FLCB vs. FLIN

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FLCB (Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF) and FLIN (Franklin FTSE India ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLCB is a Intermediate Core Bond fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while FLIN is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE India RIC Capped Index. FLCB is actively managed, while FLIN is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLCB returned 0.12%/yr vs 4.79%/yr for FLIN. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLCB charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLIN.

Performance

FLCB vs. FLIN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF (FLCB) and Franklin FTSE India ETF (FLIN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCB achieves a 1.12% return, which is significantly higher than FLIN's -7.84% return.

FLCB

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 1.01%
• YTD: 1.12%
• 6M: 1.00%
• 1Y: 4.58%
• 3Y*: 4.14%
• 5Y*: 0.12%
• 10Y*: —

FLIN

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: 2.23%
• YTD: -7.84%
• 6M: -7.74%
• 1Y: -9.16%
• 3Y*: 6.64%
• 5Y*: 4.79%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLCB vs. FLIN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FLCB Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF	1.12%	6.95%	1.59%	5.72%	-13.54%	-1.73%	7.66%	0.65%
FLIN Franklin FTSE India ETF	-7.84%	2.40%	10.33%	20.58%	-7.96%	24.96%	14.50%	9.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCB and FLIN is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.18
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2019	0.08

Over the past year, FLCB and FLIN have become more correlated (0.29) than their long-term average of 0.08, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

FLCB vs. FLIN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCB

FLCB Risk / Return Rank: 35
FLCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
FLCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
FLCB Omega Ratio Rank: 34
FLCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
FLCB Martin Ratio Rank: 34

FLIN

FLIN Risk / Return Rank: 5
FLIN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
FLIN Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FLIN Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FLIN Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
FLIN 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.

FLCB vs. FLIN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF (FLCB) and Franklin FTSE India ETF (FLIN). 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.

	FLCB	FLIN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.21	-0.61	+1.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.79	-0.79	+2.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	0.91	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.62	-0.49	+2.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.62	-1.13	+5.74

FLCB vs. FLIN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCB Sharpe Ratio is 1.21, which is higher than the FLIN Sharpe Ratio of -0.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCB and FLIN, 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

FLCB vs. FLIN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCB drawdown since its inception was -18.82%, smaller than the maximum FLIN drawdown of -41.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCB and FLIN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCB	FLIN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.82%	-41.90%	+23.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.85%	-18.79%	+15.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.16%	-22.85%	+16.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.48%	-22.85%	+4.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.54%	-15.15%	+13.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.58%	-8.07%	+1.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.99%	8.16%	-7.17%

Volatility

FLCB vs. FLIN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF (FLCB) is 1.09%, while Franklin FTSE India ETF (FLIN) has a volatility of 4.66%. This indicates that FLCB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLIN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLCB	FLIN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.09%	4.66%	-3.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.86%	13.12%	-10.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.81%	15.17%	-11.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.76%	15.79%	-10.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.49%	20.42%	-14.93%

FLCB vs. FLIN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCB has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FLIN's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLCB vs. FLIN - Dividend Comparison

FLCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, more than FLIN's 0.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLCB Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF	4.27%	4.19%	4.10%	3.40%	2.73%	2.28%	3.24%	0.73%	0.00%
FLIN Franklin FTSE India ETF	0.43%	0.56%	1.58%	0.73%	0.73%	2.26%	0.68%	0.90%	0.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCB and FLIN in my portfolio?

FLCB and FLIN have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLCB or FLIN?

FLIN has higher volatility (4.66%) compared to FLCB (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCB dropped -18.82% vs FLIN's -41.90%.

Which ETF is better, FLCB or FLIN?

On 5-year performance, FLIN leads with 4.79% vs 0.12% for FLCB. On fees, FLCB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLCB has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCB or FLIN?

Over the 5-year period, FLIN has performed better with a 4.79% return vs 0.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLCB or FLIN?

FLCB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLIN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLCB or FLIN?

FLCB has the higher dividend yield at 4.27%, compared with 0.43% for FLIN.

What is the main difference between FLCB and FLIN?

FLCB is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while FLIN is Asia Pacific Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLCB and 0.19% for FLIN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLCB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.21 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.