ACWI vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACWI returned 10.81%/yr vs -5.25%/yr for FLCH. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACWI charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

ACWI vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACWI achieves a 9.49% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -9.50% return.

ACWI

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: -0.30%
• YTD: 9.49%
• 6M: 10.24%
• 1Y: 25.23%
• 3Y*: 19.98%
• 5Y*: 10.81%
• 10Y*: 12.71%

FLCH

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: -8.03%
• YTD: -9.50%
• 6M: -11.21%
• 1Y: 2.19%
• 3Y*: 8.94%
• 5Y*: -5.25%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWI vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	9.49%	22.41%	17.45%	22.27%	-18.39%	18.66%	16.34%	26.59%	-9.19%	2.78%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-9.50%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWI and FLCH is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.51
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017	0.61

The correlation between ACWI and FLCH shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (3 years) to 0.61 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ACWI vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ACWI	FLCH
Technology	29.4%	12.9%
Financial Services	16.1%	18.2%
Industrials	10.9%	9.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	23.4%
Communication Services	9.0%	14.2%
Healthcare	8.1%	5.3%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	3.3%
Energy	4.2%	3.7%
Basic Materials	3.7%	5.5%
Utilities	2.6%	2.0%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.7%

Return for Risk

ACWI vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 64
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 65
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 69

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 11
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 11

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ACWI vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	ACWI	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.93	0.11	+1.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.64	0.30	+2.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.04	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.61	0.13	+2.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.58	0.29	+11.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ACWI vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWI Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWI and FLCH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ACWI	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.93	0.11	+1.82
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67	-0.18	+0.85
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.74	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	0.00	+0.42

Drawdowns

ACWI vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWI drawdown since its inception was -56.00%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWI and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACWI	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.00%	-62.09%	+6.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.73%	-17.14%	+7.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.55%	-25.43%	+8.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.42%	-55.78%	+29.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.53%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.16%	-36.20%	+33.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.61%	-30.54%	+21.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.18%	7.58%	-5.40%

Volatility

ACWI vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) is 4.50%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 6.46%. This indicates that ACWI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACWI	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.50%	6.46%	-1.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.76%	13.88%	-3.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.16%	19.31%	-6.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.11%	29.61%	-13.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.14%	27.91%	-10.77%

ACWI vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWI has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACWI vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

ACWI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than FLCH's 2.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.42%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.61%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACWI and FLCH in my portfolio?

ACWI and FLCH have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ACWI or FLCH?

FLCH has higher volatility (6.46%) compared to ACWI (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWI dropped -56.00% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, ACWI or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, ACWI leads with 10.81% vs -5.25% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ACWI or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 10.81% return vs -5.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACWI or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACWI or FLCH?

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 1.42% for ACWI.

What is the main difference between ACWI and FLCH?

ACWI is categorized as Global Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for ACWI and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 0.11), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.