FLCH vs. KWEB
Compare and contrast key facts about Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB).
FLCH and KWEB 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. KWEB is a passively managed fund by CICC that tracks the performance of the CSI Overseas China Internet. It was launched on Jul 31, 2013. Both FLCH and KWEB 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 KWEB.
Key characteristics
| FLCH | KWEB | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 19.20% | 13.52% |
| 1Y Return | 16.20% | 14.62% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -9.73% | -13.68% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -1.58% | -5.99% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.56 | 0.41 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.01 | 0.90 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.13 | 1.11 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.29 | 0.21 |
| Martin Ratio | 1.68 | 1.30 |
| Ulcer Index | 10.18% | 12.37% |
| Daily Std Dev | 30.86% | 38.70% |
| Max Drawdown | -62.09% | -80.92% |
| Current Drawdown | -46.28% | -67.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLCH and KWEB is 0.92, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
FLCH vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, FLCH achieves a 19.20% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's 13.52% 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. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.76% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
FLCH vs. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Performance 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.
Dividends
FLCH vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison
FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.57%, more than KWEB's 1.50% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF | 2.57% | 3.46% | 2.69% | 1.49% | 0.91% | 1.98% | 1.93% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | 1.50% | 1.71% | 0.00% | 7.07% | 0.29% | 0.08% | 3.40% | 0.58% | 1.19% | 0.46% | 0.89% | 0.31% |
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. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
FLCH vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) is 12.33%, while KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a volatility of 14.53%. 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.