PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FLCH vs. ECNS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FLCH vs. ECNS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) and ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while ECNS is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI China Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLCH returned -5.91%/yr vs -8.08%/yr for ECNS. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FLCH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ECNS.

Performance

FLCH vs. ECNS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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 -12.17% return, which is significantly lower than ECNS's -9.88% return.

FLCH

1D
-1.88%
1M
-5.67%
YTD
-12.17%
6M
-12.94%
1Y
-0.05%
3Y*
8.98%
5Y*
-5.91%
10Y*
—

ECNS

1D
-1.92%
1M
-6.71%
YTD
-9.88%
6M
-11.17%
1Y
1.85%
3Y*
6.91%
5Y*
-8.08%
10Y*
1.55%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLCH vs. ECNS - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF		-12.17%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.87%30.09%24.32%-19.52%1.51%
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		-9.88%36.49%5.64%-23.05%-24.58%2.11%25.42%7.84%-18.27%-0.33%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and ECNS is 0.77, 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

0.77

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

0.85

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

0.86

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

0.84

The correlation between FLCH and ECNS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLCH vs. ECNS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
FLCH
ECNS

Consumer Cyclical

25.5%
9.3%

Technology

16.8%
12.6%

Industrials

15.5%
18.0%

Financial Services

14.4%
4.6%

Energy

12.6%
3.2%

Basic Materials

6.0%
8.4%

Communication Services

2.1%
6.5%

Healthcare

2.1%
19.9%

Utilities

2.0%
2.4%

Real Estate

1.6%
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

1.2%
4.2%

Consumer Cyclical

FLCH
25.5%
ECNS
9.3%

Technology

FLCH
16.8%
ECNS
12.6%

Industrials

FLCH
15.5%
ECNS
18.0%

Financial Services

FLCH
14.4%
ECNS
4.6%

Energy

FLCH
12.6%
ECNS
3.2%

Basic Materials

FLCH
6.0%
ECNS
8.4%

Communication Services

FLCH
2.1%
ECNS
6.5%

Healthcare

FLCH
2.1%
ECNS
19.9%

Utilities

FLCH
2.0%
ECNS
2.4%

Real Estate

FLCH
1.6%
ECNS
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

FLCH
1.2%
ECNS
4.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Franklin FTSE China ETF

iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF

Often compared with FLCH:
FLCH vs. MCHIFLCH vs. CXSEFLCH vs. CNYAFLCH vs. KWEBFLCH vs. IPACFLCH vs. ASHXFLCH vs. VWO
Often compared with ECNS:
ECNS vs. ASHSECNS vs. MCHIECNS vs. CNXTECNS vs. DFAEECNS vs. CQQQECNS vs. EWTECNS vs. SCHF

Return for Risk

FLCH vs. ECNS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
ECNS
ECNS Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
ECNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECNS Omega Ratio Rank: 1010
Omega Ratio Rank
ECNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECNS Martin Ratio Rank: 99
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. ECNS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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.

FLCHECNSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.00
0.09

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.13
0.26

-0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.02

1.03

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.00

0.08

-0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.01

0.18

-0.19

FLCH vs. ECNS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is -0.00, which is lower than the ECNS Sharpe Ratio of 0.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and ECNS, 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. ECNS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, roughly equal to the maximum ECNS drawdown of -63.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and ECNS.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FLCHECNSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.09%

-63.43%

+1.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.59%

-22.70%

+3.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.43%

-31.72%

+6.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-55.78%

-59.61%

+3.83%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-63.43%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-38.09%

-41.99%

+3.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.55%

-29.41%

-1.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.32%

10.24%

-1.92%

Volatility

FLCH vs. ECNS - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) have volatilities of 5.65% and 5.69%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FLCHECNSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.65%

5.69%

-0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.07%

13.59%

+0.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.43%

20.68%

-1.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.63%

29.44%

+0.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.86%

25.90%

+1.96%

FLCH vs. ECNS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ECNS's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLCH vs. ECNS - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, less than ECNS's 6.53% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		6.53%6.20%5.98%4.89%3.54%4.87%3.59%3.23%6.16%3.18%4.29%3.58%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF		1.77%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 ECNS have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ECNS has higher volatility (5.69%) compared to FLCH (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs ECNS's -63.43%.

On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -5.91% vs -8.08% for ECNS. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. Their volatility is very similar. 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 -5.91% return vs -8.08%. 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 0.59% for ECNS.

ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.53%, compared with 1.77% for FLCH.

FLCH is categorized as China Equities, while ECNS is Asia Pacific Equities. FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.59% for ECNS.

ECNS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.09 vs -0.00), 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 ECNS

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