EWN vs. FLGB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EWN (iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF) and FLGB (Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF) are both Europe Equities funds - EWN tracks the MSCI Netherlands Investable Market Index while FLGB tracks the FTSE UK RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EWN returned 9.47%/yr vs 10.74%/yr for FLGB. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLGB.

Performance

EWN vs. FLGB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN) and Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWN achieves a 20.24% return, which is significantly higher than FLGB's 4.59% return.

EWN

• 1D: -3.91%
• 1M: 2.60%
• YTD: 20.24%
• 6M: 20.65%
• 1Y: 34.25%
• 3Y*: 21.10%
• 5Y*: 9.47%
• 10Y*: 14.24%

FLGB

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: -1.81%
• YTD: 4.59%
• 6M: 4.84%
• 1Y: 18.93%
• 3Y*: 17.39%
• 5Y*: 10.74%
• 10Y*: —

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

EWN vs. FLGB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EWN iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF	20.24%	34.87%	1.67%	22.08%	-24.43%	22.74%	23.23%	32.45%	-15.37%	0.88%
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	4.59%	33.73%	8.77%	14.33%	-6.00%	17.14%	-9.47%	23.23%	-11.60%	1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between EWN and FLGB is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.73

The correlation between EWN and FLGB shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (1 year) to 0.73 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EWN vs. FLGB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWN	FLGB
Technology	34.6%	0.6%
Financial Services	17.9%	27.1%
Industrials	11.4%	13.3%
Consumer Defensive	10.1%	13.9%
Communication Services	9.6%	2.5%
Consumer Cyclical	5.9%	4.8%
Basic Materials	5.1%	8.8%
Healthcare	2.5%	12.9%
Energy	2.0%	10.2%
Real Estate	0.7%	0.8%
Utilities	-	4.7%

Return for Risk

EWN vs. FLGB — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWN

EWN Risk / Return Rank: 53
EWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
EWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
EWN Omega Ratio Rank: 47
EWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
EWN Martin Ratio Rank: 59

FLGB

FLGB Risk / Return Rank: 39
FLGB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
FLGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
FLGB Omega Ratio Rank: 37
FLGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
FLGB Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

EWN vs. FLGB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN) and Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB). 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.

	EWN	FLGB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.64	1.32	+0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.33	1.91	+0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.24	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	1.85	+0.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.83	6.43	+3.40

EWN vs. FLGB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWN Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the FLGB Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWN and FLGB, 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

EWN vs. FLGB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWN drawdown since its inception was -65.22%, which is greater than FLGB's maximum drawdown of -42.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWN and FLGB.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWN	FLGB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-65.22%	-42.61%	-22.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.24%	-10.26%	-2.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.77%	-13.13%	-6.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.57%	-25.90%	-17.67%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.57%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.14%	-5.18%	+1.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.32%	-6.67%	-9.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.49%	2.95%	+0.54%

Volatility

EWN vs. FLGB - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN) has a higher volatility of 8.69% compared to Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) at 4.15%. This indicates that EWN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLGB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EWN	FLGB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.69%	4.15%	+4.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.07%	12.36%	+5.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.06%	14.49%	+6.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.14%	16.63%	+6.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.23%	18.95%	+2.28%

EWN vs. FLGB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FLGB's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWN vs. FLGB - Dividend Comparison

EWN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.18%, more than FLGB's 1.68% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EWN iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF	4.18%	5.03%	2.18%	1.79%	1.98%	1.01%	0.78%	2.57%	2.40%	1.68%	2.71%	1.92%
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	1.68%	3.50%	4.42%	3.95%	4.23%	2.93%	2.67%	4.30%	3.92%	0.43%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EWN and FLGB in my portfolio?

EWN and FLGB have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EWN or FLGB?

EWN has higher volatility (8.69%) compared to FLGB (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWN dropped -65.22% vs FLGB's -42.61%.

Which ETF is better, EWN or FLGB?

On 5-year performance, FLGB leads with 10.74% vs 9.47% for EWN. On fees, FLGB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLGB has been the lower-risk option at 4.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EWN or FLGB?

Over the 5-year period, FLGB has performed better with a 10.74% return vs 9.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWN or FLGB?

FLGB is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EWN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EWN or FLGB?

EWN has the higher dividend yield at 4.18%, compared with 1.68% for FLGB.

What is the main difference between EWN and FLGB?

EWN tracks MSCI Netherlands Investable Market Index, while FLGB tracks FTSE UK RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWN and 0.09% for FLGB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 vs 1.32), 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.