CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CI2G.L (Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD) and FLRK.L (Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - CI2G.L tracks the MSCI India NR USD while FLRK.L tracks the MSCI Korea NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CI2G.L returned 3.82%/yr vs 20.63%/yr for FLRK.L. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CI2G.L charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLRK.L.

Performance

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) and Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF (FLRK.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

CI2G.L is traded in GBp, while FLRK.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FLRK.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CI2G.L achieves a -12.55% return, which is significantly lower than FLRK.L's 111.17% return.

CI2G.L

• 1D: 1.23%
• 1M: -3.40%
• YTD: -12.55%
• 6M: -13.41%
• 1Y: -12.56%
• 3Y*: 1.96%
• 5Y*: 3.82%
• 10Y*: 7.30%

FLRK.L

• 1D: -5.06%
• 1M: 19.12%
• YTD: 111.17%
• 6M: 129.46%
• 1Y: 234.17%
• 3Y*: 46.37%
• 5Y*: 20.63%
• 10Y*: —

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

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CI2G.L Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD	-12.55%	-5.46%	11.34%	12.20%	2.39%	24.86%	10.51%	-6.48%
FLRK.L Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF	111.17%	82.09%	-20.56%	14.16%	-19.37%	-5.90%	42.60%	-14.15%

Correlation

The correlation between CI2G.L and FLRK.L is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.22
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2019	0.35

The correlation between CI2G.L and FLRK.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CI2G.L	FLRK.L
Financial Services	28.3%	8.7%
Consumer Cyclical	12.4%	5.5%
Industrials	10.2%	17.7%
Energy	9.5%	0.9%
Basic Materials	8.5%	2.4%
Technology	8.2%	57.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	1.7%
Healthcare	6.1%	3.0%
Communication Services	4.7%	2.3%
Utilities	4.5%	0.4%
Real Estate	1.3%	-

Return for Risk

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CI2G.L

CI2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 3
CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
CI2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2

FLRK.L

FLRK.L Risk / Return Rank: 97
FLRK.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
FLRK.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
FLRK.L Omega Ratio Rank: 97
FLRK.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FLRK.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) and Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF (FLRK.L). 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.

	CI2G.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.75	6.24	-6.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.95	5.75	-6.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	1.85	-0.96
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.59	10.98	-11.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.37	39.30	-40.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.75, which is lower than the FLRK.L Sharpe Ratio of 6.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CI2G.L and FLRK.L, 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

	CI2G.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.75	6.24	-6.99
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.24	0.81	-0.58
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.40	0.67	-0.27

Drawdowns

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CI2G.L drawdown since its inception was -37.13%, smaller than the maximum FLRK.L drawdown of -41.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CI2G.L and FLRK.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CI2G.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.13%	-41.57%	+4.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.32%	-21.18%	+0.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.30%	-27.82%	+0.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.30%	-38.68%	+11.38%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.13%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.55%	-5.62%	-17.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.24%	-19.95%	+12.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.84%	5.93%	+2.91%

Volatility

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) is 5.70%, while Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF (FLRK.L) has a volatility of 18.09%. This indicates that CI2G.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLRK.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CI2G.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.70%	18.09%	-12.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.70%	32.92%	-19.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.10%	37.31%	-21.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.04%	25.31%	-9.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.77%	27.31%	-7.54%

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CI2G.L has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than FLRK.L's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

CI2G.L vs. FLRK.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CI2G.L nor FLRK.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CI2G.L and FLRK.L in my portfolio?

CI2G.L and FLRK.L have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CI2G.L or FLRK.L?

On fees, FLRK.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CI2G.L or FLRK.L?

FLRK.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for CI2G.L.

What is the main difference between CI2G.L and FLRK.L?

CI2G.L tracks MSCI India NR USD, while FLRK.L tracks MSCI Korea NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for CI2G.L and 0.09% for FLRK.L.