FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

FLRG.L (Franklin Sustainable Euro Green Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)) and DRGG.L (L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - FLRG.L is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate EUR Green Bond Index, while DRGG.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan China Custom Liquid ESG Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLRG.L returned -2.18%/yr vs 2.80%/yr for DRGG.L. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. FLRG.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for DRGG.L.

Performance

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Franklin Sustainable Euro Green Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (FLRG.L) and L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DRGG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

FLRG.L is traded in EUR, while DRGG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the DRGG.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLRG.L achieves a 0.63% return, which is significantly lower than DRGG.L's 5.79% return.

FLRG.L

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: -0.62%
• 6M: 0.17%
• YTD: 0.63%
• 1Y: 1.22%
• 3Y*: 3.27%
• 5Y*: -2.18%
• 10Y*: —

DRGG.L

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 0.34%
• 6M: 5.03%
• YTD: 5.79%
• 1Y: 7.67%
• 3Y*: 4.09%
• 5Y*: 2.80%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FLRG.L Franklin Sustainable Euro Green Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)	0.63%	0.59%	2.78%	7.71%	-18.99%	-3.01%	0.52%
DRGG.L L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	5.79%	-6.86%	9.85%	-2.99%	0.48%	15.58%	-25.28%

Correlation

The correlation between FLRG.L and DRGG.L is -0.14, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.09
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2020	-0.01

The correlation between FLRG.L and DRGG.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLRG.L

FLRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 18
FLRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
FLRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FLRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 16
FLRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
FLRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 20

DRGG.L

DRGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 39
DRGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
DRGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
DRGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 35
DRGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
DRGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Sustainable Euro Green Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (FLRG.L) and L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DRGG.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.

	FLRG.L	DRGG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.40	1.35	-0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.59	1.96	-1.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.25	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.58	2.61	-2.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.62	7.42	-5.80

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLRG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the DRGG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLRG.L and DRGG.L, 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

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLRG.L drawdown since its inception was -23.17%, smaller than the maximum DRGG.L drawdown of -25.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLRG.L and DRGG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLRG.L	DRGG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.17%	-25.95%	+2.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.48%	-2.93%	+0.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.41%	-10.96%	+7.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.63%	-13.83%	-8.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.19%	-8.91%	-3.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.42%	-14.26%	+3.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.89%	1.03%	-0.14%

Volatility

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Sustainable Euro Green Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (FLRG.L) is 1.02%, while L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DRGG.L) has a volatility of 1.09%. This indicates that FLRG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DRGG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLRG.L	DRGG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.02%	1.09%	-0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.98%	4.33%	-1.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.61%	5.69%	-2.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.37%	6.98%	-1.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.99%	12.63%	-7.64%

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLRG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than DRGG.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLRG.L vs. DRGG.L - Dividend Comparison

FLRG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DRGG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DRGG.L L&G China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	0.01%	2.04%	2.27%	2.48%	2.61%	1.40%
FLRG.L Franklin Sustainable Euro Green Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLRG.L and DRGG.L in my portfolio?

FLRG.L and DRGG.L have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FLRG.L or DRGG.L?

On fees, FLRG.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLRG.L or DRGG.L?

FLRG.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for DRGG.L.

What is the main difference between FLRG.L and DRGG.L?

FLRG.L is categorized as Global Bonds, while DRGG.L is Government Bonds. FLRG.L tracks Bloomberg Global Aggregate EUR Green Bond Index, while DRGG.L tracks J.P. Morgan China Custom Liquid ESG Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FLRG.L and 0.30% for DRGG.L.