FLGR vs. EWD

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

FLGR (Franklin FTSE Germany ETF) and EWD (iShares MSCI Sweden ETF) are both Europe Equities funds - FLGR tracks the FTSE Germany RIC Capped Index while EWD tracks the MSCI Sweden Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLGR returned 6.78%/yr vs 4.42%/yr for EWD. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLGR charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EWD.

Performance

FLGR vs. EWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Germany ETF (FLGR) and iShares MSCI Sweden ETF (EWD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLGR achieves a -0.81% return, which is significantly lower than EWD's 3.93% return.

FLGR

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: -0.32%
• 6M: -3.22%
• YTD: -0.81%
• 1Y: -0.60%
• 3Y*: 15.21%
• 5Y*: 6.78%
• 10Y*: —

EWD

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -0.94%
• 6M: 0.91%
• YTD: 3.93%
• 1Y: 14.34%
• 3Y*: 14.98%
• 5Y*: 4.42%
• 10Y*: 9.48%

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

FLGR vs. EWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLGR Franklin FTSE Germany ETF	-0.81%	36.67%	10.63%	24.22%	-21.96%	5.40%	12.11%	19.99%	-21.50%	-0.16%
EWD iShares MSCI Sweden ETF	3.93%	36.55%	-3.90%	25.07%	-27.84%	22.84%	22.27%	21.74%	-12.78%	-3.69%

Correlation

The correlation between FLGR and EWD is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.79

The correlation between FLGR and EWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLGR vs. EWD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLGR	EWD
Industrials	29.9%	45.3%
Financial Services	20.5%	24.1%
Technology	16.1%	7.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	2.4%
Communication Services	6.4%	13.2%
Healthcare	5.6%	1.2%
Basic Materials	5.6%	3.1%
Utilities	4.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.4%	2.2%
Real Estate	1.2%	1.1%
Energy	-	-

Return for Risk

FLGR vs. EWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLGR

FLGR Risk / Return Rank: 9
FLGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
FLGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FLGR Omega Ratio Rank: 9
FLGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
FLGR Martin Ratio Rank: 9

EWD

EWD Risk / Return Rank: 25
EWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
EWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
EWD Omega Ratio Rank: 22
EWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
EWD Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

FLGR vs. EWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Germany ETF (FLGR) and iShares MSCI Sweden ETF (EWD). 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.

	FLGR	EWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.03	0.71	-0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.08	1.12	-1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.13	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	0.99	-1.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.12	3.07	-3.19

FLGR vs. EWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLGR Sharpe Ratio is -0.03, which is lower than the EWD Sharpe Ratio of 0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLGR and EWD, 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

FLGR vs. EWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLGR drawdown since its inception was -46.21%, smaller than the maximum EWD drawdown of -75.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLGR and EWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLGR	EWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.21%	-75.40%	+29.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.44%	-14.49%	+0.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.53%	-17.84%	+2.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.69%	-42.33%	-0.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-42.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.45%	-6.50%	+1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.28%	-19.18%	+6.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.17%	4.68%	+0.49%

Volatility

FLGR vs. EWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE Germany ETF (FLGR) is 4.84%, while iShares MSCI Sweden ETF (EWD) has a volatility of 5.28%. This indicates that FLGR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EWD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLGR	EWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.84%	5.28%	-0.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.05%	17.28%	-2.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.63%	20.25%	-2.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.35%	24.02%	-3.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.39%	23.17%	-1.78%

FLGR vs. EWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLGR has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than EWD's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLGR vs. EWD - Dividend Comparison

FLGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.43%, less than EWD's 3.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EWD iShares MSCI Sweden ETF	3.59%	3.27%	1.77%	2.41%	3.68%	5.46%	0.98%	4.15%	5.17%	3.23%	3.91%	4.08%
FLGR Franklin FTSE Germany ETF	3.43%	1.72%	2.40%	2.99%	3.50%	2.67%	2.61%	2.52%	3.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLGR and EWD in my portfolio?

FLGR and EWD have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLGR or EWD?

EWD has higher volatility (5.28%) compared to FLGR (4.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLGR dropped -46.21% vs EWD's -75.40%.

Which ETF is better, FLGR or EWD?

On 5-year performance, FLGR leads with 6.78% vs 4.42% for EWD. On fees, FLGR is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLGR has been the lower-risk option at 4.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLGR or EWD?

Over the 5-year period, FLGR has performed better with a 6.78% return vs 4.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLGR or EWD?

FLGR is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EWD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLGR or EWD?

EWD has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 3.43% for FLGR.

What is the main difference between FLGR and EWD?

FLGR tracks FTSE Germany RIC Capped Index, while EWD tracks MSCI Sweden Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLGR and 0.55% for EWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.71 vs -0.03), 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.