PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

FLAU vs. EWA

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FLAU (Franklin FTSE Australia ETF) and EWA (iShares MSCI-Australia ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - FLAU tracks the FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index while EWA tracks the MSCI Australia Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLAU returned 5.88%/yr vs 5.40%/yr for EWA. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FLAU charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for EWA.

Performance

FLAU vs. EWA - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with FLAU having a 7.69% return and EWA slightly higher at 8.06%.

FLAU

1D
-0.39%
1M
-1.24%
YTD
7.69%
6M
6.27%
1Y
12.12%
3Y*
12.30%
5Y*
5.88%
10Y*
—

EWA

1D
-0.39%
1M
-1.66%
YTD
8.06%
6M
6.40%
1Y
10.50%
3Y*
11.73%
5Y*
5.40%
10Y*
8.34%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLAU vs. EWA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLAU
Franklin FTSE Australia ETF		7.69%15.95%1.81%12.58%-5.58%9.90%11.00%23.38%-10.17%1.89%
EWA
iShares MSCI-Australia ETF		8.06%13.35%1.60%13.81%-5.92%8.93%8.29%22.45%-12.04%3.89%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAU and EWA is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.98

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

0.98

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

0.99

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

0.93

The correlation between FLAU and EWA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLAU vs. EWA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
FLAU
EWA

Financial Services

37.1%
41.4%

Basic Materials

26.6%
26.4%

Consumer Cyclical

6.6%
6.5%

Real Estate

6.0%
5.1%

Industrials

5.6%
4.2%

Energy

4.8%
4.2%

Healthcare

4.3%
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
3.6%

Communication Services

1.9%
1.9%

Technology

1.8%
1.0%

Utilities

1.6%
1.6%

Financial Services

FLAU
37.1%
EWA
41.4%

Basic Materials

FLAU
26.6%
EWA
26.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FLAU
6.6%
EWA
6.5%

Real Estate

FLAU
6.0%
EWA
5.1%

Industrials

FLAU
5.6%
EWA
4.2%

Energy

FLAU
4.8%
EWA
4.2%

Healthcare

FLAU
4.3%
EWA
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

FLAU
3.7%
EWA
3.6%

Communication Services

FLAU
1.9%
EWA
1.9%

Technology

FLAU
1.8%
EWA
1.0%

Utilities

FLAU
1.6%
EWA
1.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Franklin FTSE Australia ETF

iShares MSCI-Australia ETF

Often compared with FLAU:
FLAU vs. FLBRFLAU vs. FLGBFLAU vs. EPIFLAU vs. PEYFLAU vs. BCDFLAU vs. QQQFLAU vs. JEPI
Often compared with EWA:
EWA vs. EWCEWA vs. EWJEWA vs. EWOEWA vs. VOOEWA vs. ^N225EWA vs. SPYEWA vs. VPL

Return for Risk

FLAU vs. EWA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
FLAU
FLAU Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
FLAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLAU Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
FLAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLAU Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
EWA
EWA Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
EWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWA Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
EWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWA Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
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.

FLAU vs. EWA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

FLAUEWADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.71
0.61

+0.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.08
0.95

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.12

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.22

1.05

+0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.59

2.85

+0.74

FLAU vs. EWA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAU Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is comparable to the EWA Sharpe Ratio of 0.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAU and EWA, 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

FLAU vs. EWA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAU drawdown since its inception was -45.73%, smaller than the maximum EWA drawdown of -66.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAU and EWA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FLAUEWADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.73%

-66.98%

+21.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.01%

-10.01%

0.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.03%

-21.91%

-0.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.68%

-24.87%

+0.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-45.54%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.55%

-6.47%

+0.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.77%

-11.32%

+4.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.39%

3.70%

-0.31%

Volatility

FLAU vs. EWA - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) and iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) have volatilities of 5.69% and 5.70%, 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

FLAUEWADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.69%

5.70%

-0.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.50%

14.76%

-0.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.19%

17.42%

-0.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.68%

19.79%

-0.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.57%

22.54%

+1.03%

FLAU vs. EWA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLAU has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than EWA's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLAU vs. EWA - Dividend Comparison

FLAU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, less than EWA's 3.04% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWA
iShares MSCI-Australia ETF		3.04%3.21%3.71%3.72%5.28%5.08%2.02%3.97%6.11%4.44%4.03%5.48%
FLAU
Franklin FTSE Australia ETF		1.72%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

With a correlation of 0.98, FLAU and EWA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

EWA has higher volatility (5.70%) compared to FLAU (5.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAU dropped -45.73% vs EWA's -66.98%.

On 5-year performance, FLAU leads with 5.88% vs 5.40% for EWA. On fees, FLAU is cheaper at 0.09% per year. Their volatility is very similar. 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 5.88% return vs 5.40%. 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 0.50% for EWA.

EWA has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 1.72% for FLAU.

FLAU tracks FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index, while EWA tracks MSCI Australia Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLAU and 0.50% for EWA.

FLAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.71 vs 0.61), 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 FLAU and EWA

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