AIA vs. FLJH

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) and FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia 50 Index, while FLJH is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AIA returned 10.80%/yr vs 21.36%/yr for FLJH. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AIA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLJH.

Performance

AIA vs. FLJH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIA achieves a 36.49% return, which is significantly higher than FLJH's 20.27% return.

AIA

• 1D: -2.81%
• 1M: -6.64%
• 6M: 25.90%
• YTD: 36.49%
• 1Y: 63.00%
• 3Y*: 32.07%
• 5Y*: 10.80%
• 10Y*: 13.33%

FLJH

• 1D: -1.55%
• 1M: -0.89%
• 6M: 12.70%
• YTD: 20.27%
• 1Y: 44.73%
• 3Y*: 27.57%
• 5Y*: 21.36%
• 10Y*: —

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

AIA vs. FLJH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	36.49%	47.79%	20.26%	4.32%	-24.08%	-10.91%	33.73%	22.21%	-14.22%	2.18%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	20.27%	25.26%	25.89%	36.02%	-2.75%	12.68%	10.65%	20.34%	-14.66%	1.26%

Correlation

The correlation between AIA and FLJH is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.47

The correlation between AIA and FLJH shifts across timeframes, from 0.44 (3 years) to 0.55 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AIA vs. FLJH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AIA	FLJH
Technology	63.8%	19.4%
Financial Services	16.4%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	12.7%
Communication Services	7.4%	8.0%
Industrials	2.0%	25.2%
Healthcare	0.8%	5.5%
Energy	0.6%	0.9%
Real Estate	0.5%	3.0%
Basic Materials	-	4.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.0%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

AIA vs. FLJH — Risk / Return Rank

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

AIA

AIA Risk / Return Rank: 81
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 78
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 85

FLJH

FLJH Risk / Return Rank: 88
FLJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FLJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FLJH Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FLJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
FLJH Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

AIA vs. FLJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AIA	FLJH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.07	2.33	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	3.11	-0.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.42	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.48	4.16	+0.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.55	15.64	-2.09

AIA vs. FLJH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIA Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is comparable to the FLJH Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIA and FLJH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AIA vs. FLJH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIA drawdown since its inception was -60.89%, which is greater than FLJH's maximum drawdown of -31.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIA and FLJH.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIA	FLJH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.89%	-31.51%	-29.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.15%	-10.80%	-3.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.64%	-20.39%	-1.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.18%	-20.39%	-27.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.64%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.70%	-4.01%	-7.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.62%	-5.27%	-11.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.66%	2.87%	+1.79%

Volatility

AIA vs. FLJH - Volatility Comparison

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 13.25% compared to Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) at 6.77%. This indicates that AIA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIA	FLJH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.25%	6.77%	+6.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.44%	15.03%	+12.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.65%	19.26%	+11.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.58%	18.72%	+7.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.05%	19.88%	+4.17%

AIA vs. FLJH - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJH's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIA vs. FLJH - Dividend Comparison

AIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, less than FLJH's 2.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	1.61%	2.50%	2.78%	2.07%	2.59%	1.54%	1.11%	2.24%	2.49%	1.45%	2.29%	2.88%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	2.50%	3.90%	5.06%	25.59%	26.67%	1.29%	0.00%	0.00%	5.92%	0.10%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIA and FLJH in my portfolio?

AIA and FLJH have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AIA or FLJH?

AIA has higher volatility (13.25%) compared to FLJH (6.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs FLJH's -31.51%.

Which ETF is better, AIA or FLJH?

On 5-year performance, FLJH leads with 21.36% vs 10.80% for AIA. On fees, FLJH is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLJH has been the lower-risk option at 6.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIA or FLJH?

Over the 5-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 21.36% return vs 10.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIA or FLJH?

FLJH is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AIA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIA or FLJH?

FLJH has the higher dividend yield at 2.50%, compared with 1.61% for AIA.

What is the main difference between AIA and FLJH?

AIA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FLJH is Japan Equities. AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index, while FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AIA and 0.09% for FLJH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 2.07), 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.