG vs SLV: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share on X Download as PDF

FBCG is an actively managed equity fund and SLV a commodity fund, and over the year to Oct 28, 2026, SLV returned +14.9% against +9.5%.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about FBCG and SLV

Net assets: $7.6bn on Sep 30, 2026 for Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF, and $26.9bn on Oct 28, 2026 for iShares Silver Trust.

FBCG on its own →SLV on its own →

At a glance

+9.5%

FBCG total return, 1 year

+14.9%

SLV total return, 1 year

0.57%

FBCG expense ratio

0.50%

SLV expense ratio

Pair scorecard

SLV costs 0.07 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 5.4 points; SLV is 3.9 times larger.

FBCG vs SLV: Differences, Returns & Fees
Measure	FBCG	SLV
Return
Measure	FBCG	SLV
Total return, 1 year	+9.5%	+14.9%
Drawdown
Measure	FBCG	SLV
Below its high	5.7%, high on Oct 6, 2026	53.5%, high on Jan 28, 2026
Benchmark
Measure	FBCG	SLV
What it tracks	No index, actively managed	Silver
Cost and size
Measure	FBCG	SLV
Expense ratio	0.57%	0.50%
Net assets, as of Sep 30, 2026	$7.6bn	$30.0bn
Holdings
Measure	FBCG	SLV
Holdings in common	not published
In the S&P 500, by weight	85%
Holdings dated	Jul 31, 2026
Top ten holdings, share of the fund	57.2%

Method

Side by side

FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF SLV iShares Silver Trust

Where it sits Stock ETF Commodity ETF

Issuer Fidelity iShares

What it is Actively managed Holds silver

Total return, 1 year +9.5% +14.9%

Its benchmark over the same days +13.7% (VOO) +15.0% (SIVR)

Gap to its benchmark −4.2 pts vs VOO −0.1 pts vs SIVR

Expense ratio 0.57% 0.50%

Holdings 230 not counted

Net assets, FBCG as of Sep 30, 2026 and SLV as of Oct 28, 2026 $7.6bn $26.9bn

FBCG and SLV on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

Alert

About each fund

FBCG

FBCG is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +9.5% with distributions reinvested, against +13.7% 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 5.7% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

SLV

Its expense ratio is 0.50% a year, for the three months to Jun 30, 2026, as its 10-Q states.

SLV holds silver. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +14.9% with distributions reinvested, against +15.0% for its benchmark, the price of silver. It sat 53.5% below its high of Jan 28, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FBCG or SLV?: In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FBCG returned +9.5% and SLV +14.9%.
Which is cheaper, FBCG or SLV?: SLV is cheaper, by 0.07 percentage points a year. That is about $7 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's own filings.

Other comparisons

FBCG vs GLDM FBCG vs IAU FBCG vs GLD FBCG vs SIVR MAGS vs SLV ONEQ vs SLV GARP vs SLV SLV vs XOVR

Where to next

FBCG on its own →SLV on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →FBCG dividend history →FBCG holdings →Standards and sources →

Sources and dates

FBCG filings on SEC EDGAR ↗

FBCG prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗

Fidelity website ↗

iShares page for SLV ↗

Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, FBCG against SLV, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fbcg-vs-slv

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.