FLCH vs. FLLA

Last updated Jul 26, 2026

FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) and FLLA (Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while FLLA is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLCH returned -3.87%/yr vs 9.29%/yr for FLLA. Their 0.42 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. Both charge a 0.19% expense ratio.

Performance

FLCH vs. FLLA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a -10.17% return, which is significantly lower than FLLA's 14.21% return.

FLCH

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 4.49%
• 6M: -13.97%
• YTD: -10.17%
• 1Y: -6.50%
• 3Y*: 7.74%
• 5Y*: -3.87%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 0.09%

FLLA

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: 2.56%
• 6M: -0.13%
• YTD: 14.21%
• 1Y: 37.04%
• 3Y*: 10.65%
• 5Y*: 9.29%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.48%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	$3.91M	$4.48M	$3.36M
FLLA Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF	$721.85K	$757.25K	$1.17M

FLCH vs. FLLA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-10.17%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-0.38%
FLLA Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF	14.21%	51.81%	-26.89%	32.71%	7.78%	-8.93%	-15.08%	19.59%	-2.78%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and FLLA is 0.41, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.45
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2018	0.42

FLCH vs. FLLA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLCH	FLLA
Consumer Cyclical	23.2%	2.8%
Financial Services	19.0%	27.0%
Communication Services	16.2%	3.8%
Technology	10.5%	0.4%
Industrials	8.2%	9.6%
Healthcare	6.1%	0.8%
Basic Materials	5.6%	18.1%
Energy	3.4%	11.2%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	11.2%
Utilities	2.0%	9.9%
Real Estate	1.6%	3.0%

Return for Risk

FLCH vs. FLLA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 8
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 7
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 8

FLLA

FLLA Risk / Return Rank: 69
FLLA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
FLLA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
FLLA Omega Ratio Rank: 71
FLLA Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
FLLA Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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. FLLA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA). 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	FLLA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.34	1.70	-2.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.36	2.29	-2.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.30	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.32	2.67	-2.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.68	6.62	-7.30

FLCH vs. FLLA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is -0.34, which is lower than the FLLA Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and FLLA, 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. FLLA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, which is greater than FLLA's maximum drawdown of -53.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and FLLA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCH	FLLA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.09%	-53.88%	-8.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.48%	-13.75%	-7.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.43%	-27.76%	+2.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.38%	-28.32%	-22.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.68%	-9.71%	-26.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.62%	-13.43%	-17.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.01%	5.53%	+4.48%

Volatility

FLCH vs. FLLA - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a higher volatility of 5.99% compared to Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) at 4.59%. This indicates that FLCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLLA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLCH	FLLA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.99%	4.59%	+1.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.93%	17.69%	-3.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.83%	21.61%	-1.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.58%	22.74%	+6.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.80%	27.39%	+0.41%

FLCH vs. FLLA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLCH and FLLA have an expense ratio of 0.19%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLCH vs. FLLA - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, less than FLLA's 4.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.41%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
FLLA Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF	4.80%	6.06%	7.04%	5.45%	9.55%	7.60%	2.12%	3.18%	0.48%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCH and FLLA in my portfolio?

FLCH and FLLA have a correlation of 0.41, 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 FLLA?

FLCH has higher volatility (5.99%) compared to FLLA (4.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs FLLA's -53.88%.

Which ETF is better, FLCH or FLLA?

On 5-year performance, FLLA leads with 9.29% vs -3.87% for FLCH. Both ETFs have the same 0.19% expense ratio. On volatility, FLLA has been the lower-risk option at 4.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCH or FLLA?

Over the 5-year period, FLLA has performed better with a 9.29% return vs -3.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLCH or FLLA?

FLCH and FLLA have the same expense ratio: 0.19% per year.

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

FLLA has the higher dividend yield at 4.80%, compared with 2.41% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between FLCH and FLLA?

FLCH is categorized as China Equities, while FLLA is Latin America Equities. FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while FLLA tracks FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLLA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs -0.34), 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.