FLJH vs. IQSU
FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) and IQSU (IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity 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 IQSU is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the IQ Candriam ESG US Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLJH returned 20.83%/yr vs 12.97%/yr for IQSU. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.09% expense ratio.
Performance
FLJH vs. IQSU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLJH achieves a 20.41% return, which is significantly higher than IQSU's 13.69% return.
FLJH
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 7.06%
- YTD
- 20.41%
- 6M
- 17.72%
- 1Y
- 48.16%
- 3Y*
- 28.28%
- 5Y*
- 20.83%
- 10Y*
- —
IQSU
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 5.78%
- YTD
- 13.69%
- 6M
- 14.19%
- 1Y
- 30.14%
- 3Y*
- 19.93%
- 5Y*
- 12.97%
- 10Y*
- —
FLJH vs. IQSU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF | 20.41% | 25.26% | 25.89% | 36.02% | -2.75% | 12.68% | 10.65% | -2.19% |
IQSU IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF | 13.69% | 14.44% | 16.64% | 32.96% | -22.10% | 30.53% | 28.24% | 1.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLJH and IQSU is 0.54, 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 | 0.54 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2019 | 0.61 |
The correlation between FLJH and IQSU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
FLJH vs. IQSU - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FLJH
IQSU
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Healthcare
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Utilities
Energy
Industrials
FLJH
IQSU
Technology
FLJH
IQSU
Financial Services
FLJH
IQSU
Consumer Cyclical
FLJH
IQSU
Communication Services
FLJH
IQSU
Healthcare
FLJH
IQSU
Basic Materials
FLJH
IQSU
Consumer Defensive
FLJH
IQSU
Real Estate
FLJH
IQSU
Utilities
FLJH
IQSU
Energy
FLJH
IQSU
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FLJH vs. IQSU — Risk / Return Rank
FLJH
IQSU
FLJH vs. IQSU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) and IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF (IQSU). 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.
| FLJH | IQSU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.39 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.48 | 2.71 | +1.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.57 | 11.03 | +6.54 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FLJH | IQSU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.70 | 2.19 | +0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.13 | 0.73 | +0.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.75 | 0.80 | -0.05 |
Drawdowns
FLJH vs. IQSU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLJH drawdown since its inception was -31.51%, roughly equal to the maximum IQSU drawdown of -31.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLJH and IQSU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLJH | IQSU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.51% | -31.29% | -0.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.80% | -11.18% | +0.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.39% | -20.96% | +0.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.39% | -26.76% | +6.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.31% | -5.98% | +0.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.75% | 2.74% | +0.01% |
Volatility
FLJH vs. IQSU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) is 3.25%, while IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF (IQSU) has a volatility of 3.48%. This indicates that FLJH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IQSU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLJH | IQSU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.25% | 3.48% | -0.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.38% | 9.83% | +3.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.97% | 13.85% | +4.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.51% | 17.88% | +0.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.82% | 20.67% | -0.85% |
FLJH vs. IQSU - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both FLJH and IQSU have an expense ratio of 0.09%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
FLJH vs. IQSU - Dividend Comparison
FLJH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.24%, more than IQSU's 0.97% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF | 3.24% | 3.90% | 5.06% | 25.59% | 26.67% | 1.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 5.92% | 0.10% |
IQSU IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF | 0.97% | 1.09% | 1.12% | 1.15% | 1.47% | 1.07% | 0.98% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLJH and IQSU have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IQSU has higher volatility (3.48%) compared to FLJH (3.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLJH dropped -31.51% vs IQSU's -31.29%.
On 5-year performance, FLJH leads with 20.83% vs 12.97% for IQSU. Both ETFs have the same 0.09% expense ratio. On volatility, FLJH has been the lower-risk option at 3.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 20.83% return vs 12.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLJH and IQSU have the same expense ratio: 0.09% per year.
FLJH has the higher dividend yield at 3.24%, compared with 0.97% for IQSU.
FLJH is categorized as Japan Equities, while IQSU is Large Cap Growth Equities. FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index, while IQSU tracks IQ Candriam ESG US Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and New York Life.
FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.19), 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.
Find the right allocation for FLJH and IQSU
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer