PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ASEA vs. FLCH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ASEA vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASEA achieves a 16.39% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -10.17% return.


ASEA

1D
0.43%
1M
7.14%
6M
9.57%
YTD
16.39%
1Y
28.24%
3Y*
15.76%
5Y*
12.90%
10Y*
7.65%
ALL TIME*
5.30%

FLCH

1D
-0.33%
1M
4.49%
6M
-13.97%
YTD
-10.17%
1Y
-6.50%
3Y*
7.74%
5Y*
-3.87%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
0.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$593.31K$523.08K$605.79K
$3.91M$4.48M$3.36M

ASEA vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
16.39%19.80%9.82%4.88%5.24%4.66%-7.88%8.34%-7.58%8.23%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
-10.17%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.87%30.09%24.32%-19.52%1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between ASEA and FLCH is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.41

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017

0.50

The correlation between ASEA and FLCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.41 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

ASEA vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ASEA
FLCH

Financial Services

60.3%
19.0%

Industrials

15.6%
8.2%

Communication Services

8.0%
16.2%

Utilities

4.3%
2.0%

Energy

3.2%
3.4%

Real Estate

2.8%
1.6%

Healthcare

2.2%
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

2.1%
3.2%

Basic Materials

1.5%
5.6%

Consumer Cyclical

0.7%
23.2%

Technology

-

10.5%

Financial Services

ASEA
60.3%
FLCH
19.0%

Industrials

ASEA
15.6%
FLCH
8.2%

Communication Services

ASEA
8.0%
FLCH
16.2%

Utilities

ASEA
4.3%
FLCH
2.0%

Energy

ASEA
3.2%
FLCH
3.4%

Real Estate

ASEA
2.8%
FLCH
1.6%

Healthcare

ASEA
2.2%
FLCH
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

ASEA
2.1%
FLCH
3.2%

Basic Materials

ASEA
1.5%
FLCH
5.6%

Consumer Cyclical

ASEA
0.7%
FLCH
23.2%

Technology

ASEA

-

FLCH
10.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ASEA vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASEA
ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ASEA vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) 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.

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.


ASEAFLCHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

0.96

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.33

-0.32

+3.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.85

-0.68

+9.53

ASEA vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASEA Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of -0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASEA 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ASEA vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASEA drawdown since its inception was -44.16%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASEA and FLCH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ASEAFLCHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.16%

-62.09%

+17.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.28%

-21.48%

+13.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.20%

-25.43%

+3.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.20%

-50.38%

+28.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.04%

-36.68%

+35.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.58%

-30.62%

+20.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.13%

10.01%

-6.88%

Volatility

ASEA vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) is 3.50%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 5.99%. This indicates that ASEA 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ASEAFLCHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.50%

5.99%

-2.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.74%

13.93%

-2.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.59%

19.83%

-5.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.72%

29.58%

-14.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.49%

27.80%

-10.31%

ASEA vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASEA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.


Dividends

ASEA vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

ASEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.71%, more than FLCH's 2.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
3.71%3.95%3.61%3.76%2.23%4.19%2.27%2.51%3.08%1.59%2.78%3.64%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
2.41%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


ASEA and FLCH have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLCH has higher volatility (5.99%) compared to ASEA (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASEA dropped -44.16% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

On 5-year performance, ASEA leads with 12.90% vs -3.87% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ASEA has performed better with a 12.90% return vs -3.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASEA.

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.71%, compared with 2.41% for FLCH.

ASEA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. ASEA tracks FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASEA and 0.19% for FLCH.

ASEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs -0.34), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ASEA and FLCH

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer