EZBC vs. FLCH

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EZBC (Franklin Bitcoin ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EZBC is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EZBC returned -44.53% vs 1.60% for FLCH. Their 0.26 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. Both charge a 0.19% expense ratio.

Performance

EZBC vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC) 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, EZBC achieves a -28.20% return, which is significantly lower than FLCH's -6.16% return.

EZBC

• 1D: -2.86%
• 1M: 2.28%
• 6M: -25.05%
• YTD: -28.20%
• 1Y: -44.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.49%

FLCH

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 8.66%
• 6M: -9.56%
• YTD: -6.16%
• 1Y: 1.60%
• 3Y*: 7.92%
• 5Y*: -2.03%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 0.59%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EZBC Franklin Bitcoin ETF	$3.11M	$3.63M	$7.00M
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	$3.84M	$4.46M	$3.18M

EZBC vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EZBC Franklin Bitcoin ETF	-28.20%	-6.56%	87.83%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.16%	32.55%	24.72%

Correlation

The correlation between EZBC and FLCH is 0.35, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.26

Return for Risk

EZBC vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EZBC

EZBC Risk / Return Rank: 1
EZBC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
EZBC Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
EZBC Omega Ratio Rank: 2
EZBC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
EZBC Martin Ratio Rank: 2

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 11
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 11

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

EZBC vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC) 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.

	EZBC	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.05	-0.00	-1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.58	0.14	-1.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.02	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.87	-0.00	-0.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.34	-0.00	-1.33

EZBC vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EZBC Sharpe Ratio is -1.05, which is lower than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of -0.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EZBC 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

EZBC vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EZBC drawdown since its inception was -53.35%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EZBC and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	EZBC	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.35%	-62.09%	+8.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.35%	-21.48%	-31.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-25.15%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-50.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.02%	-33.85%	-16.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.28%	-30.63%	+12.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	34.65%	10.23%	+24.42%

Volatility

EZBC vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC) has a higher volatility of 9.03% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 5.89%. This indicates that EZBC'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

	EZBC	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.03%	5.89%	+3.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.75%	14.07%	+19.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.37%	19.91%	+24.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.52%	29.34%	+20.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	49.52%	27.77%	+21.75%

EZBC vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both EZBC and FLCH have an expense ratio of 0.19%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

EZBC vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

EZBC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EZBC Franklin Bitcoin ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.31%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EZBC and FLCH in my portfolio?

EZBC and FLCH have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EZBC or FLCH?

EZBC has higher volatility (9.03%) compared to FLCH (5.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EZBC dropped -53.35% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, EZBC or FLCH?

On 1-year performance, FLCH leads with 1.60% vs -44.53% for EZBC. Both ETFs have the same 0.19% expense ratio. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EZBC or FLCH?

Over the 1-year period, FLCH has performed better with a 1.60% return vs -44.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EZBC or FLCH?

EZBC and FLCH have the same expense ratio: 0.19% per year.

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

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 0.00% for EZBC.

What is the main difference between EZBC and FLCH?

EZBC is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while FLCH is China Equities. EZBC tracks CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.00 vs -1.05), 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.