PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLCH vs. ASEA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLCH vs. ASEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a -10.17% return, which is significantly lower than ASEA's 16.39% return.


FLCH

1D
-0.33%
1M
4.49%
6M
-13.97%
YTD
-10.17%
1Y
-6.50%
3Y*
7.74%
5Y*
-3.87%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
0.09%

ASEA

1D
0.43%
1M
7.14%
6M
9.57%
YTD
16.39%
1Y
28.24%
3Y*
15.76%
5Y*
12.90%
10Y*
7.65%
ALL TIME*
5.30%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$593.31K$523.08K$605.79K
$3.91M$4.48M$3.36M

FLCH vs. ASEA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
-10.17%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.87%30.09%24.32%-19.52%1.51%
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
16.39%19.80%9.82%4.88%5.24%4.66%-7.88%8.34%-7.58%8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and ASEA is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.41

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017

0.50

The correlation between FLCH and ASEA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.41 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLCH vs. ASEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLCH
ASEA

Consumer Cyclical

23.2%
0.7%

Financial Services

19.0%
60.3%

Communication Services

16.2%
8.0%

Technology

10.5%

-

Industrials

8.2%
15.6%

Healthcare

6.1%
2.2%

Basic Materials

5.6%
1.5%

Energy

3.4%
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
2.1%

Utilities

2.0%
4.3%

Real Estate

1.6%
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

FLCH
23.2%
ASEA
0.7%

Financial Services

FLCH
19.0%
ASEA
60.3%

Communication Services

FLCH
16.2%
ASEA
8.0%

Technology

FLCH
10.5%
ASEA

-

Industrials

FLCH
8.2%
ASEA
15.6%

Healthcare

FLCH
6.1%
ASEA
2.2%

Basic Materials

FLCH
5.6%
ASEA
1.5%

Energy

FLCH
3.4%
ASEA
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

FLCH
3.2%
ASEA
2.1%

Utilities

FLCH
2.0%
ASEA
4.3%

Real Estate

FLCH
1.6%
ASEA
2.8%

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

FLCH vs. ASEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

ASEA
ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

FLCH vs. ASEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). 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.


FLCHASEADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.96

1.33

-0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.32

3.33

-3.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.68

8.85

-9.53

FLCH vs. ASEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is -0.34, which is lower than the ASEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and ASEA, 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...

Drawdowns

FLCH vs. ASEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, which is greater than ASEA's maximum drawdown of -44.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and ASEA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLCHASEADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.09%

-44.16%

-17.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.48%

-8.28%

-13.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.43%

-22.20%

-3.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-50.38%

-22.20%

-28.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-36.68%

-1.04%

-35.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.62%

-10.58%

-20.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.01%

3.13%

+6.88%

Volatility

FLCH vs. ASEA - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a higher volatility of 5.99% compared to Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) at 3.50%. This indicates that FLCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLCHASEADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.99%

3.50%

+2.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.93%

11.74%

+2.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.83%

14.59%

+5.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.58%

14.72%

+14.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.80%

17.49%

+10.31%

FLCH vs. ASEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ASEA's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLCH vs. ASEA - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, less than ASEA's 3.71% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
3.71%3.95%3.61%3.76%2.23%4.19%2.27%2.51%3.08%1.59%2.78%3.64%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
2.41%2.36%2.87%3.47%2.69%1.48%0.91%1.98%1.92%0.01%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLCH and ASEA have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLCH has higher volatility (5.99%) compared to ASEA (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs ASEA's -44.16%.

On 5-year performance, ASEA leads with 12.90% vs -3.87% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ASEA has performed better with a 12.90% return vs -3.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASEA.

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.71%, compared with 2.41% for FLCH.

FLCH is categorized as China Equities, while ASEA is Asia Pacific Equities. FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while ASEA tracks FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.65% for ASEA.

ASEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs -0.34), 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 FLCH and ASEA

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