FLAU vs. PBDC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLAU (Franklin FTSE Australia ETF) and PBDC (Putnam BDC Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLAU is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index, while PBDC is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton. FLAU is passively managed, while PBDC is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLAU returned 12.44%/yr vs 7.11%/yr for PBDC. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLAU charges 0.09%/yr vs 13.49%/yr for PBDC.

Performance

FLAU vs. PBDC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLAU achieves a 8.11% return, which is significantly higher than PBDC's -11.42% return.

FLAU

• 1D: -1.87%
• 1M: -0.86%
• YTD: 8.11%
• 6M: 6.54%
• 1Y: 13.67%
• 3Y*: 12.44%
• 5Y*: 5.96%
• 10Y*: —

PBDC

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -1.31%
• YTD: -11.42%
• 6M: -9.25%
• 1Y: -11.33%
• 3Y*: 7.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLAU vs. PBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FLAU Franklin FTSE Australia ETF	8.11%	15.95%	1.81%	12.58%	13.29%
PBDC Putnam BDC Income ETF	-11.42%	-1.77%	19.43%	30.52%	10.38%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAU and PBDC is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2022	0.46

Return for Risk

FLAU vs. PBDC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAU

FLAU Risk / Return Rank: 25
FLAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
FLAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
FLAU Omega Ratio Rank: 22
FLAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
FLAU Martin Ratio Rank: 30

PBDC

PBDC Risk / Return Rank: 4
PBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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. PBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC). 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	PBDC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.80	-0.61	+1.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.20	-0.76	+1.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	0.91	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.37	-0.56	+1.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.07	-0.98	+5.05

FLAU vs. PBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAU Sharpe Ratio is 0.80, which is higher than the PBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAU and PBDC, 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. PBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAU drawdown since its inception was -45.73%, which is greater than PBDC's maximum drawdown of -20.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAU and PBDC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLAU	PBDC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.73%	-20.47%	-25.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-20.15%	+10.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.03%	-20.47%	-1.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.18%	-18.74%	+13.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.77%	-4.83%	-1.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.37%	11.58%	-8.21%

Volatility

FLAU vs. PBDC - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC) have volatilities of 5.73% and 5.50%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	FLAU	PBDC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.73%	5.50%	+0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.50%	15.43%	-0.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.20%	18.66%	-1.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.69%	17.05%	+2.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.57%	17.05%	+6.52%

FLAU vs. PBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLAU has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than PBDC's 13.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLAU vs. PBDC - Dividend Comparison

FLAU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, less than PBDC's 11.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLAU Franklin FTSE Australia ETF	1.71%	3.25%	3.37%	3.62%	5.91%	5.14%	2.18%	4.37%	4.34%	0.18%
PBDC Putnam BDC Income ETF	11.91%	10.53%	9.29%	9.86%	3.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLAU and PBDC in my portfolio?

FLAU and PBDC have a correlation of 0.39, 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 PBDC?

FLAU has higher volatility (5.73%) compared to PBDC (5.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAU dropped -45.73% vs PBDC's -20.47%.

Which ETF is better, FLAU or PBDC?

On 3-year performance, FLAU leads with 12.44% vs 7.11% for PBDC. On fees, FLAU is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, PBDC has been the lower-risk option at 5.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLAU or PBDC?

Over the 3-year period, FLAU has performed better with a 12.44% return vs 7.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLAU or PBDC?

FLAU is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 13.49% for PBDC.

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

PBDC has the higher dividend yield at 11.91%, compared with 1.71% for FLAU.

What is the main difference between FLAU and PBDC?

FLAU is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while PBDC is Financials Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLAU and 13.49% for PBDC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.80 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.