Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
FSPGX has lagged SCHG over the trailing twelve months, posting a 7.97% total return against 13.54%. The lead holds up over 10 years too: SCHG has compounded at 18.77% a year, against 18.20% for FSPGX. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
Total return and risk statistics by fund. Each row is one fund; each column is one period or statistic.
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of September 30, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Jun 2016” measures every fund from June 14, 2016 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Side-by-side snapshot
Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric;
each column is one fund.
Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index
Objective
—
Seeks to track the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index, holding the components ranked 1-750 by full market capitalization that are classified as growth.
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Schwab is a major provider of low-cost, broad-based ETFs known for making investing accessible to individual investors through its discount brokerage platform. The issuer's fund lineup spans multiple categories including core index funds, dividend and income-focused strategies, factor-based approaches, international exposure, fixed income, and digital assets, with popular core holdings like SCHB (U.S. broad market) and SCHD (dividend appreciation) alongside more specialized thematic offerings. Schwab's ETF suite is characterized by its breadth across asset classes and investment styles, competitive expense ratios, and integration with its retail brokerage ecosystem.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on SCHG.
FSPGX (Fidelity Large Cap Growth Index Fund) is a mutual fund, while SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) is an ETF — their trading structures differ.
SCHG offers the higher yield at 0.41% vs 0.37% for FSPGX. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.
FSPGX is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.035% compared to 0.04%.
SCHG is the larger fund by assets ($64.3B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Still deciding? Track FSPGX & SCHG for free
Create a free Dividend Vision account to keep them on a watchlist, get notified when they declare dividends, and see how much income they would add to your portfolio.
On a $10,000 investment, FSPGX would generate roughly $18.50 cash per distribution, while SCHG would produce $10.25 cash per distribution, at current distribution rates.
FSPGX yield0.37%
SCHG yield0.41%
Cash diff on $10K$8.25
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, FSPGX would cost approximately $35 in fees vs $40 for SCHG (simplified, not compounded). The $5.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
FSPGX ER0.035%
SCHG ER0.04%
Strategy & risk
SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. FSPGX is a mutual fund whose tracked index or strategy detail is not recorded in our data, so this comparison rests on the measured figures — yield, fees, size, and performance — rather than strategy labels. Beta is 1.21 for FSPGX and 1.22 for SCHG — effectively similar market sensitivity.
FSPGX beta1.21
SCHG beta1.22
Fund details
FSPGX is managed by Fidelity Investments (launched 06/07/2016) with $43.7B in assets. SCHG is managed by Schwab (launched 12/11/2009) with $64.3B in assets.
Do us a favor — if you found this comparison useful, please share it with a friend researching dividend investments.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between FSPGX and SCHG?
Same growth idea, different wrapper. FSPGX (Fidelity Large Cap Growth Index Fund) is a Fidelity index mutual fund that transacts at end-of-day net asset value. SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) is an ETF that trades all day. Cost is 0.035% versus 0.04%; distributions are 0.37% and 0.41% as of September 2026. FSPGX is a mutual fund, not an exchange-traded fund. The live decision is account fit and cost, not two different markets.
What is the current distribution rate for FSPGX and SCHG?
FSPGX currently distributes 0.37% and SCHG 0.41%, based on fund data updated September 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.
Is FSPGX or SCHG better for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. SCHG currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.
Can I hold both FSPGX and SCHG?
Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.
Is FSPGX or SCHG safer?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — SCHG scores 100, FSPGX scores 70, so SCHG's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.
Which has lower fees, FSPGX or SCHG?
FSPGX has an expense ratio of 0.035% while SCHG charges 0.04%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in FSPGX vs SCHG generate?
At current rates, $10,000 in FSPGX would generate roughly $18.50 cash per distribution ($37.00 annually). The same in SCHG would produce about $10.25 cash per distribution ($41.00 annually).
Which has performed better historically, FSPGX or SCHG?
FSPGX has lagged SCHG over the trailing twelve months, posting a 7.97% total return against 13.54%. The lead holds up over 10 years too: SCHG has compounded at 18.77% a year, against 18.20% for FSPGX. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Explore related screeners
Lateral filters that include these funds — browse the full peer set on DividendVision.
large-cap growth stocks. The funds are structurally different (mutual fund vs. ETF) and track slightly different indexes, which explains modest differences in holdings, fees, and distribution patterns. FSPGX tracks Fidelity's own index while SCHG tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index; the funds hold the largest 750 growth stocks by market cap, but their exact holdings may diverge slightly depending on index methodology. FSPGX charges 0.035% versus 0.04% for SCHG, nearly identical costs. SCHG has the larger asset base at $64.3B compared to FSPGX's $43.7B.
Who each is best for
FSPGX: Fits investors who prefer the simplicity of a traditional mutual fund structure and are comfortable with semi-annual distributions, or who already hold Fidelity brokerage relationships and benefit from no transaction costs there.
Key risks to know
Beta and growth-stock sensitivity: Both funds carry a beta around 1.21–1.22, meaning they amplify broad market moves; large-cap growth stocks are also more sensitive to interest-rate and sentiment shifts than value or dividend-paying stocks, so these funds will likely underperform when growth loses favor.
Index methodology divergence:FSPGX and SCHG track different indexes, so their holdings may drift over time; this creates tracking error that could affect returns even as expense ratios remain low, and the exact impact depends on how each index defines and ranks growth stocks.
Limited income: Both funds distribute very low yields—around 0.4%—reflecting the slim dividend payout typical of high-growth equities; investors relying on current income will find these insufficient. Either way, past performance does not predict future results, and both carry growth-stock volatility that will test patience in market downturns.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Learn the method
The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.
Still deciding? Compare them against your own portfolio
See how each security fits alongside your real holdings — forecast future income, analyze overlap, and gauge risk. Start a free 7-day Dividend Vision trial and make the call with your full portfolio in view.
