FLCH vs. ASEA
FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) and ASEA (Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while ASEA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLCH returned -3.87%/yr vs 12.90%/yr for ASEA. Their 0.50 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FLCH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASEA.
Performance
FLCH vs. ASEA - Performance Comparison
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%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. 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) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Financial Services
Communication Services
Technology
-
Industrials
Healthcare
Basic Materials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
FLCH
ASEA
Financial Services
FLCH
ASEA
Communication Services
FLCH
ASEA
Technology
FLCH
ASEA
-
Industrials
FLCH
ASEA
Healthcare
FLCH
ASEA
Basic Materials
FLCH
ASEA
Energy
FLCH
ASEA
Consumer Defensive
FLCH
ASEA
Utilities
FLCH
ASEA
Real Estate
FLCH
ASEA
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
FLCH
ASEA
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.
| FLCH | ASEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| FLCH | ASEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.68% | -1.04% | -35.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.62% | -10.58% | -20.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| FLCH | ASEA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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