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

Performance

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ). 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 -6.60% return, which is significantly higher than BUYZ's -15.59% return.


FLCH

1D
-0.31%
1M
-2.97%
YTD
-6.60%
6M
-7.51%
1Y
5.91%
3Y*
10.54%
5Y*
-4.99%
10Y*

BUYZ

1D
-1.79%
1M
-4.87%
YTD
-15.59%
6M
-16.44%
1Y
-13.70%
3Y*
11.07%
5Y*
-7.01%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
-6.60%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.87%34.46%
BUYZ
Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF
-15.59%8.70%28.25%39.13%-49.81%-19.38%111.45%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and BUYZ is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.37

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

0.37

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

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 2020

0.50

The correlation between FLCH and BUYZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.50 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLCH
BUYZ

Consumer Cyclical

23.4%
41.0%

Financial Services

18.2%
7.8%

Communication Services

14.2%
21.9%

Technology

12.9%
15.9%

Industrials

9.1%
4.7%

Basic Materials

5.5%

-

Healthcare

5.3%
0.7%

Energy

3.7%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.3%
6.1%

Utilities

2.0%

-

Real Estate

1.7%
2.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FLCH
23.4%
BUYZ
41.0%

Financial Services

FLCH
18.2%
BUYZ
7.8%

Communication Services

FLCH
14.2%
BUYZ
21.9%

Technology

FLCH
12.9%
BUYZ
15.9%

Industrials

FLCH
9.1%
BUYZ
4.7%

Basic Materials

FLCH
5.5%
BUYZ

-

Healthcare

FLCH
5.3%
BUYZ
0.7%

Energy

FLCH
3.7%
BUYZ

-

Consumer Defensive

FLCH
3.3%
BUYZ
6.1%

Utilities

FLCH
2.0%
BUYZ

-

Real Estate

FLCH
1.7%
BUYZ
2.5%

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. BUYZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

BUYZ
BUYZ Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
BUYZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUYZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUYZ Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
BUYZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUYZ Martin Ratio Rank: 55
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. BUYZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ). 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.


FLCHBUYZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

0.91

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.38

-0.45

+0.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.80

-0.91

+1.70

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is 0.31, which is higher than the BUYZ Sharpe Ratio of -0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and BUYZ, 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


FLCHBUYZDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.31

-0.62

+0.93

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.17

-0.26

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.02

0.19

-0.17

Drawdowns

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, smaller than the maximum BUYZ drawdown of -68.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and BUYZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLCHBUYZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.09%

-68.04%

+5.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.52%

-30.85%

+15.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.43%

-30.85%

+5.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-55.78%

-63.32%

+7.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-34.16%

-45.52%

+11.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.53%

-38.76%

+8.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.43%

15.13%

-7.70%

Volatility

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a higher volatility of 6.59% compared to Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ) at 5.15%. This indicates that FLCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUYZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLCHBUYZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.59%

5.15%

+1.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.67%

17.16%

-3.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.20%

22.18%

-2.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.59%

27.17%

+2.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.91%

29.91%

-2.00%

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than BUYZ's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLCH vs. BUYZ - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, while BUYZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
BUYZ
Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF
0.00%0.00%0.07%0.00%0.00%0.77%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
2.53%2.36%2.87%3.47%2.69%1.48%0.91%1.98%1.92%0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLCH and BUYZ have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLCH has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to BUYZ (5.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs BUYZ's -68.04%.

On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -4.99% vs -7.01% for BUYZ. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, BUYZ has been the lower-risk option at 5.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FLCH has performed better with a -4.99% return vs -7.01%. 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 0.50% for BUYZ.

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.53%, compared with 0.00% for BUYZ.

FLCH is categorized as China Equities, while BUYZ is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.50% for BUYZ.

FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.31 vs -0.62), 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 BUYZ

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