FDGRX vs FCNTX: Which Fidelity Growth Fund Is Better? (2026)
FDGRX (Fidelity Growth Company Fund) returned 35.45% over the past year. FCNTX (Fidelity Contrafund) returned 13.41% over the same period. Both are 5-star Fidelity growth funds with no minimum investment. Both are actively managed. But they have diverged dramatically — and the reasons tell you a lot about what you're buying.
By Dan Mahler · Updated May 10, 2026
💡 Bottom Line Up Front
FDGRX has outperformed FCNTX by a wide margin recently — 35.45% vs 13.41% over the past year — driven by concentrated exposure to AI and semiconductor stocks. But FDGRX is also more volatile (18.12% vs 14.47%) and more expensive (0.83% vs 0.55%). FCNTX's legendary manager William Danoff has been running the fund for 33 years with a consistently strong long-term record. If you can hold through volatility and want to chase FDGRX's recent momentum, it's earned it. For a smoother ride with a proven manager, FCNTX is the choice.
FDGRX vs FCNTX: At a Glance
| Metric | FDGRX | FCNTX |
|---|---|---|
| Fund Name | Fidelity® Growth Company Fund | Fidelity® Contrafund® |
| Expense Ratio | 0.83% | 0.55% |
| Annual Cost on $10,000 | $83.00 | $55.00 |
| Minimum Investment | $0 (both) | |
| 1-Year Return | +35.45% | +13.41% |
| 3-Year Annualized Return | +28.41% | +24.28% |
| 5-Year Annualized Return | +14.80% | +13.37% |
| 10-Year Annualized Return | +22.82% | +17.45% |
| Volatility (Std Dev) | 18.12% | 14.47% |
| Total Assets (AUM) | $79B | $158B |
| Morningstar Rating | ★★★★★ (5 stars, both) | |
| Category | Large Growth (both) | |
| Management Style | Actively managed (both) | |
| Fund Manager | Fidelity Management Team | William Danoff (33 yrs) |
| Native Brokerage | Fidelity (both) | |
Performance: FDGRX Has Outrun FCNTX — But Is It Sustainable?
Over every measured time period, FDGRX has outperformed FCNTX by a meaningful margin. The gap is widest over the short term — a massive 22-percentage-point spread in the past year alone. Over a decade, FDGRX leads by 5.37 percentage points annually — a substantial edge that compounds dramatically.
| Time Period | FDGRX | FCNTX | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1-Year Return | +35.45% | +13.41% | +22.04% (FDGRX) |
| 3-Year Annualized | +28.41% | +24.28% | +4.13% (FDGRX) |
| 5-Year Annualized | +14.80% | +13.37% | +1.43% (FDGRX) |
| 10-Year Annualized | +22.82% | +17.45% | +5.37% (FDGRX) |
Data from CMF fund database, updated May 2026. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
FDGRX's exceptional recent performance is largely attributable to its concentrated exposure to AI and semiconductor stocks — particularly NVIDIA, which has been the defining investment story of 2024–2026. FCNTX holds many of the same names but carries a more diversified, value-aware mandate that naturally dampens both gains in bull runs and losses in corrections.
Why FDGRX Outperformed FCNTX So Dramatically in 2025–2026
FDGRX's mandate is straightforward: invest in companies with above-average growth potential, full stop. That philosophy led to concentrated positions in NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta — the stocks that dominated market returns when AI spending exploded.
FCNTX, while holding many of the same names, is guided by a different philosophy: invest in companies whose value isn't fully recognized by the public. This leads William Danoff to maintain a broader, more diversified portfolio that includes mid-cap and value-oriented positions alongside growth names. That diversification is a feature in volatile markets — but it muted FCNTX's gains in the narrow AI-driven tech rally.
The critical question is whether you believe AI-driven growth will continue at the same pace. If so, FDGRX's focused growth strategy continues to pay. If leadership rotates — or if a correction hits tech-heavy portfolios — FCNTX's diversification and lower volatility (14.47% vs 18.12%) will prove their worth.
Expense Ratio: FCNTX Is Cheaper — But FDGRX Has Earned Its Cost
FDGRX charges 0.83% annually. FCNTX charges 0.55%. Both are in the range typical for actively managed large-growth funds — though significantly more expensive than passive index funds. The real question is whether active management justifies the fee.
| Portfolio Size | Annual Fee — FDGRX (0.83%) | Annual Fee — FCNTX (0.55%) | Annual Savings with FCNTX |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10,000 | $83 | $55 | $28 |
| $50,000 | $415 | $275 | $140 |
| $100,000 | $830 | $550 | $280 |
| $500,000 | $4,150 | $2,750 | $1,400 |
On a $100,000 investment, FDGRX costs $280 more per year than FCNTX. In a year where FDGRX returned 35.45% vs FCNTX's 13.41%, that fee difference is trivial. But in years where both funds post similar returns — or in down years — the fee drag matters more. Both funds have beaten their category benchmark over the long term, but past alpha is never guaranteed. Consider pairing either with low-cost index funds like FXAIX or FSKAX as a core holding.
Fund Manager: Danoff's Legacy at FCNTX vs FDGRX's Team Approach
In active fund investing, the manager is the product. This is where FCNTX and FDGRX diverge most sharply.
FCNTX — William Danoff
- ✅ 33 years managing Contrafund
- ✅ One of the longest-tenured active managers in the industry
- ✅ Beat the S&P 500 index consistently over his tenure
- ✅ Famous for deep fundamental research and long holding periods
- ⚠️ Manager departure would be a significant risk event
FDGRX — Fidelity Team
- ✅ Managed by Fidelity's institutional research team
- ✅ No single-manager key-person risk
- ✅ Strong recent performance — 35.45% 1yr, 22.82% 10yr
- ✅ Leverages Fidelity's deep research infrastructure
- ⚠️ Less transparency on individual decision-makers
FCNTX's biggest risk is also its biggest strength: William Danoff. His 33-year tenure is a remarkable achievement — but it also means FCNTX's performance is tightly linked to one person. A management transition would introduce uncertainty. FDGRX's team approach distributes that risk, though it also makes the investment thesis harder to evaluate.
Top Holdings: Similar Names, Different Weights
Both FDGRX and FCNTX hold the same mega-cap tech names in their top positions — NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Alphabet. The overlap is significant, which is part of why both are categorized as large growth. The difference is in concentration and secondary positions.
| Stock | FDGRX Weight | FCNTX Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corp | 12.05% | 12.05% |
| Apple Inc | 11.02% | 11.02% |
| Microsoft Corp | 8.91% | 8.91% |
| Amazon.com Inc | 6.81% | 6.81% |
| Meta Platforms | 5.52% | 5.52% |
Top holdings from CMF fund database, updated May 2026. Individual position weights shift over time; check each fund's profile for the latest holdings.
Volatility: FCNTX Carries Less Risk
FDGRX has a standard deviation of 18.12% vs FCNTX's 14.47%. In practical terms: FDGRX swings harder in both directions. In a strong bull market, it captures more upside. In a downturn, it drops harder.
Over the past year (35.45% gain), FDGRX's volatility was a feature. But the same concentration that drove those gains means FDGRX portfolios experience sharper drawdowns when tech sells off. If you invested $100,000 in FDGRX, your daily swings are measurably larger than with FCNTX.
For investors with a long time horizon who can hold through 20–30% drawdowns, FDGRX's higher volatility is acceptable given its higher long-term returns. For investors closer to retirement or with lower risk tolerance, FCNTX's lower volatility (and still-strong 17.45% 10-year return) makes it the better fit.
FDGRX vs FCNTX: Which Should You Choose?
Choose FDGRX if you…
- ✅ Can tolerate higher volatility (18% std dev)
- ✅ Have a 10+ year time horizon
- ✅ Believe concentrated AI/tech growth continues
- ✅ Want to maximize long-term return potential
- ✅ Are comfortable with active management fee of 0.83%
Choose FCNTX if you…
- ✅ Prefer smoother volatility (14.47% std dev)
- ✅ Value an experienced, named manager (Danoff, 33 yrs)
- ✅ Want the lower active management fee (0.55%)
- ✅ Want access to a larger, more diversified active fund
- ✅ Are in or near retirement with moderate risk tolerance
Our Verdict
On raw performance, FDGRX wins — not just recently but over 5 and 10 years. If you can hold it through volatility, the data supports owning it. But FCNTX isn't a consolation prize: William Danoff's 33-year track record is one of the most impressive in active fund management, and FCNTX's lower fees and lower volatility make it appropriate for a broader range of investors. Both funds are materially more expensive than index alternatives — if you're paying 0.55–0.83% for active management, make sure you're monitoring whether they continue to earn it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is FDGRX or FCNTX better?
FDGRX has outperformed FCNTX across every time period — 35.45% vs 13.41% over the past year, and 22.82% vs 17.45% over 10 years. But FDGRX is also more volatile and more expensive (0.83% vs 0.55%). FCNTX has legendary manager William Danoff and a 33-year track record. If you can handle volatility and have a long time horizon, FDGRX's performance record is compelling. For a smoother ride with a lower fee, FCNTX is the stronger choice.
What is the difference between FDGRX and FCNTX?
Both are actively managed Fidelity large growth funds with $0 minimums. FDGRX focuses on above-average growth potential companies; FCNTX targets undervalued growth stocks. FDGRX charges 0.83% vs FCNTX's 0.55%. FDGRX has returned 35.45% over the past year vs FCNTX's 13.41%. FCNTX is managed by William Danoff (33 years) while FDGRX is managed by Fidelity's team.
Why did FDGRX outperform FCNTX so dramatically in 2025-2026?
FDGRX's concentrated growth strategy benefited from the AI and semiconductor boom — particularly NVIDIA. FCNTX holds many of the same names but maintains a broader, value-aware mandate that diversifies across growth and undervalued positions. In concentrated tech bull markets, FDGRX's approach amplifies gains; in downturns, it amplifies losses.
Can I buy FDGRX or FCNTX without a minimum investment?
Yes. Both FDGRX and FCNTX have no minimum investment requirement at Fidelity. You can start with any amount. Both are available commission-free through Fidelity brokerage or retirement accounts.
Are FDGRX and FCNTX available outside of Fidelity?
Both are available at other brokerages, but you'll typically pay a $50–$75 transaction fee per purchase. For investors outside Fidelity, comparable large growth index funds at your native brokerage (like SWPPX at Schwab or VFIAX at Vanguard) likely offer better value after transaction costs.
Get New Comparisons in Your Inbox
New fund comparisons, data updates, and investing guides — delivered free. No spam.