FLAU vs. FLGB

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FLAU (Franklin FTSE Australia ETF) and FLGB (Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLAU is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index, while FLGB is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE UK RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLAU returned 5.84%/yr vs 10.95%/yr for FLGB. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.09% expense ratio.

Performance

FLAU vs. FLGB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) 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, FLAU achieves a 7.49% return, which is significantly higher than FLGB's 5.63% return.

FLAU

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -2.08%
• YTD: 7.49%
• 6M: 6.06%
• 1Y: 12.18%
• 3Y*: 12.15%
• 5Y*: 5.84%
• 10Y*: —

FLGB

• 1D: 1.13%
• 1M: -1.46%
• YTD: 5.63%
• 6M: 5.82%
• 1Y: 20.03%
• 3Y*: 17.75%
• 5Y*: 10.95%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLAU vs. FLGB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLAU Franklin FTSE Australia ETF	7.49%	15.95%	1.81%	12.58%	-5.58%	9.90%	11.00%	23.38%	-10.17%	1.89%
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	5.63%	33.73%	8.77%	14.33%	-6.00%	17.14%	-9.47%	23.23%	-11.60%	1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAU and FLGB is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.74

The correlation between FLAU and FLGB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLAU vs. FLGB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLAU	FLGB
Financial Services	37.1%	27.1%
Basic Materials	26.6%	8.8%
Consumer Cyclical	6.6%	4.8%
Real Estate	6.0%	0.8%
Industrials	5.6%	13.3%
Energy	4.8%	10.2%
Healthcare	4.3%	12.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	13.9%
Communication Services	1.9%	2.5%
Technology	1.8%	0.6%
Utilities	1.6%	4.7%

Return for Risk

FLAU vs. FLGB — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAU

FLAU Risk / Return Rank: 24
FLAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
FLAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
FLAU Omega Ratio Rank: 21
FLAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
FLAU Martin Ratio Rank: 28

FLGB

FLGB Risk / Return Rank: 45
FLGB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
FLGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
FLGB Omega Ratio Rank: 42
FLGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
FLGB Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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. FLGB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FLAU	FLGB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	1.39	-0.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.09	2.01	-0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.25	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.22	1.96	-0.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.58	6.73	-3.15

FLAU vs. FLGB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAU Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the FLGB Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAU 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

FLAU vs. FLGB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAU drawdown since its inception was -45.73%, which is greater than FLGB's maximum drawdown of -42.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAU and FLGB.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLAU	FLGB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.73%	-42.61%	-3.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-10.26%	+0.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.03%	-13.13%	-8.90%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.68%	-25.90%	+1.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.73%	-4.24%	-1.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.77%	-6.67%	-0.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.41%	2.98%	+0.43%

Volatility

FLAU vs. FLGB - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) has a higher volatility of 5.65% compared to Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) at 4.25%. This indicates that FLAU'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

	FLAU	FLGB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	4.25%	+1.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.46%	12.38%	+2.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.17%	14.49%	+2.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.68%	16.64%	+3.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.56%	18.95%	+4.61%

FLAU vs. FLGB - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLAU and FLGB have an expense ratio of 0.09%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLAU vs. FLGB - Dividend Comparison

FLAU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, more than FLGB's 1.66% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	1.66%	3.50%	4.42%	3.95%	4.23%	2.93%	2.67%	4.30%	3.92%	0.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLAU and FLGB in my portfolio?

FLAU and FLGB have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLAU or FLGB?

FLAU has higher volatility (5.65%) compared to FLGB (4.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAU dropped -45.73% vs FLGB's -42.61%.

Which ETF is better, FLAU or FLGB?

On 5-year performance, FLGB leads with 10.95% vs 5.84% for FLAU. Both ETFs have the same 0.09% expense ratio. On volatility, FLGB has been the lower-risk option at 4.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLAU or FLGB?

Over the 5-year period, FLGB has performed better with a 10.95% return vs 5.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLAU or FLGB?

FLAU and FLGB have the same expense ratio: 0.09% per year.

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

FLAU has the higher dividend yield at 1.72%, compared with 1.66% for FLGB.

What is the main difference between FLAU and FLGB?

FLAU is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FLGB is Europe Equities. FLAU tracks FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index, while FLGB tracks FTSE UK RIC Capped Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLGB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs 0.71), 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.