FLCH vs. XLG

Last updated Jul 26, 2026

FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLCH returned -3.87%/yr vs 13.16%/yr for XLG. Their 0.49 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FLCH charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

FLCH vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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 XLG's 1.55% 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%

XLG

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 0.71%
• 6M: 2.67%
• YTD: 1.55%
• 1Y: 12.21%
• 3Y*: 19.71%
• 5Y*: 13.16%
• 10Y*: 16.25%
• ALL TIME*: 11.26%

*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
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	$60.47M	$91.92M	$104.94M

FLCH vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-10.17%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	1.51%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	1.55%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	30.77%	24.15%	32.04%	-3.59%	3.81%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCH and XLG is 0.48, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.36
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.49

The correlation between FLCH and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (3 years) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLCH vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLCH	XLG
Consumer Cyclical	23.2%	10.0%
Financial Services	19.0%	9.7%
Communication Services	16.2%	13.5%
Technology	10.5%	49.5%
Industrials	8.2%	2.9%
Healthcare	6.1%	6.6%
Basic Materials	5.6%	0.6%
Energy	3.4%	2.2%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	5.0%
Utilities	2.0%	0.8%
Real Estate	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

FLCH vs. XLG — 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

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 34
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 34
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.34	0.88	-1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.36	1.28	-1.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.16	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.32	1.02	-1.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.68	3.29	-3.97

FLCH vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCH Sharpe Ratio is -0.34, which is lower than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCH and XLG, 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. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCH drawdown since its inception was -62.09%, which is greater than XLG's maximum drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCH and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCH	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.09%	-52.39%	-9.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.48%	-12.41%	-9.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.43%	-20.70%	-4.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.38%	-28.02%	-22.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.68%	-6.96%	-29.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.62%	-7.62%	-23.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.01%	3.84%	+6.17%

Volatility

FLCH vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a higher volatility of 5.99% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 4.47%. This indicates that FLCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLCH	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.99%	4.47%	+1.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.93%	11.10%	+2.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.83%	14.39%	+5.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.58%	18.84%	+10.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.80%	18.89%	+8.91%

FLCH vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCH has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLCH vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

FLCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than XLG's 0.66% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.66%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCH and XLG in my portfolio?

FLCH and XLG have a correlation of 0.48, 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 XLG?

FLCH has higher volatility (5.99%) compared to XLG (4.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCH dropped -62.09% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, FLCH or XLG?

On 5-year performance, XLG leads with 13.16% vs -3.87% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCH or XLG?

Over the 5-year period, XLG has performed better with a 13.16% 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 XLG?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XLG.

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

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 0.66% for XLG.

What is the main difference between FLCH and XLG?

FLCH is categorized as China Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLCH and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.88 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.