FLCH vs. IPAC
Compare and contrast key facts about Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC).
FLCH and IPAC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FLCH is a passively managed fund by Franklin Templeton that tracks the performance of the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. It was launched on Nov 2, 2017. IPAC is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index. It was launched on Jun 10, 2014. Both FLCH and IPAC are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: FLCH or IPAC.
Key characteristics
| FLCH | IPAC | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 2.87% | 1.41% |
| 1Y Return | -9.09% | 9.77% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -17.97% | 0.00% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -5.82% | 4.60% |
| Sharpe Ratio | -0.38 | 0.71 |
| Daily Std Dev | 24.17% | 13.62% |
| Max Drawdown | -62.09% | -30.99% |
| Current Drawdown | -53.64% | -6.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLCH and IPAC is 0.61, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
FLCH vs. IPAC - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a 2.87% return, which is significantly higher than IPAC's 1.41% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FLCH vs. IPAC - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than IPAC'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%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
FLCH vs. IPAC - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC). 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.
Dividends
FLCH vs. IPAC - Dividend Comparison
FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.37%, more than IPAC's 3.12% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF | 3.37% | 3.47% | 2.69% | 1.48% | 0.91% | 1.98% | 1.92% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF | 3.12% | 3.16% | 2.76% | 4.03% | 1.68% | 3.37% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 2.66% | 2.60% | 0.96% |
Drawdowns
FLCH vs. IPAC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, which is greater than IPAC's maximum drawdown of -30.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and IPAC. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
FLCH vs. IPAC - Volatility Comparison
Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a higher volatility of 5.29% compared to iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) at 4.04%. This indicates that FLCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IPAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.