FLQM vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLQM (Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLQM is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity Index, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLQM returned 6.88%/yr vs -5.91%/yr for FLCH. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLQM charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

FLQM vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF (FLQM) 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, FLQM achieves a 1.78% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -12.17% return.

FLQM

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 0.46%
• YTD: 1.78%
• 6M: 0.64%
• 1Y: 7.43%
• 3Y*: 11.10%
• 5Y*: 6.88%
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: -5.67%
• YTD: -12.17%
• 6M: -12.94%
• 1Y: -0.05%
• 3Y*: 8.98%
• 5Y*: -5.91%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLQM vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLQM Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF	1.78%	5.16%	14.32%	17.47%	-12.95%	28.76%	15.50%	28.56%	-4.24%	8.23%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-12.17%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between FLQM and FLCH is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.32
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.38

The correlation between FLQM and FLCH shifts across timeframes, from 0.27 (1 year) to 0.38 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLQM vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLQM	FLCH
Consumer Cyclical	18.8%	25.5%
Industrials	17.9%	15.5%
Financial Services	15.1%	14.4%
Technology	13.4%	16.8%
Healthcare	12.3%	2.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	1.2%
Energy	5.3%	12.6%
Real Estate	4.3%	1.6%
Communication Services	3.3%	2.1%
Utilities	1.6%	2.0%
Basic Materials	0.2%	6.0%

Return for Risk

FLQM vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLQM

FLQM Risk / Return Rank: 20
FLQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
FLQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FLQM Omega Ratio Rank: 17
FLQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FLQM Martin Ratio Rank: 23

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 9
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

FLQM vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF (FLQM) 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.

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.

	FLQM	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.61	-0.00	+0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.99	0.13	+0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.02	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.99	-0.00	+0.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.72	-0.01	+2.73

FLQM vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLQM Sharpe Ratio is 0.61, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of -0.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLQM 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.

Drawdowns

FLQM vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLQM drawdown since its inception was -37.26%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLQM and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLQM	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.26%	-62.09%	+24.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.57%	-19.59%	+12.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.70%	-25.43%	+5.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.51%	-55.78%	+33.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.30%	-38.09%	+35.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.90%	-30.55%	+25.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.74%	8.32%	-5.58%

Volatility

FLQM vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF (FLQM) is 3.13%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 5.65%. This indicates that FLQM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLQM	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.13%	5.65%	-2.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.54%	14.07%	-5.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.23%	19.43%	-7.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.40%	29.63%	-13.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.45%	27.86%	-9.41%

FLQM vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLQM has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLQM vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FLQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, less than FLCH's 1.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	1.77%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
FLQM Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF	1.50%	1.49%	1.28%	1.27%	1.33%	1.05%	1.10%	1.37%	1.42%	1.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLQM and FLCH in my portfolio?

FLQM and FLCH have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLQM or FLCH?

FLCH has higher volatility (5.65%) compared to FLQM (3.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLQM dropped -37.26% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, FLQM or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLQM leads with 6.88% vs -5.91% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLQM has been the lower-risk option at 3.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLQM or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLQM has performed better with a 6.88% return vs -5.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLQM or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for FLQM.

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

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 1.50% for FLQM.

What is the main difference between FLQM and FLCH?

FLQM is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. FLQM tracks LibertyQ U.S. Mid Cap Equity Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for FLQM and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.61 vs -0.00), 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.