FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L
FLQA.L (Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF) and LCCN.L (Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc) are both China Equities funds - FLQA.L tracks the Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF while LCCN.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLQA.L returned 12.63%/yr vs -4.23%/yr for LCCN.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLQA.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for LCCN.L.
Performance
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLQA.L achieves a 32.52% return, which is significantly higher than LCCN.L's -8.72% return.
FLQA.L
- 1D
- -1.74%
- 1M
- -9.13%
- 6M
- 26.58%
- YTD
- 32.52%
- 1Y
- 52.26%
- 3Y*
- 25.15%
- 5Y*
- 12.63%
- 10Y*
- —
LCCN.L
- 1D
- 2.05%
- 1M
- -0.85%
- 6M
- -13.44%
- YTD
- -8.72%
- 1Y
- -0.57%
- 3Y*
- 8.66%
- 5Y*
- -4.23%
- 10Y*
- —
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLQA.L Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF | 32.52% | 29.84% | 7.76% | 12.02% | -12.93% | 4.57% | 6.71% | 9.75% | -5.84% |
LCCN.L Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc | -8.72% | 31.99% | 19.37% | -11.59% | -22.21% | -21.87% | 29.79% | 21.86% | -10.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLQA.L and LCCN.L is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018 | 0.69 |
Over the past year, the correlation between FLQA.L and LCCN.L has dropped to 0.47 - well below their long-term average of 0.69, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L — Risk / Return Rank
FLQA.L
LCCN.L
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF (FLQA.L) and Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L). 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.
| FLQA.L | LCCN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.01 | +0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.75 | -0.03 | +3.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.86 | -0.05 | +11.92 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLQA.L drawdown since its inception was -29.21%, smaller than the maximum LCCN.L drawdown of -62.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLQA.L and LCCN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLQA.L | LCCN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.21% | -62.38% | +33.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.77% | -22.74% | +8.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.19% | -25.53% | +3.34% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.38% | -53.18% | +27.80% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.64% | -35.27% | +22.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.22% | -29.90% | +22.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.36% | 10.49% | -6.13% |
Volatility
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L - Volatility Comparison
Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF (FLQA.L) has a higher volatility of 11.18% compared to Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) at 5.49%. This indicates that FLQA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LCCN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLQA.L | LCCN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.18% | 5.49% | +5.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.99% | 15.17% | +7.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.11% | 20.46% | +4.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.74% | 29.35% | -11.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.52% | 27.61% | -9.09% |
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLQA.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than LCCN.L's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLQA.L vs. LCCN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither FLQA.L nor LCCN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FLQA.L and LCCN.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FLQA.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FLQA.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for LCCN.L.
FLQA.L tracks Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF, while LCCN.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Franklin and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for FLQA.L and 0.29% for LCCN.L.
Find the right allocation for FLQA.L and LCCN.L
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