PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLAU vs. FPA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLAU vs. FPA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) and First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLAU achieves a 10.47% return, which is significantly lower than FPA's 51.47% return.


FLAU

1D
-1.17%
1M
1.12%
YTD
10.47%
6M
12.59%
1Y
16.61%
3Y*
12.97%
5Y*
5.98%
10Y*

FPA

1D
-0.59%
1M
9.98%
YTD
51.47%
6M
51.19%
1Y
82.43%
3Y*
33.32%
5Y*
13.09%
10Y*
11.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLAU vs. FPA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLAU
Franklin FTSE Australia ETF
10.47%15.95%1.81%12.58%-5.58%9.90%11.00%23.38%-10.17%1.89%
FPA
First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund
51.47%43.16%3.95%9.97%-14.55%2.98%13.43%8.91%-21.91%2.64%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAU and FPA is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.65

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

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017

0.59

The correlation between FLAU and FPA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLAU vs. FPA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLAU
FPA

Financial Services

36.0%
9.6%

Basic Materials

26.2%
4.9%

Consumer Cyclical

6.6%
8.8%

Real Estate

6.4%
6.9%

Industrials

6.4%
37.1%

Energy

5.7%
6.7%

Healthcare

4.9%
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
3.2%

Communication Services

1.7%
2.6%

Technology

1.2%
16.1%

Utilities

0.8%
5.7%

Financial Services

FLAU
36.0%
FPA
9.6%

Basic Materials

FLAU
26.2%
FPA
4.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FLAU
6.6%
FPA
8.8%

Real Estate

FLAU
6.4%
FPA
6.9%

Industrials

FLAU
6.4%
FPA
37.1%

Energy

FLAU
5.7%
FPA
6.7%

Healthcare

FLAU
4.9%
FPA
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

FLAU
3.7%
FPA
3.2%

Communication Services

FLAU
1.7%
FPA
2.6%

Technology

FLAU
1.2%
FPA
16.1%

Utilities

FLAU
0.8%
FPA
5.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

FLAU vs. FPA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAU
FLAU Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
FLAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLAU Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
FLAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLAU Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

FPA
FPA Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
FPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
FPA Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
FPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
FPA Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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. FPA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) and First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA). 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.


FLAUFPADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.54

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.67

5.39

-3.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.15

19.96

-14.81

FLAU vs. FPA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAU Sharpe Ratio is 1.00, which is lower than the FPA Sharpe Ratio of 3.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAU and FPA, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLAUFPADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.00

3.24

-2.24

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.55

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.33

0.33

0.00

Drawdowns

FLAU vs. FPA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAU drawdown since its inception was -45.73%, smaller than the maximum FPA drawdown of -52.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAU and FPA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLAUFPADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.73%

-52.91%

+7.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.01%

-15.37%

+5.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.03%

-20.66%

-1.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.68%

-35.21%

+10.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.11%

-4.12%

+1.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.79%

-13.49%

+6.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.23%

4.14%

-0.91%

Volatility

FLAU vs. FPA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) is 5.45%, while First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA) has a volatility of 12.96%. This indicates that FLAU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FPA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLAUFPADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.45%

12.96%

-7.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.66%

21.92%

-8.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.63%

25.55%

-8.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.61%

23.98%

-4.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.58%

22.39%

+1.19%

FLAU vs. FPA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLAU has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than FPA's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLAU vs. FPA - Dividend Comparison

FLAU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.94%, less than FPA's 3.52% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLAU
Franklin FTSE Australia ETF
2.94%3.25%3.37%3.62%5.91%5.14%2.18%4.37%4.34%0.18%0.00%0.00%
FPA
First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund
3.52%4.71%3.40%3.02%4.22%5.12%1.59%3.90%2.81%3.15%2.42%1.74%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLAU and FPA have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FPA has higher volatility (12.96%) compared to FLAU (5.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAU dropped -45.73% vs FPA's -52.91%.

On 5-year performance, FPA leads with 13.09% vs 5.98% for FLAU. On fees, FLAU is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLAU has been the lower-risk option at 5.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FPA has performed better with a 13.09% return vs 5.98%. 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 0.80% for FPA.

FPA has the higher dividend yield at 3.52%, compared with 2.94% for FLAU.

FLAU tracks FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index, while FPA tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Asia Pacific Ex-Japan Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLAU and 0.80% for FPA.

FPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.24 vs 1.00), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLAU and FPA

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