FLAX vs. IPAC

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FLAX (Franklin FTSE Asia ex Japan ETF) and IPAC (iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - FLAX tracks the FTSE Asia ex Japan RIC Capped Index while IPAC tracks the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLAX returned 8.35%/yr vs 7.65%/yr for IPAC. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLAX charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for IPAC.

Performance

FLAX vs. IPAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Asia ex Japan ETF (FLAX) and iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLAX achieves a 30.76% return, which is significantly higher than IPAC's 13.73% return.

FLAX

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 11.53%
• YTD: 30.76%
• 6M: 33.55%
• 1Y: 61.25%
• 3Y*: 25.46%
• 5Y*: 8.35%
• 10Y*: —

IPAC

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 4.62%
• YTD: 13.73%
• 6M: 15.39%
• 1Y: 28.03%
• 3Y*: 17.03%
• 5Y*: 7.65%
• 10Y*: 9.13%

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

FLAX vs. IPAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLAX Franklin FTSE Asia ex Japan ETF	30.76%	33.72%	9.82%	6.27%	-18.88%	-3.54%	24.17%	17.19%	-12.02%
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	13.73%	25.16%	6.18%	14.51%	-13.68%	3.09%	12.39%	19.44%	-10.07%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAX and IPAC is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.67
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2018	0.69

The correlation between FLAX and IPAC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLAX vs. IPAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLAX	IPAC
Technology	39.7%	12.9%
Financial Services	17.2%	22.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	10.8%
Industrials	9.2%	21.3%
Communication Services	6.5%	5.7%
Basic Materials	4.2%	8.2%
Healthcare	3.3%	5.3%
Energy	3.0%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	4.0%
Utilities	2.1%	1.9%
Real Estate	2.0%	5.5%

Return for Risk

FLAX vs. IPAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAX

FLAX Risk / Return Rank: 89
FLAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
FLAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
FLAX Omega Ratio Rank: 91
FLAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
FLAX Martin Ratio Rank: 87

IPAC

IPAC Risk / Return Rank: 50
IPAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Omega Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

FLAX vs. IPAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Asia ex Japan ETF (FLAX) and iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC). 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.

	FLAX	IPAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.24	1.72	+1.52
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.20	2.45	+1.75
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.32	+0.28
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.81	2.45	+2.36
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	19.00	8.83	+10.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLAX vs. IPAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAX Sharpe Ratio is 3.24, which is higher than the IPAC Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAX and IPAC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLAX	IPAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.24	1.72	+1.52
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.46	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.55	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.45	+0.01

Drawdowns

FLAX vs. IPAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAX drawdown since its inception was -42.51%, which is greater than IPAC's maximum drawdown of -30.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAX and IPAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLAX	IPAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.51%	-30.99%	-11.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.99%	-11.49%	-1.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.29%	-15.45%	-3.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.75%	-29.64%	-9.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.56%	+0.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.42%	-7.48%	-7.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.29%	3.18%	+0.11%

Volatility

FLAX vs. IPAC - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Asia ex Japan ETF (FLAX) has a higher volatility of 8.43% compared to iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) at 4.00%. This indicates that FLAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IPAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLAX	IPAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.43%	4.00%	+4.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.49%	13.09%	+3.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.03%	16.41%	+2.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.02%	16.62%	+2.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.93%	16.58%	+3.35%

FLAX vs. IPAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLAX has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than IPAC's 0.09% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLAX vs. IPAC - Dividend Comparison

FLAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, less than IPAC's 3.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLAX Franklin FTSE Asia ex Japan ETF	1.81%	2.37%	3.12%	2.20%	2.86%	2.38%	1.57%	2.23%	2.35%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	3.80%	4.32%	3.43%	3.16%	2.76%	4.03%	1.68%	3.37%	2.95%	2.98%	2.66%	2.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLAX and IPAC in my portfolio?

FLAX and IPAC have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLAX or IPAC?

FLAX has higher volatility (8.43%) compared to IPAC (4.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAX dropped -42.51% vs IPAC's -30.99%.

Which ETF is better, FLAX or IPAC?

On 5-year performance, FLAX leads with 8.35% vs 7.65% for IPAC. On fees, IPAC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IPAC has been the lower-risk option at 4.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLAX or IPAC?

Over the 5-year period, FLAX has performed better with a 8.35% return vs 7.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLAX or IPAC?

IPAC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLAX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLAX or IPAC?

IPAC has the higher dividend yield at 3.80%, compared with 1.81% for FLAX.

What is the main difference between FLAX and IPAC?

FLAX tracks FTSE Asia ex Japan RIC Capped Index, while IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLAX and 0.09% for IPAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.24 vs 1.72), 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.