FBCG vs IWF: Holdings Overlap
FBCGFidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF
Fidelity · 214 holdings · $6.9B · as of 2026-04-30
IWFiShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
iShares · 387 holdings · $127.3B · as of 2026-03-31
Holdings snapshots are 30 days apart (FBCG: 2026-04-30, IWF: 2026-03-31). Weights and index membership change between snapshots, so the true current overlap is typically higher than shown. For funds tracking the same index, the gap can be 5–15 points.
How similar are FBCG and IWF?
Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG, by Fidelity) holds 214 positions; iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF, by iShares) holds 387. They have 103 holdings in common, and by portfolio weight the two funds are 58.7% identical. In practical terms the pair is moderately overlapping; they share a meaningful core, but each fund adds distinct exposure.
- Overlap by Weight
- 58.7%Sum of the smaller weight of each shared holding
- Shared Holdings
- 103FBCG holds 214 · IWF holds 387
- Weight in Shared Holdings
- FBCG 83%·IWF 80%Share of each fund's weight in stocks both funds own
Based on each fund's latest official holdings. How is this calculated?
What makes each fund different
Only in FBCG
111 of 214 positions (16.5% of the fund) are not held by IWF. Showing the top 30 by weight.
Sector Breakdown
| Sector | FBCG | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 48.3% | 49.2% |
| Communication Services | 17.1% | 12.4% |
| Consumer Discretionary | 16.8% | 13.1% |
| Health Care | 5.5% | 8.0% |
| Industrials | 6.1% | 6.7% |
| Other Sectors | 5.2% | 10.4% |
| Unclassified | 0.7% | 0.0% |
Share of each fund's portfolio weight by GICS-style sector, compiled from issuer fund data and our own classification of the holdings, not the issuers' published sector charts. “Unclassified” is weight we could not classify (1% of FBCG, 0% of IWF).
Performance
| Fund | 1M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y (ann.) | 5Y (ann.) | 10Y (ann.) | Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FBCG | +2.6% | +14.4% | +23.8% | +27.2% | +13.5% | — | 0.04% |
| IWF | +2.7% | +5.5% | +13.1% | +22.0% | +12.6% | +17.8% | 0.35% |
Total returns including dividends, from adjusted daily closes as of 2026-08-07. 3Y/5Y/10Y are annualized. Yield is trailing-12-month distributions over the last close. Past performance does not predict future results.
Project the growth of $10,000 in FBCG vs IWF →
Shared Holdings(103)
The top 10 shared positions account for 82% of the overlap, led by NVDA, AAPL and MSFT.
14.58% | 12.92% | 12.92% | |
9.61% | 11.64% | 9.61% | |
5.19% | 8.82% | 5.19% | |
8.40% | 4.66% | 4.66% | |
3.73% | 4.79% | 3.73% | |
9.08% | 3.54% | 3.54% | |
3.89% | 3.46% | 3.46% | |
2.25% | 2.66% | 2.25% | |
2.22% | 1.47% | 1.47% | |
1.45% | 3.55% | 1.45% | |
0.82% | 0.85% | 0.82% | |
0.80% | 1.45% | 0.80% | |
0.49% | 0.89% | 0.49% | |
0.42% | 1.39% | 0.42% | |
0.39% | 1.06% | 0.39% | |
0.38% | 0.56% | 0.38% | |
0.37% | 1.15% | 0.37% | |
1.26% | 0.34% | 0.34% | |
0.36% | 0.33% | 0.33% | |
0.39% | 0.32% | 0.32% | |
0.26% | 1.84% | 0.26% | |
0.29% | 0.23% | 0.23% | |
0.23% | 0.25% | 0.23% | |
0.21% | 0.52% | 0.21% | |
0.21% | 0.97% | 0.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
How much do FBCG and IWF overlap?
FBCG and IWF overlap by 58.7% of portfolio weight. They share 103 holdings (FBCG holds 214 positions and IWF holds 387), based on each fund's latest SEC-reported holdings.
Is it redundant to own both FBCG and IWF?
The two portfolios are 58.7% identical by weight. Owning both is defensible: they share a meaningful core, but each fund adds exposure the other lacks.
What are the biggest shared holdings of FBCG and IWF?
The largest positions held by both funds are NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN and AVGO. Together the top 10 shared positions account for 82% of the total overlap.
What does FBCG own that IWF doesn't?
111 positions (16.5% of FBCG) are unique to FBCG, led by WDC, TSM and CLS. In the other direction, 284 positions (20.2% of IWF) are unique to IWF.