FGDL vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FGDL is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FGDL returned 28.79%/yr vs 8.98%/yr for FLCH. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FGDL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

FGDL vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) 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, FGDL achieves a -4.86% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -12.17% return.

FGDL

• 1D: -1.86%
• 1M: -8.58%
• YTD: -4.86%
• 6M: -8.67%
• 1Y: 21.26%
• 3Y*: 28.79%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: -5.67%
• YTD: -12.17%
• 6M: -12.94%
• 1Y: -0.05%
• 3Y*: 8.98%
• 5Y*: -5.91%
• 10Y*: —

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

FGDL vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	-4.86%	64.15%	27.31%	12.92%	0.72%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-12.17%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-13.66%

Correlation

The correlation between FGDL and FLCH is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2022	0.27

Return for Risk

FGDL vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FGDL

FGDL Risk / Return Rank: 21
FGDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FGDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
FGDL Omega Ratio Rank: 24
FGDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
FGDL Martin Ratio Rank: 20

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 9
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

FGDL vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) 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.

	FGDL	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.77	-0.00	+0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.12	0.13	+0.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.02	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.86	-0.00	+0.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.31	-0.01	+2.32

FGDL vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FGDL Sharpe Ratio is 0.77, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of -0.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGDL 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

FGDL vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGDL drawdown since its inception was -24.73%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGDL and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FGDL	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.73%	-62.09%	+37.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.73%	-19.59%	-5.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.73%	-25.43%	+0.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-55.78%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.98%	-38.09%	+14.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.07%	-30.55%	+26.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.24%	8.32%	+0.92%

Volatility

FGDL vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) has a higher volatility of 8.47% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 5.65%. This indicates that FGDL'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

	FGDL	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.47%	5.65%	+2.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.48%	14.07%	+10.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.83%	19.43%	+8.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.33%	29.63%	-10.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.33%	27.86%	-8.53%

FGDL vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGDL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FGDL vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FGDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold 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	1.77%	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 FGDL and FLCH in my portfolio?

FGDL and FLCH have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FGDL or FLCH?

FGDL has higher volatility (8.47%) compared to FLCH (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FGDL dropped -24.73% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, FGDL or FLCH?

On 3-year performance, FGDL leads with 28.79% vs 8.98% for FLCH. On fees, FGDL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FGDL or FLCH?

Over the 3-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 28.79% return vs 8.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FGDL or FLCH?

FGDL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLCH.

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

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.00% for FGDL.

What is the main difference between FGDL and FLCH?

FGDL is categorized as Gold, while FLCH is China Equities. FGDL tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FGDL and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FGDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.77 vs -0.00), 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.