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

Performance

FLCH vs. ASHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). 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 -6.30% return, which is significantly lower than ASHS's 15.10% return.


FLCH

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

ASHS

1D
-0.17%
1M
-0.19%
YTD
15.10%
6M
23.90%
1Y
57.65%
3Y*
13.41%
5Y*
3.97%
10Y*
3.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLCH vs. ASHS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
-6.30%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.87%30.09%24.32%-19.52%0.91%
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
15.10%39.48%2.68%-10.03%-24.78%17.66%28.22%24.53%-35.91%-2.92%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and ASHS is 0.65, 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

0.65

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.68

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017

0.67

The correlation between FLCH and ASHS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLCH vs. ASHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLCH
ASHS

Consumer Cyclical

23.4%
5.8%

Financial Services

18.2%
6.3%

Communication Services

14.2%
3.2%

Technology

12.9%
29.8%

Industrials

9.1%
19.7%

Basic Materials

5.5%
19.4%

Healthcare

5.3%
7.2%

Energy

3.7%
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.3%
2.6%

Utilities

2.0%
2.2%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.7%

Consumer Cyclical

FLCH
23.4%
ASHS
5.8%

Financial Services

FLCH
18.2%
ASHS
6.3%

Communication Services

FLCH
14.2%
ASHS
3.2%

Technology

FLCH
12.9%
ASHS
29.8%

Industrials

FLCH
9.1%
ASHS
19.7%

Basic Materials

FLCH
5.5%
ASHS
19.4%

Healthcare

FLCH
5.3%
ASHS
7.2%

Energy

FLCH
3.7%
ASHS
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

FLCH
3.3%
ASHS
2.6%

Utilities

FLCH
2.0%
ASHS
2.2%

Real Estate

FLCH
1.7%
ASHS
0.7%

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. ASHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

ASHS
ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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. ASHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). 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.


FLCHASHSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.42

-0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.54

4.13

-3.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.14

13.72

-12.59

FLCH vs. ASHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is 0.44, which is lower than the ASHS Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and ASHS, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLCHASHSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

2.57

-2.13

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.17

0.15

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.02

0.19

-0.17

Drawdowns

FLCH vs. ASHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, smaller than the maximum ASHS drawdown of -69.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and ASHS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLCHASHSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.09%

-69.90%

+7.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.52%

-14.03%

-1.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.43%

-34.13%

+8.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-55.78%

-47.81%

-7.97%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.95%

-33.57%

-0.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.53%

-48.57%

+18.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.38%

4.21%

+3.17%

Volatility

FLCH vs. ASHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) is 6.59%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) has a volatility of 7.33%. This indicates that FLCH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLCHASHSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.59%

7.33%

-0.74%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.67%

17.00%

-3.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.22%

22.59%

-3.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.59%

26.46%

+3.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.91%

25.57%

+2.34%

FLCH vs. ASHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

FLCH vs. ASHS - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, while ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
0.00%0.00%0.69%0.65%1.90%0.76%0.43%0.57%0.00%0.00%0.00%8.34%
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%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLCH and ASHS have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ASHS has higher volatility (7.33%) compared to FLCH (6.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs ASHS's -69.90%.

On 5-year performance, ASHS leads with 3.97% vs -4.93% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 6.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ASHS has performed better with a 3.97% return vs -4.93%. 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 ASHS.

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.

FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.65% for ASHS.

ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLCH and ASHS

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