FLLA vs. ASHR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLLA (Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF) and ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FLLA is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index, while ASHR is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 300 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLLA returned 7.79%/yr vs -1.24%/yr for ASHR. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLLA charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHR.

Performance

FLLA vs. ASHR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLLA achieves a 12.62% return, which is significantly higher than ASHR's 10.11% return.

FLLA

• 1D: -2.69%
• 1M: -5.24%
• YTD: 12.62%
• 6M: 11.76%
• 1Y: 35.32%
• 3Y*: 14.00%
• 5Y*: 7.79%
• 10Y*: —

ASHR

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 3.02%
• YTD: 10.11%
• 6M: 13.67%
• 1Y: 39.07%
• 3Y*: 12.07%
• 5Y*: -1.24%
• 10Y*: 5.38%

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

FLLA vs. ASHR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLLA Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF	12.62%	51.81%	-26.89%	32.71%	7.78%	-8.93%	-15.08%	19.59%	-2.78%
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund	10.11%	27.02%	11.95%	-12.52%	-27.52%	-1.57%	36.29%	36.50%	-4.01%

Correlation

The correlation between FLLA and ASHR is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2018	0.35

FLLA vs. ASHR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLLA	ASHR
Financial Services	25.9%	20.4%
Basic Materials	19.3%	10.7%
Energy	11.3%	2.7%
Consumer Defensive	11.0%	7.3%
Utilities	9.8%	3.0%
Industrials	9.2%	16.7%
Communication Services	3.9%	0.8%
Real Estate	3.0%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	2.8%	6.7%
Healthcare	1.6%	4.9%
Technology	0.4%	26.3%

Return for Risk

FLLA vs. ASHR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLLA

FLLA Risk / Return Rank: 50
FLLA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
FLLA Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
FLLA Omega Ratio Rank: 45
FLLA Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
FLLA Martin Ratio Rank: 51

ASHR

ASHR Risk / Return Rank: 75
ASHR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
ASHR Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
ASHR Omega Ratio Rank: 67
ASHR Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
ASHR Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

FLLA vs. ASHR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR). 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.

	FLLA	ASHR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	2.33	-0.67
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	3.23	-1.00
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.41	-0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	5.10	-2.04
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.72	15.76	-7.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLLA vs. ASHR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLLA Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the ASHR Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLLA and ASHR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLLA	ASHR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.66	2.33	-0.67
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34	-0.05	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.22	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	0.23	+0.01

Drawdowns

FLLA vs. ASHR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLLA drawdown since its inception was -53.88%, which is greater than ASHR's maximum drawdown of -51.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLLA and ASHR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLLA	ASHR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.88%	-51.30%	-2.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.59%	-7.69%	-3.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.76%	-33.12%	+5.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.32%	-45.76%	+17.44%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-51.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.96%	-15.63%	+4.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.48%	-29.18%	+15.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.06%	2.49%	+1.57%

Volatility

FLLA vs. ASHR - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) has a higher volatility of 6.72% compared to Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR) at 5.87%. This indicates that FLLA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASHR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLLA	ASHR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.72%	5.87%	+0.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.23%	11.53%	+6.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.33%	16.84%	+4.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.81%	23.89%	-1.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.54%	24.06%	+3.48%

FLLA vs. ASHR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLLA has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ASHR's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLLA vs. ASHR - Dividend Comparison

FLLA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.38%, more than ASHR's 2.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund	2.10%	2.31%	1.13%	2.48%	1.13%	0.88%	0.81%	0.98%	1.32%	0.84%	0.73%	30.13%
FLLA Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF	5.38%	6.06%	7.04%	5.45%	9.55%	7.60%	2.12%	3.18%	0.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLLA and ASHR in my portfolio?

FLLA and ASHR have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLLA or ASHR?

FLLA has higher volatility (6.72%) compared to ASHR (5.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLLA dropped -53.88% vs ASHR's -51.30%.

Which ETF is better, FLLA or ASHR?

On 5-year performance, FLLA leads with 7.79% vs -1.24% for ASHR. On fees, FLLA is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ASHR has been the lower-risk option at 5.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLLA or ASHR?

Over the 5-year period, FLLA has performed better with a 7.79% return vs -1.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLLA or ASHR?

FLLA is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHR.

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

FLLA has the higher dividend yield at 5.38%, compared with 2.10% for ASHR.

What is the main difference between FLLA and ASHR?

FLLA is categorized as Latin America Equities, while ASHR is China Equities. FLLA tracks FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index, while ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLLA and 0.65% for ASHR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.66), 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.