FLSW vs. XLG

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

FLSW (Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLSW is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE Switzerland RIC Capped Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLSW returned 6.39%/yr vs 15.66%/yr for XLG. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLSW charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

FLSW vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLSW achieves a 1.74% return, which is significantly lower than XLG's 5.19% return.

FLSW

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

XLG

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: -1.03%
• YTD: 5.19%
• 6M: 4.76%
• 1Y: 25.02%
• 3Y*: 23.53%
• 5Y*: 15.66%
• 10Y*: 17.03%

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

FLSW vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLSW Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF	1.74%	32.92%	-1.77%	16.79%	-18.14%	20.82%	13.25%	31.66%	-7.85%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	5.19%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	30.77%	24.15%	32.04%	-4.08%

Correlation

The correlation between FLSW and XLG 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	0.40
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2018	0.53

The correlation between FLSW and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (3 years) to 0.53 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLSW vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLSW	XLG
Healthcare	37.4%	7.0%
Financial Services	18.0%	9.6%
Consumer Defensive	14.0%	5.8%
Industrials	13.8%	1.9%
Basic Materials	7.7%	0.6%
Consumer Cyclical	5.2%	11.3%
Real Estate	1.3%	-
Communication Services	1.2%	17.1%
Technology	1.1%	43.9%
Utilities	0.2%	-
Energy	-	2.7%

Return for Risk

FLSW vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLSW

FLSW Risk / Return Rank: 23
FLSW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
FLSW Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FLSW Omega Ratio Rank: 23
FLSW Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FLSW Martin Ratio Rank: 24

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 55
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 60
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.

	FLSW	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.77	1.86	-1.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.20	2.51	-1.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.33	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.90	2.02	-1.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.89	7.56	-4.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLSW vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLSW Sharpe Ratio is 0.77, which is lower than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLSW and XLG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLSW	XLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77	1.86	-1.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41	0.84	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.91	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.62	-0.06

Drawdowns

FLSW vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLSW drawdown since its inception was -28.16%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLSW and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLSW	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.16%	-52.39%	+24.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.38%	-12.41%	-0.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.38%	-20.70%	+7.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.16%	-28.02%	-0.14%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.36%	-3.62%	-2.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.96%	-7.64%	+1.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.16%	3.32%	+0.84%

Volatility

FLSW vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Switzerland ETF (FLSW) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) have volatilities of 4.10% and 4.01%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLSW	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	4.01%	+0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.28%	10.19%	+2.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.64%	13.57%	+2.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.72%	18.72%	-3.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.89%	18.87%	-1.98%

FLSW vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLSW has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, 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. XLG - Dividend Comparison

FLSW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%, more than XLG's 0.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.61%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLSW and XLG in my portfolio?

FLSW and XLG 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.

Which is riskier, FLSW or XLG?

FLSW has higher volatility (4.10%) compared to XLG (4.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLSW dropped -28.16% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, FLSW or XLG?

On 5-year performance, XLG leads with 15.66% vs 6.39% for FLSW. On fees, FLSW is cheaper at 0.09% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLSW or XLG?

Over the 5-year period, XLG has performed better with a 15.66% return vs 6.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLSW or XLG?

FLSW is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XLG.

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

FLSW has the higher dividend yield at 2.08%, compared with 0.61% for XLG.

What is the main difference between FLSW and XLG?

FLSW is categorized as Europe Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. FLSW tracks FTSE Switzerland RIC Capped Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLSW and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 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.