FLCH vs. FLJH

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) and FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while FLJH is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLCH returned -6.62%/yr vs 20.99%/yr for FLJH. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLCH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLJH.

Performance

FLCH vs. FLJH - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a -14.03% return, which is significantly lower than FLJH's 21.36% return.

FLCH

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -8.25%
• YTD: -14.03%
• 6M: -14.94%
• 1Y: -4.98%
• 3Y*: 8.15%
• 5Y*: -6.62%
• 10Y*: —

FLJH

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: 2.00%
• YTD: 21.36%
• 6M: 21.87%
• 1Y: 48.60%
• 3Y*: 27.60%
• 5Y*: 20.99%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLCH vs. FLJH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-14.03%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	1.51%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	21.36%	25.26%	25.89%	36.02%	-2.75%	12.68%	10.65%	20.34%	-14.66%	1.26%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and FLJH 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	0.28
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.37

FLCH vs. FLJH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLCH	FLJH
Consumer Cyclical	25.5%	12.7%
Technology	16.8%	19.4%
Industrials	15.5%	25.2%
Financial Services	14.4%	15.8%
Energy	12.6%	0.9%
Basic Materials	6.0%	4.4%
Communication Services	2.1%	8.0%
Healthcare	2.1%	5.5%
Utilities	2.0%	1.2%
Real Estate	1.6%	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	1.2%	4.0%

Return for Risk

FLCH vs. FLJH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 7
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 7
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 7

FLJH

FLJH Risk / Return Rank: 88
FLJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FLJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FLJH Omega Ratio Rank: 88
FLJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FLJH Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. FLJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). 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	FLJH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.26	2.57	-2.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.24	3.40	-3.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.47	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.23	4.52	-4.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.59	17.37	-17.96

FLCH vs. FLJH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is -0.26, which is lower than the FLJH Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and FLJH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FLCH vs. FLJH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, which is greater than FLJH's maximum drawdown of -31.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and FLJH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCH	FLJH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.09%	-31.51%	-30.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.29%	-10.80%	-10.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.43%	-20.39%	-5.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.78%	-20.39%	-35.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-39.40%	-3.15%	-36.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.56%	-5.29%	-25.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.52%	2.81%	+5.71%

Volatility

FLCH vs. FLJH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) is 5.62%, while Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) has a volatility of 7.00%. This indicates that FLCH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLCH	FLJH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.62%	7.00%	-1.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.09%	14.63%	-0.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.27%	18.99%	+0.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.63%	18.71%	+10.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.86%	19.88%	+7.98%

FLCH vs. FLJH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJH's 0.09% 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. FLJH - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, less than FLJH's 1.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	1.81%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	1.84%	3.90%	5.06%	25.59%	26.67%	1.29%	0.00%	0.00%	5.92%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCH and FLJH in my portfolio?

FLCH and FLJH 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 FLJH?

FLJH has higher volatility (7.00%) compared to FLCH (5.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs FLJH's -31.51%.

Which ETF is better, FLCH or FLJH?

On 5-year performance, FLJH leads with 20.99% vs -6.62% for FLCH. On fees, FLJH is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCH or FLJH?

Over the 5-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 20.99% return vs -6.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLCH or FLJH?

FLJH is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLCH.

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

FLJH has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 1.81% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between FLCH and FLJH?

FLCH is categorized as China Equities, while FLJH is Japan Equities. FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.09% for FLJH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs -0.26), 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.