PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLSW vs. SCHG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLSW vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLSW achieves a 1.74% return, which is significantly lower than SCHG's 3.75% return.


FLSW

1D
-0.52%
1M
-1.51%
YTD
1.74%
6M
5.66%
1Y
11.98%
3Y*
11.98%
5Y*
6.39%
10Y*

SCHG

1D
0.15%
1M
-0.94%
YTD
3.75%
6M
2.93%
1Y
20.82%
3Y*
24.03%
5Y*
14.90%
10Y*
18.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLSW vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
FLSW
Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF
1.74%32.92%-1.77%16.79%-18.14%20.82%13.25%31.66%-7.85%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
3.75%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%39.14%36.02%-3.30%

Correlation

The correlation between FLSW and SCHG is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.39

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2018

0.52

The correlation between FLSW and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (3 years) to 0.52 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLSW vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLSW
SCHG

Healthcare

37.4%
7.7%

Financial Services

18.0%
6.7%

Consumer Defensive

14.0%
1.7%

Industrials

13.8%
5.8%

Basic Materials

7.7%
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

5.2%
12.7%

Real Estate

1.3%
0.5%

Communication Services

1.2%
16.0%

Technology

1.1%
46.3%

Utilities

0.2%
0.4%

Energy

-

0.8%

Healthcare

FLSW
37.4%
SCHG
7.7%

Financial Services

FLSW
18.0%
SCHG
6.7%

Consumer Defensive

FLSW
14.0%
SCHG
1.7%

Industrials

FLSW
13.8%
SCHG
5.8%

Basic Materials

FLSW
7.7%
SCHG
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FLSW
5.2%
SCHG
12.7%

Real Estate

FLSW
1.3%
SCHG
0.5%

Communication Services

FLSW
1.2%
SCHG
16.0%

Technology

FLSW
1.1%
SCHG
46.3%

Utilities

FLSW
0.2%
SCHG
0.4%

Energy

FLSW

-

SCHG
0.8%

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

FLSW vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLSW
FLSW Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
FLSW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLSW Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLSW Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
FLSW Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLSW Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
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. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.


FLSWSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.24

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.90

1.27

-0.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.89

4.25

-1.36

FLSW vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLSW Sharpe Ratio is 0.77, which is lower than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLSW and SCHG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLSWSCHGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.77

1.33

-0.56

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.67

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.83

-0.28

Drawdowns

FLSW vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLSW drawdown since its inception was -28.16%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLSW and SCHG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLSWSCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.16%

-34.59%

+6.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.38%

-16.41%

+3.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.38%

-23.39%

+10.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.16%

-34.59%

+6.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.36%

-4.25%

-2.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.96%

-5.20%

-0.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.16%

4.91%

-0.75%

Volatility

FLSW vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) is 4.10%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 4.52%. This indicates that FLSW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLSWSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.10%

4.52%

-0.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.28%

12.02%

+0.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.64%

15.77%

-0.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.72%

22.31%

-6.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.89%

21.58%

-4.69%

FLSW vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLSW has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FLSW vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

FLSW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%, more than SCHG's 0.37% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLSW
Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF
2.08%2.12%2.04%2.36%2.02%1.86%2.28%1.15%2.86%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.37%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLSW and SCHG have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SCHG has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to FLSW (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLSW dropped -28.16% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 5-year performance, SCHG leads with 14.90% vs 6.39% for FLSW. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, FLSW has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 14.90% return vs 6.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.09% for FLSW.

FLSW has the higher dividend yield at 2.08%, compared with 0.37% for SCHG.

FLSW is categorized as Europe Equities, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. FLSW tracks FTSE Switzerland RIC Capped Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLSW and 0.04% for SCHG.

SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.33 vs 0.77), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLSW and SCHG

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