FLCH vs. KWEB

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds - FLCH tracks the FTSE China RIC Capped Index while KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLCH returned -4.99%/yr vs -13.12%/yr for KWEB. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FLCH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.

Performance

FLCH vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a -11.65% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -22.97% return.

FLCH

• 1D: -1.36%
• 1M: -3.67%
• 6M: -17.28%
• YTD: -11.65%
• 1Y: -1.70%
• 3Y*: 7.36%
• 5Y*: -4.99%
• 10Y*: —

KWEB

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: -0.98%
• 6M: -30.35%
• YTD: -22.97%
• 1Y: -17.81%
• 3Y*: 0.03%
• 5Y*: -13.12%
• 10Y*: -0.41%

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

FLCH vs. KWEB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-11.65%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	1.51%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-22.97%	23.55%	12.01%	-9.06%	-17.24%	-49.01%	58.23%	29.92%	-33.80%	2.57%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and KWEB is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.92

The correlation between FLCH and KWEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLCH vs. KWEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLCH	KWEB
Consumer Cyclical	20.0%	34.3%
Financial Services	18.3%	1.9%
Communication Services	14.9%	27.0%
Technology	13.9%	19.5%
Industrials	11.1%	4.2%
Healthcare	5.7%	5.9%
Basic Materials	5.2%	-
Energy	3.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	3.0%
Utilities	1.8%	-
Real Estate	1.6%	3.9%

Return for Risk

FLCH vs. KWEB — 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: 8
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 8

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 5
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). 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	KWEB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.09	-0.65	+0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.01	-0.81	+0.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	0.91	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.08	-0.43	+0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.18	-0.87	+0.69

FLCH vs. KWEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is -0.09, which is higher than the KWEB Sharpe Ratio of -0.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and KWEB, 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. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and KWEB.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCH	KWEB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.09%	-80.92%	+18.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.48%	-41.62%	+20.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.43%	-41.62%	+16.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-53.29%	-68.90%	+15.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-80.92%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.72%	-69.66%	+31.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.60%	-35.51%	+4.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.46%	20.57%	-11.11%

Volatility

FLCH vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) is 5.45%, while KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a volatility of 7.71%. This indicates that FLCH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KWEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLCH	KWEB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.45%	7.71%	-2.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.87%	20.51%	-6.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.59%	27.59%	-8.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.57%	47.58%	-18.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.81%	40.01%	-12.20%

FLCH vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLCH vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, less than KWEB's 7.99% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.45%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	7.99%	6.16%	3.51%	1.71%	0.00%	7.07%	0.29%	0.08%	3.40%	0.58%	1.19%	0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCH and KWEB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, FLCH and KWEB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FLCH or KWEB?

KWEB has higher volatility (7.71%) compared to FLCH (5.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs KWEB's -80.92%.

Which ETF is better, FLCH or KWEB?

On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -4.99% vs -13.12% for KWEB. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCH or KWEB?

Over the 5-year period, FLCH has performed better with a -4.99% return vs -13.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLCH or KWEB?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for KWEB.

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

KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 7.99%, compared with 2.45% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between FLCH and KWEB?

FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.70% for KWEB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.09 vs -0.65), 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.