ECON vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

ECON (Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ECON is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones Emerging Markets Consumer Titans Index, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ECON returned 8.06%/yr vs -5.32%/yr for FLCH. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ECON charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

ECON vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECON achieves a 38.95% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -10.49% return.

ECON

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 10.79%
• YTD: 38.95%
• 6M: 40.59%
• 1Y: 67.92%
• 3Y*: 24.55%
• 5Y*: 8.06%
• 10Y*: 6.94%

FLCH

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -3.87%
• YTD: -10.49%
• 6M: -11.51%
• 1Y: 2.54%
• 3Y*: 9.67%
• 5Y*: -5.32%
• 10Y*: —

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

ECON vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ECON Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF	38.95%	34.15%	0.22%	7.51%	-16.00%	-14.11%	20.83%	17.22%	-26.87%	3.57%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-10.49%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between ECON and FLCH is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.85

Over the past year, the correlation between ECON and FLCH has dropped to 0.64 - well below their long-term average of 0.85, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

ECON vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ECON	FLCH
Technology	44.0%	16.8%
Financial Services	20.5%	14.4%
Industrials	6.7%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	6.1%	25.5%
Basic Materials	5.5%	6.0%
Communication Services	5.3%	2.1%
Energy	3.5%	12.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	1.2%
Healthcare	2.6%	2.1%
Utilities	1.8%	2.0%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.6%

Return for Risk

ECON vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECON

ECON Risk / Return Rank: 88
ECON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
ECON Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
ECON Omega Ratio Rank: 90
ECON Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
ECON Martin Ratio Rank: 87

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 10
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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.

ECON vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) 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.

	ECON	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.98	0.13	+2.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.74	0.32	+3.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.04	+0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.96	0.14	+4.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.81	0.31	+17.50

ECON vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECON Sharpe Ratio is 2.98, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECON 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.

Drawdowns

ECON vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECON drawdown since its inception was -45.37%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECON and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECON	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.37%	-62.09%	+16.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.76%	-18.29%	+4.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.37%	-25.43%	+9.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.08%	-55.78%	+17.70%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.37%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-36.90%	+36.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.60%	-30.55%	+13.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.83%	8.23%	-4.40%

Volatility

ECON vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) has a higher volatility of 12.21% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 5.46%. This indicates that ECON'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.

Volatility by Period

	ECON	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.21%	5.46%	+6.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.60%	13.98%	+6.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.93%	19.37%	+3.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.83%	29.63%	-8.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.25%	27.86%	-6.61%

ECON vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECON has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECON vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

ECON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than FLCH's 1.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ECON Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF	1.28%	1.77%	0.76%	1.57%	2.06%	1.08%	0.63%	1.68%	0.98%	0.35%	0.74%	1.10%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	1.73%	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

Can I hold both ECON and FLCH in my portfolio?

ECON and FLCH have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ECON or FLCH?

ECON has higher volatility (12.21%) compared to FLCH (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECON dropped -45.37% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, ECON or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, ECON leads with 8.06% vs -5.32% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ECON or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, ECON has performed better with a 8.06% return vs -5.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECON or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ECON.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ECON or FLCH?

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.73%, compared with 1.28% for ECON.

What is the main difference between ECON and FLCH?

ECON is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. ECON tracks Dow Jones Emerging Markets Consumer Titans Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ECON and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.98 vs 0.13), 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.