FLBL vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLBL (Franklin Liberty Senior Loan ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLBL is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. FLBL is actively managed, while FLCH is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLBL returned 5.21%/yr vs -4.93%/yr for FLCH. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLBL charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

FLBL vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Liberty Senior Loan ETF (FLBL) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLBL achieves a 0.91% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -6.30% return.

FLBL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 0.91%
• 6M: 0.70%
• 1Y: 2.39%
• 3Y*: 7.36%
• 5Y*: 5.21%
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: -6.30%
• 6M: -7.45%
• 1Y: 8.36%
• 3Y*: 10.66%
• 5Y*: -4.93%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLBL vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLBL Franklin Liberty Senior Loan ETF	0.91%	3.59%	8.26%	14.83%	-2.69%	4.35%	2.17%	7.67%	-1.63%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.30%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-22.83%

Correlation

The correlation between FLBL and FLCH is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2018	0.26

FLBL vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLBL	FLCH
Financial Services	2.5%	18.2%
Consumer Cyclical	0.6%	23.4%
Healthcare	0.2%	5.3%
Industrials	0.1%	9.1%
Basic Materials	-	5.5%
Communication Services	-	14.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.3%
Energy	-	3.7%
Real Estate	-	1.7%
Technology	-	12.9%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

FLBL vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLBL

FLBL Risk / Return Rank: 23
FLBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
FLBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FLBL Omega Ratio Rank: 26
FLBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FLBL Martin Ratio Rank: 21

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 15
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

FLBL vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Liberty Senior Loan ETF (FLBL) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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.

	FLBL	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.92	0.44	+0.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.31	0.75	+0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.09	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.75	0.54	+0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.54	1.14	+1.41
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLBL vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLBL Sharpe Ratio is 0.92, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLBL and FLCH, 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

	FLBL	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92	0.44	+0.49
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.36	-0.17	+1.52
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.80	0.02	+0.78

Drawdowns

FLBL vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLBL drawdown since its inception was -19.52%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLBL and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLBL	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.52%	-62.09%	+42.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.18%	-15.52%	+12.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.91%	-25.43%	+21.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-6.80%	-55.78%	+48.98%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.09%	-33.95%	+33.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.00%	-30.53%	+29.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.94%	7.38%	-6.44%

Volatility

FLBL vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Liberty Senior Loan ETF (FLBL) is 0.65%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 6.59%. This indicates that FLBL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLBL	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.65%	6.59%	-5.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.23%	13.67%	-11.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.60%	19.22%	-16.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.86%	29.59%	-25.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.72%	27.91%	-22.19%

FLBL vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLBL has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLBL vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FLBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.58%, more than FLCH's 2.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLBL Franklin Liberty Senior Loan ETF	7.58%	7.24%	8.05%	8.37%	5.53%	3.57%	3.22%	3.97%	2.21%	0.00%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.52%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLBL and FLCH in my portfolio?

FLBL and FLCH have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLBL or FLCH?

FLCH has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to FLBL (0.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLBL dropped -19.52% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, FLBL or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLBL leads with 5.21% vs -4.93% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLBL has been the lower-risk option at 0.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLBL or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLBL has performed better with a 5.21% return vs -4.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLBL or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FLBL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLBL or FLCH?

FLBL has the higher dividend yield at 7.58%, compared with 2.52% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between FLBL and FLCH?

FLBL is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while FLCH is China Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FLBL and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.92 vs 0.44), 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.