FLGB vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FLGB (Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLGB is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE UK RIC Capped Index, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. FLGB is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, FLGB returned 18.30% vs 3.89% for CSHP. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. FLGB charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.

Performance

FLGB vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLGB achieves a 4.44% return, which is significantly higher than CSHP's 1.79% return.

FLGB

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: -1.95%
• YTD: 4.44%
• 6M: 4.63%
• 1Y: 18.30%
• 3Y*: 17.33%
• 5Y*: 10.70%
• 10Y*: —

CSHP

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.23%
• YTD: 1.79%
• 6M: 1.85%
• 1Y: 3.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLGB vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	4.44%	33.73%	-2.01%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.79%	4.10%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between FLGB and CSHP is -0.14, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024	-0.04

Return for Risk

FLGB vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLGB

FLGB Risk / Return Rank: 39
FLGB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
FLGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
FLGB Omega Ratio Rank: 37
FLGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
FLGB Martin Ratio Rank: 42

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

FLGB vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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.

	FLGB	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.27	10.81	-9.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	26.16	-24.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	6.09	-4.87
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.79	48.60	-46.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.17	338.28	-332.11

FLGB vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLGB Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 10.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLGB and CSHP, 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

FLGB vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLGB drawdown since its inception was -42.61%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLGB and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLGB	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.61%	-0.08%	-42.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.26%	-0.08%	-10.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.13%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.32%	-0.08%	-5.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.67%	-0.00%	-6.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.97%	0.01%	+2.96%

Volatility

FLGB vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) has a higher volatility of 4.13% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.16%. This indicates that FLGB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLGB	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.13%	0.16%	+3.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.34%	0.27%	+12.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.46%	0.36%	+14.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.63%	0.41%	+16.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.95%	0.41%	+18.54%

FLGB vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLGB has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than CSHP'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

FLGB vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

FLGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, less than CSHP's 3.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.92%	5.39%	1.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	1.68%	3.50%	4.42%	3.95%	4.23%	2.93%	2.67%	4.30%	3.92%	0.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLGB and CSHP in my portfolio?

FLGB and CSHP have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLGB or CSHP?

FLGB has higher volatility (4.13%) compared to CSHP (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLGB dropped -42.61% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, FLGB or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, FLGB leads with 18.30% vs 3.89% for CSHP. On fees, FLGB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLGB or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, FLGB has performed better with a 18.30% return vs 3.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLGB or CSHP?

FLGB is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for CSHP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLGB or CSHP?

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.92%, compared with 1.68% for FLGB.

What is the main difference between FLGB and CSHP?

FLGB is categorized as Europe Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLGB and 0.20% for CSHP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (10.81 vs 1.27), 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.