PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EWH vs. FLAU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EWH vs. FLAU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EWH (iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF) and FLAU (Franklin FTSE Australia ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWH tracks the MSCI Hong Kong Index while FLAU tracks the FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EWH returned -0.71%/yr vs 6.55%/yr for FLAU. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWH charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLAU.

Performance

EWH vs. FLAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) and Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWH achieves a 2.00% return, which is significantly lower than FLAU's 10.17% return.

EWH

1D
0.23%
1M
-7.73%
YTD
2.00%
6M
0.16%
1Y
17.74%
3Y*
8.52%
5Y*
-0.71%
10Y*
4.79%

FLAU

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.03%
YTD
10.17%
6M
10.27%
1Y
16.57%
3Y*
13.15%
5Y*
6.55%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EWH vs. FLAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		2.00%34.50%0.00%-13.87%-6.81%-3.49%4.17%10.74%-8.76%4.44%
FLAU
Franklin FTSE Australia ETF		10.17%15.95%1.81%12.58%-5.58%9.90%11.00%23.38%-10.17%1.89%

Correlation

The correlation between EWH and FLAU is 0.51, 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

0.51

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

0.52

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

0.53

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

0.52

The correlation between EWH and FLAU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWH vs. FLAU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EWH
FLAU

Financial Services

43.9%
37.1%

Industrials

18.3%
5.6%

Real Estate

18.0%
6.0%

Utilities

11.6%
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

3.9%
6.6%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
3.7%

Communication Services

1.7%
1.9%

Basic Materials

-

26.6%

Energy

-

4.8%

Healthcare

-

4.3%

Technology

-

1.8%

Financial Services

EWH
43.9%
FLAU
37.1%

Industrials

EWH
18.3%
FLAU
5.6%

Real Estate

EWH
18.0%
FLAU
6.0%

Utilities

EWH
11.6%
FLAU
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

EWH
3.9%
FLAU
6.6%

Consumer Defensive

EWH
2.6%
FLAU
3.7%

Communication Services

EWH
1.7%
FLAU
1.9%

Basic Materials

EWH

-

FLAU
26.6%

Energy

EWH

-

FLAU
4.8%

Healthcare

EWH

-

FLAU
4.3%

Technology

EWH

-

FLAU
1.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF

Franklin FTSE Australia ETF

Often compared with EWH:
EWH vs. MCHIEWH vs. FXIEWH vs. EWSEWH vs. EWYEWH vs. EWTEWH vs. EWJEWH vs. EPP
Often compared with FLAU:
FLAU vs. EWAFLAU vs. FLBRFLAU vs. FLGBFLAU vs. EPIFLAU vs. PEYFLAU vs. BCDFLAU vs. QQQ

Return for Risk

EWH vs. FLAU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EWH
EWH Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
EWH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWH Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWH Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
EWH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWH Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
FLAU
FLAU Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
FLAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLAU Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
FLAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLAU Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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.

EWH vs. FLAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) and Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU). 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.

EWHFLAUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.06
0.97

+0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.56
1.43

+0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.18

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.38

1.66

-0.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.55

4.95

-0.40

EWH vs. FLAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWH Sharpe Ratio is 1.06, which is comparable to the FLAU Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWH and FLAU, 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

EWH vs. FLAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWH drawdown since its inception was -66.44%, which is greater than FLAU's maximum drawdown of -45.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWH and FLAU.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EWHFLAUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.44%

-45.73%

-20.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.91%

-10.01%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.93%

-22.03%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.28%

-24.68%

-16.60%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.71%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.71%

-3.38%

-8.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.47%

-6.77%

-12.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.91%

3.35%

+0.56%

Volatility

EWH vs. FLAU - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) and Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) have volatilities of 5.30% and 5.42%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EWHFLAUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.30%

5.42%

-0.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.57%

14.38%

-1.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.78%

17.12%

-0.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.11%

19.67%

+0.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.59%

23.57%

-3.98%

EWH vs. FLAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWH has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than FLAU's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWH vs. FLAU - Dividend Comparison

EWH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.86%, more than FLAU's 1.68% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		4.86%5.20%4.17%4.28%2.91%2.78%2.56%2.71%2.93%4.35%3.08%2.63%
FLAU
Franklin FTSE Australia ETF		1.68%3.25%3.37%3.62%5.91%5.14%2.18%4.37%4.34%0.18%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

EWH and FLAU have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLAU has higher volatility (5.42%) compared to EWH (5.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWH dropped -66.44% vs FLAU's -45.73%.

On 5-year performance, FLAU leads with 6.55% vs -0.71% for EWH. On fees, FLAU is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, EWH has been the lower-risk option at 5.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FLAU has performed better with a 6.55% return vs -0.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLAU is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EWH.

EWH has the higher dividend yield at 4.86%, compared with 1.68% for FLAU.

EWH tracks MSCI Hong Kong Index, while FLAU tracks FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EWH and 0.09% for FLAU.

EWH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.06 vs 0.97), 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 EWH and FLAU

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