FLGB vs. EWN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLGB (Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF) and EWN (iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF) are both Europe Equities funds - FLGB tracks the FTSE UK RIC Capped Index while EWN tracks the MSCI Netherlands Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLGB returned 10.74%/yr vs 9.47%/yr for EWN. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLGB charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for EWN.

Performance

FLGB vs. EWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) and iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLGB achieves a 4.59% return, which is significantly lower than EWN's 20.24% return.

FLGB

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: -1.81%
• YTD: 4.59%
• 6M: 4.84%
• 1Y: 18.93%
• 3Y*: 17.39%
• 5Y*: 10.74%
• 10Y*: —

EWN

• 1D: -3.91%
• 1M: 2.60%
• YTD: 20.24%
• 6M: 20.65%
• 1Y: 34.25%
• 3Y*: 21.10%
• 5Y*: 9.47%
• 10Y*: 14.24%

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

FLGB vs. EWN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	4.59%	33.73%	8.77%	14.33%	-6.00%	17.14%	-9.47%	23.23%	-11.60%	1.12%
EWN iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF	20.24%	34.87%	1.67%	22.08%	-24.43%	22.74%	23.23%	32.45%	-15.37%	0.88%

Correlation

The correlation between FLGB and EWN is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.73

The correlation between FLGB and EWN shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (1 year) to 0.73 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLGB vs. EWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLGB	EWN
Financial Services	27.1%	17.9%
Consumer Defensive	13.9%	10.1%
Industrials	13.3%	11.4%
Healthcare	12.9%	2.5%
Energy	10.2%	2.0%
Basic Materials	8.8%	5.1%
Consumer Cyclical	4.8%	5.9%
Utilities	4.7%	-
Communication Services	2.5%	9.6%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.7%
Technology	0.6%	34.6%

Return for Risk

FLGB vs. EWN — 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: 38
FLGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
FLGB Omega Ratio Rank: 37
FLGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
FLGB Martin Ratio Rank: 42

EWN

EWN Risk / Return Rank: 53
EWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
EWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
EWN Omega Ratio Rank: 47
EWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
EWN Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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. EWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) and iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN). 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	EWN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.32	1.64	-0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	2.33	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.29	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.85	2.60	-0.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.43	9.83	-3.40

FLGB vs. EWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLGB Sharpe Ratio is 1.32, which is comparable to the EWN Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLGB and EWN, 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. EWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLGB drawdown since its inception was -42.61%, smaller than the maximum EWN drawdown of -65.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLGB and EWN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLGB	EWN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.61%	-65.22%	+22.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.26%	-13.24%	+2.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.13%	-19.77%	+6.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.90%	-43.57%	+17.67%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-43.57%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.18%	-4.14%	-1.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.67%	-16.32%	+9.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.95%	3.49%	-0.54%

Volatility

FLGB vs. EWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) is 4.15%, while iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN) has a volatility of 8.69%. This indicates that FLGB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLGB	EWN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.15%	8.69%	-4.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.36%	18.07%	-5.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.49%	21.06%	-6.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.63%	23.14%	-6.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.95%	21.23%	-2.28%

FLGB vs. EWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLGB has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than EWN's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLGB vs. EWN - Dividend Comparison

FLGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, less than EWN's 4.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EWN iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF	4.18%	5.03%	2.18%	1.79%	1.98%	1.01%	0.78%	2.57%	2.40%	1.68%	2.71%	1.92%
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%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLGB and EWN in my portfolio?

FLGB and EWN have a correlation of 0.63, 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 EWN?

EWN has higher volatility (8.69%) compared to FLGB (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLGB dropped -42.61% vs EWN's -65.22%.

Which ETF is better, FLGB or EWN?

On 5-year performance, FLGB leads with 10.74% vs 9.47% for EWN. On fees, FLGB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLGB has been the lower-risk option at 4.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLGB or EWN?

Over the 5-year period, FLGB has performed better with a 10.74% return vs 9.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLGB or EWN?

FLGB is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EWN.

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

EWN has the higher dividend yield at 4.18%, compared with 1.68% for FLGB.

What is the main difference between FLGB and EWN?

FLGB tracks FTSE UK RIC Capped Index, while EWN tracks MSCI Netherlands Investable Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLGB and 0.50% for EWN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 vs 1.32), 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.