FLLA vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLLA (Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLLA is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLLA returned 7.79%/yr vs -4.93%/yr for FLCH. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.19% expense ratio.

Performance

FLLA vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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 FLCH's -6.30% return.

FLLA

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

FLCH

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: -6.30%
• 6M: -7.45%
• 1Y: 8.36%
• 3Y*: 10.66%
• 5Y*: -4.93%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLLA vs. FLCH - 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%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.30%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-0.77%

Correlation

The correlation between FLLA and FLCH is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2018	0.42

FLLA vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLLA	FLCH
Financial Services	25.9%	18.2%
Basic Materials	19.3%	5.5%
Energy	11.3%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	11.0%	3.3%
Utilities	9.8%	2.0%
Industrials	9.2%	9.1%
Communication Services	3.9%	14.2%
Real Estate	3.0%	1.7%
Consumer Cyclical	2.8%	23.4%
Healthcare	1.6%	5.3%
Technology	0.4%	12.9%

Return for Risk

FLLA vs. FLCH — 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

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 15
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	0.44	+1.23
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	0.75	+1.49
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.09	+0.20
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	0.54	+2.52
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.72	1.14	+7.58
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. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLLA Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLLA and FLCH, 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	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.66	0.44	+1.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34	-0.17	+0.51
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	0.02	+0.22

Drawdowns

FLLA vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLLA drawdown since its inception was -53.88%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLLA and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLLA	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.88%	-62.09%	+8.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.59%	-15.52%	+3.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.76%	-25.43%	-2.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.32%	-55.78%	+27.46%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.96%	-33.95%	+22.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.48%	-30.53%	+17.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.06%	7.38%	-3.32%

Volatility

FLLA vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) have volatilities of 6.72% and 6.59%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLLA	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.72%	6.59%	+0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.23%	13.67%	+4.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.33%	19.22%	+2.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.81%	29.59%	-6.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.54%	27.91%	-0.37%

FLLA vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLLA and FLCH have an expense ratio of 0.19%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLLA vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FLLA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.38%, more than FLCH's 2.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.52%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLLA and FLCH in my portfolio?

FLLA and FLCH have a correlation of 0.38, 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 FLCH?

FLLA has higher volatility (6.72%) compared to FLCH (6.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLLA dropped -53.88% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, FLLA or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLLA leads with 7.79% vs -4.93% for FLCH. Both ETFs have the same 0.19% expense ratio. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 6.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLLA or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLLA has performed better with a 7.79% return vs -4.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLLA or FLCH?

FLLA and FLCH have the same expense ratio: 0.19% per year.

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

FLLA has the higher dividend yield at 5.38%, compared with 2.52% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between FLLA and FLCH?

FLLA is categorized as Latin America Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. FLLA tracks FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLLA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 0.44), 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.