CHIQ vs. FLCH
CHIQ (Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both China Equities funds - CHIQ tracks the MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 Index while FLCH tracks the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CHIQ returned -8.27%/yr vs -2.13%/yr for FLCH. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. CHIQ charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.
Performance
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CHIQ achieves a -12.61% return, which is significantly lower than FLCH's -5.99% return.
CHIQ
- 1D
- -0.78%
- 1M
- 13.46%
- 6M
- -11.03%
- YTD
- -12.61%
- 1Y
- -11.86%
- 3Y*
- -1.64%
- 5Y*
- -8.27%
- 10Y*
- 6.32%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.17%
FLCH
- 1D
- 0.27%
- 1M
- 8.86%
- 6M
- -7.54%
- YTD
- -5.99%
- 1Y
- 0.17%
- 3Y*
- 8.51%
- 5Y*
- -2.13%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 0.61%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.03M | $735.04K | $809.72K | |
| $1.47M | $4.17M | $3.23M |
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | -12.61% | 13.69% | 10.74% | -10.70% | -22.01% | -27.07% | 92.61% | 44.19% | -28.65% | 7.48% |
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF | -5.99% | 32.55% | 18.00% | -11.21% | -22.74% | -20.87% | 30.09% | 24.32% | -19.52% | 1.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between CHIQ and FLCH is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017 | 0.91 |
The correlation between CHIQ and FLCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CHIQ
FLCH
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
CHIQ
FLCH
Consumer Defensive
CHIQ
FLCH
Real Estate
CHIQ
FLCH
Technology
CHIQ
FLCH
Industrials
CHIQ
FLCH
Basic Materials
CHIQ
-
FLCH
Communication Services
CHIQ
-
FLCH
Energy
CHIQ
-
FLCH
Financial Services
CHIQ
-
FLCH
Healthcare
CHIQ
-
FLCH
Utilities
CHIQ
-
FLCH
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
CHIQ vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank
CHIQ
FLCH
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ) 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.
| CHIQ | FLCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.93 | 1.02 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.34 | 0.01 | -0.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.71 | 0.02 | -0.72 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CHIQ drawdown since its inception was -67.04%, which is greater than FLCH's maximum drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CHIQ and FLCH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CHIQ | FLCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.04% | -62.09% | -4.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.53% | -21.48% | -14.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.53% | -25.15% | -10.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -54.89% | -50.38% | -4.51% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -67.04% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -54.15% | -33.73% | -20.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.87% | -30.63% | -0.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.85% | 10.31% | +6.54% |
Volatility
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison
Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ) has a higher volatility of 6.69% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 5.42%. This indicates that CHIQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CHIQ | FLCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.69% | 5.42% | +1.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.64% | 13.80% | +2.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.16% | 19.83% | +3.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.29% | 29.33% | +7.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.47% | 27.76% | +4.71% |
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison
CHIQ has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
CHIQ vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison
CHIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.54%, less than FLCH's 2.30% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | 1.54% | 1.48% | 2.65% | 2.26% | 0.38% | 0.00% | 0.11% | 1.05% | 2.71% | 0.62% | 1.51% | 4.86% |
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF | 2.30% | 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
CHIQ and FLCH have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CHIQ has higher volatility (6.69%) compared to FLCH (5.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CHIQ dropped -67.04% vs FLCH's -62.09%.
On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -2.13% vs -8.27% for CHIQ. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLCH has performed better with a -2.13% return vs -8.27%. 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 CHIQ.
FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.30%, compared with 1.54% for CHIQ.
CHIQ tracks MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 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 CHIQ and 0.19% for FLCH.
FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.01 vs -0.52), 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.
Find the right allocation for CHIQ 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