FLJH vs. FLLA

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) and FLLA (Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLJH is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index, while FLLA is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLJH returned 20.82%/yr vs 7.19%/yr for FLLA. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLJH charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLLA.

Performance

FLJH vs. FLLA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) and Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLJH achieves a 20.52% return, which is significantly higher than FLLA's 9.77% return.

FLJH

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 2.90%
• YTD: 20.52%
• 6M: 21.03%
• 1Y: 47.18%
• 3Y*: 27.21%
• 5Y*: 20.82%
• 10Y*: —

FLLA

• 1D: -1.11%
• 1M: -4.81%
• YTD: 9.77%
• 6M: 9.74%
• 1Y: 29.79%
• 3Y*: 10.64%
• 5Y*: 7.19%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLJH vs. FLLA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	20.52%	25.26%	25.89%	36.02%	-2.75%	12.68%	10.65%	20.34%	-14.19%
FLLA Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF	9.77%	51.81%	-26.89%	32.71%	7.78%	-8.93%	-15.08%	19.59%	-2.78%

Correlation

The correlation between FLJH and FLLA is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2018	0.40

FLJH vs. FLLA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLJH	FLLA
Industrials	25.2%	11.4%
Technology	19.4%	0.4%
Financial Services	15.8%	24.4%
Consumer Cyclical	12.7%	2.9%
Communication Services	8.0%	3.9%
Healthcare	5.5%	1.6%
Basic Materials	4.4%	20.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	11.4%
Real Estate	3.0%	3.1%
Utilities	1.2%	9.0%
Energy	0.9%	11.7%

Return for Risk

FLJH vs. FLLA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLJH

FLJH Risk / Return Rank: 86
FLJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
FLJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FLJH Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FLJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
FLJH Martin Ratio Rank: 87

FLLA

FLLA Risk / Return Rank: 43
FLLA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
FLLA Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
FLLA Omega Ratio Rank: 41
FLLA Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
FLLA Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

FLJH vs. FLLA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) and Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA). 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.

	FLJH	FLLA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.50	1.38	+1.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.32	1.92	+1.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.24	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.39	2.18	+2.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.90	6.08	+10.83

FLJH vs. FLLA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLJH Sharpe Ratio is 2.50, which is higher than the FLLA Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLJH and FLLA, 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

FLJH vs. FLLA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLJH drawdown since its inception was -31.51%, smaller than the maximum FLLA drawdown of -53.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLJH and FLLA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLJH	FLLA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.51%	-53.88%	+22.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.80%	-13.75%	+2.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.39%	-27.76%	+7.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.39%	-28.32%	+7.93%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.81%	-13.22%	+9.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.29%	-13.46%	+8.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.80%	4.92%	-2.12%

Volatility

FLJH vs. FLLA - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) has a higher volatility of 7.13% compared to Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) at 5.84%. This indicates that FLJH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLLA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLJH	FLLA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.13%	5.84%	+1.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.64%	17.89%	-3.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.98%	21.73%	-2.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.70%	22.86%	-4.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.88%	27.48%	-7.60%

FLJH vs. FLLA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLJH has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than FLLA's 0.19% 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

FLJH vs. FLLA - Dividend Comparison

FLJH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, less than FLLA's 3.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	1.85%	3.90%	5.06%	25.59%	26.67%	1.29%	0.00%	0.00%	5.92%	0.10%
FLLA Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF	3.53%	6.06%	7.04%	5.45%	9.55%	7.60%	2.12%	3.18%	0.48%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLJH and FLLA in my portfolio?

FLJH and FLLA have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLJH or FLLA?

FLJH has higher volatility (7.13%) compared to FLLA (5.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLJH dropped -31.51% vs FLLA's -53.88%.

Which ETF is better, FLJH or FLLA?

On 5-year performance, FLJH leads with 20.82% vs 7.19% for FLLA. On fees, FLJH is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLLA has been the lower-risk option at 5.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLJH or FLLA?

Over the 5-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 20.82% return vs 7.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLJH or FLLA?

FLJH is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLLA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLJH or FLLA?

FLLA has the higher dividend yield at 3.53%, compared with 1.85% for FLJH.

What is the main difference between FLJH and FLLA?

FLJH is categorized as Japan Equities, while FLLA is Latin America Equities. FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index, while FLLA tracks FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLJH and 0.19% for FLLA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 vs 1.38), 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.