PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLCH vs. ISVBF
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

FLCH vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison

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

Loading graphics...

FLCH vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
-5.65%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.62%
ISVBF
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF
-6.48%30.64%18.96%-9.28%-23.01%-22.12%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a -5.65% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -6.48% return.


FLCH

1D
0.29%
1M
-4.32%
YTD
-5.65%
6M
-12.56%
1Y
7.43%
3Y*
7.60%
5Y*
-4.85%
10Y*

ISVBF

1D
0.60%
1M
-4.98%
YTD
-6.48%
6M
-13.49%
1Y
6.38%
3Y*
8.03%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

FLCH vs. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

ISVBF
ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
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. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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.


FLCHISVBFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.32

0.20

+0.12

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.59

0.49

+0.10

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.07

+0.01

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.45

0.33

+0.12

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

1.29

0.98

+0.30

FLCH vs. ISVBF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is higher than the ISVBF Sharpe Ratio of 0.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and ISVBF, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLCHISVBFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

0.20

+0.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.02

-0.16

+0.18

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and ISVBF is 0.33, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

FLCH vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.


TTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
2.50%2.36%2.87%3.47%2.69%1.48%0.91%1.98%1.92%0.01%
ISVBF
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

FLCH vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, which is greater than ISVBF's maximum drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and ISVBF.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


FLCHISVBFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.09%

-53.78%

-8.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.65%

-19.18%

+2.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.49%

-24.20%

-9.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.50%

-33.12%

+2.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.02%

6.49%

-0.47%

Volatility

FLCH vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) is 6.44%, while iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a volatility of 17.49%. This indicates that FLCH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


FLCHISVBFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.44%

17.49%

-11.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.92%

24.96%

-11.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.03%

31.35%

-8.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.58%

30.03%

-0.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.06%

30.03%

-1.97%