FLSW vs. PBDC

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FLSW (Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF) and PBDC (Putnam BDC Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLSW is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE Switzerland RIC Capped Index, while PBDC is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton. FLSW is passively managed, while PBDC is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLSW returned 12.23%/yr vs 5.94%/yr for PBDC. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLSW charges 0.09%/yr vs 13.49%/yr for PBDC.

Performance

FLSW vs. PBDC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLSW achieves a 6.17% return, which is significantly higher than PBDC's -8.72% return.

FLSW

• 1D: -1.00%
• 1M: 1.43%
• 6M: 4.82%
• YTD: 6.17%
• 1Y: 16.45%
• 3Y*: 12.23%
• 5Y*: 7.21%
• 10Y*: —

PBDC

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: -0.56%
• 6M: -8.88%
• YTD: -8.72%
• 1Y: -13.79%
• 3Y*: 5.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLSW vs. PBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FLSW Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF	6.17%	32.92%	-1.77%	16.79%	11.20%
PBDC Putnam BDC Income ETF	-8.72%	-1.77%	19.43%	30.52%	10.38%

Correlation

The correlation between FLSW and PBDC is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2022	0.39

Return for Risk

FLSW vs. PBDC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLSW

FLSW Risk / Return Rank: 34
FLSW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
FLSW Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
FLSW Omega Ratio Rank: 33
FLSW Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
FLSW Martin Ratio Rank: 33

PBDC

PBDC Risk / Return Rank: 4
PBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
PBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

FLSW vs. PBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC). 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.

	FLSW	PBDC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.05	-0.74	+1.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.61	-0.96	+2.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	0.89	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.23	-0.69	+1.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.91	-1.14	+5.04

FLSW vs. PBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLSW Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is higher than the PBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLSW and PBDC, 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

FLSW vs. PBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLSW drawdown since its inception was -28.16%, which is greater than PBDC's maximum drawdown of -20.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLSW and PBDC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLSW	PBDC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.16%	-20.47%	-7.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.38%	-20.15%	+6.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.38%	-20.47%	+7.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.16%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.42%	-16.27%	+13.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.92%	-5.00%	-0.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.22%	12.17%	-7.95%

Volatility

FLSW vs. PBDC - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) has a higher volatility of 4.79% compared to Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC) at 4.56%. This indicates that FLSW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBDC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLSW	PBDC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.79%	4.56%	+0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.89%	15.17%	-2.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.76%	18.81%	-3.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.82%	17.02%	-1.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.88%	17.02%	-0.14%

FLSW vs. PBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLSW has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than PBDC's 13.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLSW vs. PBDC - Dividend Comparison

FLSW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.30%, less than PBDC's 11.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLSW Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF	2.30%	2.12%	2.04%	2.36%	2.02%	1.86%	2.28%	1.15%	2.86%
PBDC Putnam BDC Income ETF	11.52%	10.53%	9.29%	9.86%	3.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLSW and PBDC in my portfolio?

FLSW and PBDC have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLSW or PBDC?

FLSW has higher volatility (4.79%) compared to PBDC (4.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLSW dropped -28.16% vs PBDC's -20.47%.

Which ETF is better, FLSW or PBDC?

On 3-year performance, FLSW leads with 12.23% vs 5.94% for PBDC. On fees, FLSW is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, PBDC has been the lower-risk option at 4.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLSW or PBDC?

Over the 3-year period, FLSW has performed better with a 12.23% return vs 5.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLSW or PBDC?

FLSW is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 13.49% for PBDC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLSW or PBDC?

PBDC has the higher dividend yield at 11.52%, compared with 2.30% for FLSW.

What is the main difference between FLSW and PBDC?

FLSW is categorized as Europe Equities, while PBDC is Financials Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLSW and 13.49% for PBDC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLSW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.05 vs -0.74), 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.