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

Performance

ECNS vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) 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, ECNS achieves a -2.30% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -4.71% return.


ECNS

1D
0.77%
1M
-4.58%
YTD
-2.30%
6M
-5.64%
1Y
17.42%
3Y*
8.25%
5Y*
-6.53%
10Y*
2.11%

FLCH

1D
2.58%
1M
-1.61%
YTD
-4.71%
6M
-6.63%
1Y
11.26%
3Y*
11.28%
5Y*
-4.43%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ECNS vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF
-2.30%36.49%5.64%-23.05%-24.58%2.11%25.42%7.84%-18.27%-0.61%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
-4.71%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.87%30.09%24.32%-19.52%0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between ECNS and FLCH is 0.76, 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

0.76

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.85

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017

0.84

The correlation between ECNS and FLCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECNS vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ECNS
FLCH

Healthcare

19.8%
5.3%

Technology

16.9%
12.9%

Industrials

16.2%
9.1%

Real Estate

8.8%
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
23.4%

Basic Materials

7.8%
5.5%

Communication Services

4.5%
14.2%

Financial Services

4.4%
18.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
3.3%

Energy

3.4%
3.7%

Utilities

2.6%
2.0%

Healthcare

ECNS
19.8%
FLCH
5.3%

Technology

ECNS
16.9%
FLCH
12.9%

Industrials

ECNS
16.2%
FLCH
9.1%

Real Estate

ECNS
8.8%
FLCH
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

ECNS
8.8%
FLCH
23.4%

Basic Materials

ECNS
7.8%
FLCH
5.5%

Communication Services

ECNS
4.5%
FLCH
14.2%

Financial Services

ECNS
4.4%
FLCH
18.2%

Consumer Defensive

ECNS
4.0%
FLCH
3.3%

Energy

ECNS
3.4%
FLCH
3.7%

Utilities

ECNS
2.6%
FLCH
2.0%

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

ECNS vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECNS
ECNS Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
ECNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECNS Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
ECNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECNS Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
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.

ECNS vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) 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.


ECNSFLCHDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.84

0.59

+0.25

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.22

0.95

+0.27

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.12

+0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.01

0.78

+0.23

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

1.98

1.65

+0.33

ECNS vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECNS Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECNS 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ECNSFLCHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.84

0.59

+0.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.22

-0.15

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.03

0.03

0.00

Drawdowns

ECNS vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECNS drawdown since its inception was -63.43%, roughly equal to the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECNS and FLCH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ECNSFLCHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.43%

-62.09%

-1.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.72%

-15.52%

-2.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-31.72%

-25.43%

-6.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-59.61%

-55.78%

-3.83%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-37.11%

-32.83%

-4.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.38%

-30.53%

+1.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.07%

7.32%

+1.75%

Volatility

ECNS vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) is 5.25%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 6.40%. This indicates that ECNS 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


ECNSFLCHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.25%

6.40%

-1.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.68%

13.58%

-0.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.80%

19.16%

+1.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.43%

29.60%

-0.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.89%

27.91%

-2.02%

ECNS vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECNS has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.


Dividends

ECNS vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

ECNS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.34%, more than FLCH's 2.48% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF
6.34%6.20%5.98%4.89%3.54%4.87%3.59%3.23%6.16%3.18%4.29%3.58%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
2.48%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


ECNS and FLCH have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLCH has higher volatility (6.40%) compared to ECNS (5.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECNS dropped -63.43% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -4.43% vs -6.53% for ECNS. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ECNS has been the lower-risk option at 5.25%. 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 -4.43% return vs -6.53%. 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 0.59% for ECNS.

ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.34%, compared with 2.48% for FLCH.

ECNS is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ECNS and 0.19% for FLCH.

ECNS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.84 vs 0.59), 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 ECNS 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