FLSA vs. EMXC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLSA (Franklin FTSE Saudi Arabia ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - FLSA tracks the FTSE Saudi Arabia RIC Capped Index while EMXC tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLSA returned 2.76%/yr vs 12.43%/yr for EMXC. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLSA charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.

Performance

FLSA vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Saudi Arabia ETF (FLSA) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLSA achieves a 6.38% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 37.89% return.

FLSA

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.23%
• YTD: 6.38%
• 6M: 5.27%
• 1Y: 6.30%
• 3Y*: 0.86%
• 5Y*: 2.76%
• 10Y*: —

EMXC

• 1D: -6.44%
• 1M: 4.83%
• YTD: 37.89%
• 6M: 39.80%
• 1Y: 67.97%
• 3Y*: 27.65%
• 5Y*: 12.43%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLSA vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLSA Franklin FTSE Saudi Arabia ETF	6.38%	-7.15%	-0.29%	12.99%	-3.58%	35.72%	3.73%	9.46%	2.78%
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	37.89%	35.14%	2.68%	18.96%	-19.56%	8.54%	12.76%	15.80%	0.04%

Correlation

The correlation between FLSA and EMXC is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2018	0.46

FLSA vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLSA	EMXC
Financial Services	40.5%	17.4%
Basic Materials	15.8%	6.0%
Energy	13.9%	3.4%
Communication Services	9.4%	3.0%
Utilities	4.7%	1.9%
Healthcare	3.5%	1.8%
Consumer Cyclical	3.5%	4.1%
Industrials	3.0%	6.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	2.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.8%
Technology	1.3%	52.4%

Return for Risk

FLSA vs. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLSA

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

EMXC

EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 85
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 86
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

FLSA vs. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Saudi Arabia ETF (FLSA) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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.

	FLSA	EMXC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.39	2.70	-2.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.75	3.23	-2.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.50	-0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.56	4.74	-4.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.23	18.14	-16.91

FLSA vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLSA Sharpe Ratio is 0.39, which is lower than the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLSA and EMXC, 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

FLSA vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLSA drawdown since its inception was -38.31%, smaller than the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLSA and EMXC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLSA	EMXC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.31%	-42.81%	+4.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.30%	-14.41%	+3.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.95%	-19.12%	+4.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.25%	-28.91%	+1.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.78%	-6.44%	-8.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.21%	-10.15%	-2.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.12%	3.76%	+1.36%

Volatility

FLSA vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE Saudi Arabia ETF (FLSA) is 4.87%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 14.74%. This indicates that FLSA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLSA	EMXC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.87%	14.74%	-9.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.46%	23.44%	-10.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.36%	25.27%	-8.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.80%	18.40%	-2.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.39%	20.25%	-0.86%

FLSA vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLSA has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLSA vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

FLSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%, less than EMXC's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	1.93%	2.82%	2.69%	1.83%	2.85%	1.78%	1.45%	3.25%	2.63%	0.99%
FLSA Franklin FTSE Saudi Arabia ETF	1.22%	4.01%	3.01%	3.09%	1.90%	1.95%	2.16%	3.18%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLSA and EMXC in my portfolio?

FLSA and EMXC have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLSA or EMXC?

EMXC has higher volatility (14.74%) compared to FLSA (4.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLSA dropped -38.31% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

Which ETF is better, FLSA or EMXC?

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 12.43% vs 2.76% for FLSA. On fees, FLSA is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FLSA has been the lower-risk option at 4.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLSA or EMXC?

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 12.43% return vs 2.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLSA or EMXC?

FLSA is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EMXC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLSA or EMXC?

EMXC has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.22% for FLSA.

What is the main difference between FLSA and EMXC?

FLSA tracks FTSE Saudi Arabia RIC Capped Index, while EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for FLSA and 0.49% for EMXC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 0.39), 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.