FLMX vs. ILF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLMX (Franklin FTSE Mexico ETF) and ILF (iShares Latin American 40 ETF) are both Latin America Equities funds - FLMX tracks the FTSE Mexico RIC Capped Index while ILF tracks the S&P Latin America 40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLMX returned 12.58%/yr vs 8.24%/yr for ILF. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLMX charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for ILF.

Performance

FLMX vs. ILF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Mexico ETF (FLMX) and iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLMX achieves a 9.45% return, which is significantly lower than ILF's 11.49% return.

FLMX

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -2.53%
• YTD: 9.45%
• 6M: 6.90%
• 1Y: 33.21%
• 3Y*: 10.20%
• 5Y*: 12.58%
• 10Y*: —

ILF

• 1D: -1.38%
• 1M: -2.81%
• YTD: 11.49%
• 6M: 10.99%
• 1Y: 38.85%
• 3Y*: 12.99%
• 5Y*: 8.24%
• 10Y*: 8.34%

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

FLMX vs. ILF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLMX Franklin FTSE Mexico ETF	9.45%	53.62%	-28.45%	39.35%	2.40%	19.58%	-3.50%	12.13%	-13.32%	-0.96%
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF	11.49%	52.65%	-23.11%	33.14%	9.81%	-13.59%	-11.71%	13.77%	-6.85%	3.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FLMX and ILF is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.66

The correlation between FLMX and ILF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLMX vs. ILF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLMX	ILF
Consumer Defensive	28.2%	9.5%
Basic Materials	24.4%	24.0%
Financial Services	18.6%	33.3%
Industrials	11.6%	9.3%
Communication Services	9.3%	4.4%
Real Estate	6.6%	0.8%
Consumer Cyclical	1.3%	1.3%
Energy	-	12.0%
Healthcare	-	1.1%
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	4.4%

Return for Risk

FLMX vs. ILF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLMX

FLMX Risk / Return Rank: 48
FLMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
FLMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
FLMX Omega Ratio Rank: 44
FLMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
FLMX Martin Ratio Rank: 50

ILF

ILF Risk / Return Rank: 52
ILF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
ILF Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
ILF Omega Ratio Rank: 49
ILF Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
ILF Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

FLMX vs. ILF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Mexico ETF (FLMX) and iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF). 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.

	FLMX	ILF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	1.75	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.19	2.36	-0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.30	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.35	2.80	-0.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.16	8.13	+0.03

FLMX vs. ILF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLMX Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the ILF Sharpe Ratio of 1.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLMX and ILF, 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

FLMX vs. ILF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLMX drawdown since its inception was -50.05%, smaller than the maximum ILF drawdown of -67.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLMX and ILF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLMX	ILF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.05%	-67.48%	+17.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.18%	-13.94%	-0.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.72%	-23.97%	-7.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.72%	-29.71%	-2.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-57.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.97%	-10.90%	+3.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.00%	-23.91%	+11.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.08%	4.79%	-0.71%

Volatility

FLMX vs. ILF - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Mexico ETF (FLMX) and iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) have volatilities of 6.82% and 6.53%, 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

	FLMX	ILF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.82%	6.53%	+0.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.06%	18.37%	-0.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.57%	22.26%	-0.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.08%	23.29%	-1.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.67%	28.35%	-3.68%

FLMX vs. ILF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLMX has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ILF's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLMX vs. ILF - Dividend Comparison

FLMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.89%, less than ILF's 3.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLMX Franklin FTSE Mexico ETF	1.89%	3.99%	3.31%	2.90%	4.22%	3.15%	1.48%	2.95%	2.51%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF	3.52%	4.39%	7.44%	4.61%	12.72%	8.47%	1.88%	3.09%	3.12%	1.80%	1.59%	3.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLMX and ILF in my portfolio?

FLMX and ILF have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLMX or ILF?

FLMX has higher volatility (6.82%) compared to ILF (6.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLMX dropped -50.05% vs ILF's -67.48%.

Which ETF is better, FLMX or ILF?

On 5-year performance, FLMX leads with 12.58% vs 8.24% for ILF. On fees, FLMX is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ILF has been the lower-risk option at 6.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLMX or ILF?

Over the 5-year period, FLMX has performed better with a 12.58% return vs 8.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLMX or ILF?

FLMX is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for ILF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLMX or ILF?

ILF has the higher dividend yield at 3.52%, compared with 1.89% for FLMX.

What is the main difference between FLMX and ILF?

FLMX tracks FTSE Mexico RIC Capped Index, while ILF tracks S&P Latin America 40 Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLMX and 0.48% for ILF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.55), 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.