FLAU vs. FLJH

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FLAU (Franklin FTSE Australia ETF) and FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLAU is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index, while FLJH is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLAU returned 5.84%/yr vs 20.99%/yr for FLJH. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.09% expense ratio.

Performance

FLAU vs. FLJH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). 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 lower than FLJH's 21.36% return.

FLAU

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

FLJH

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: 2.00%
• YTD: 21.36%
• 6M: 21.87%
• 1Y: 48.60%
• 3Y*: 27.60%
• 5Y*: 20.99%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLAU vs. FLJH - 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%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	21.36%	25.26%	25.89%	36.02%	-2.75%	12.68%	10.65%	20.34%	-14.66%	1.26%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAU and FLJH is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.52

The correlation between FLAU and FLJH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.43 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLAU vs. FLJH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLAU	FLJH
Financial Services	37.1%	15.8%
Basic Materials	26.6%	4.4%
Consumer Cyclical	6.6%	12.7%
Real Estate	6.0%	3.0%
Industrials	5.6%	25.2%
Energy	4.8%	0.9%
Healthcare	4.3%	5.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	4.0%
Communication Services	1.9%	8.0%
Technology	1.8%	19.4%
Utilities	1.6%	1.2%

Return for Risk

FLAU vs. FLJH — 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

FLJH

FLJH Risk / Return Rank: 88
FLJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FLJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FLJH Omega Ratio Rank: 88
FLJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FLJH Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. FLJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). 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	FLJH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	2.57	-1.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.09	3.40	-2.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.47	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.22	4.52	-3.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.58	17.37	-13.79

FLAU vs. FLJH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAU Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the FLJH Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAU and FLJH, 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. FLJH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAU drawdown since its inception was -45.73%, which is greater than FLJH's maximum drawdown of -31.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAU and FLJH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLAU	FLJH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.73%	-31.51%	-14.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-10.80%	+0.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.03%	-20.39%	-1.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.68%	-20.39%	-4.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.73%	-3.15%	-2.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.77%	-5.29%	-1.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.41%	2.81%	+0.60%

Volatility

FLAU vs. FLJH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) is 5.65%, while Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) has a volatility of 7.00%. This indicates that FLAU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLAU	FLJH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	7.00%	-1.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.46%	14.63%	-0.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.17%	18.99%	-1.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.68%	18.71%	+0.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.56%	19.88%	+3.68%

FLAU vs. FLJH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLAU and FLJH 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. FLJH - Dividend Comparison

FLAU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, less than FLJH's 1.84% 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%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	1.84%	3.90%	5.06%	25.59%	26.67%	1.29%	0.00%	0.00%	5.92%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLAU and FLJH in my portfolio?

FLAU and FLJH have a correlation of 0.46, 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 FLJH?

FLJH has higher volatility (7.00%) compared to FLAU (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAU dropped -45.73% vs FLJH's -31.51%.

Which ETF is better, FLAU or FLJH?

On 5-year performance, FLJH leads with 20.99% vs 5.84% for FLAU. Both ETFs have the same 0.09% expense ratio. On volatility, FLAU 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, FLAU or FLJH?

Over the 5-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 20.99% 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 FLJH?

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

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

FLJH has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 1.72% for FLAU.

What is the main difference between FLAU and FLJH?

FLAU is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FLJH is Japan Equities. FLAU tracks FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index, while FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 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.