FLCH vs. FGDL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) and FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while FGDL is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLCH returned 10.66%/yr vs 31.32%/yr for FGDL. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLCH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FGDL.

Performance

FLCH vs. FGDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a -6.30% return, which is significantly lower than FGDL's 2.43% return.

FLCH

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

FGDL

• 1D: -1.09%
• 1M: -1.94%
• YTD: 2.43%
• 6M: 4.89%
• 1Y: 31.70%
• 3Y*: 31.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLCH vs. FGDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.30%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-13.66%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	2.43%	64.15%	27.31%	12.92%	0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and FGDL is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2022	0.27

Return for Risk

FLCH vs. FGDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 15
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 14

FGDL

FGDL Risk / Return Rank: 31
FGDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
FGDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FGDL Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FGDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FGDL Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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. FGDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). 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.

	FLCH	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.44	1.19	-0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.75	1.57	-0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.24	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.54	1.66	-1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.14	4.03	-2.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLCH vs. FGDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is 0.44, which is lower than the FGDL Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and FGDL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLCH	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44	1.19	-0.75
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.17	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.02	1.35	-1.33

Drawdowns

FLCH vs. FGDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, which is greater than FGDL's maximum drawdown of -19.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and FGDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCH	FGDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.09%	-19.23%	-42.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.52%	-19.23%	+3.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.43%	-19.23%	-6.20%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.78%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-33.95%	-18.16%	-15.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.53%	-3.83%	-26.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.38%	7.88%	-0.50%

Volatility

FLCH vs. FGDL - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a higher volatility of 6.59% compared to Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) at 5.61%. This indicates that FLCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FGDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLCH	FGDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.59%	5.61%	+0.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.67%	23.18%	-9.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.22%	26.78%	-7.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.59%	19.03%	+10.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.91%	19.03%	+8.88%

FLCH vs. FGDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than FGDL's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLCH vs. FGDL - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCH and FGDL in my portfolio?

FLCH and FGDL have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLCH or FGDL?

FLCH has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to FGDL (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs FGDL's -19.23%.

Which ETF is better, FLCH or FGDL?

On 3-year performance, FGDL leads with 31.32% vs 10.66% for FLCH. On fees, FGDL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FGDL has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCH or FGDL?

Over the 3-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 31.32% return vs 10.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLCH or FGDL?

FGDL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLCH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLCH or FGDL?

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

What is the main difference between FLCH and FGDL?

FLCH is categorized as China Equities, while FGDL is Precious Metals. FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while FGDL tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.15% for FGDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FGDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 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.