FLTW vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

FLTW (Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLTW is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped Index, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLTW returned 23.20%/yr vs -5.32%/yr for FLCH. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.19% expense ratio.

Performance

FLTW vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLTW achieves a 79.72% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -10.49% return.

FLTW

• 1D: 1.68%
• 1M: 15.81%
• YTD: 79.72%
• 6M: 83.89%
• 1Y: 124.51%
• 3Y*: 44.92%
• 5Y*: 23.20%
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -3.87%
• YTD: -10.49%
• 6M: -11.51%
• 1Y: 2.54%
• 3Y*: 9.67%
• 5Y*: -5.32%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLTW vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF	79.72%	32.00%	16.68%	30.05%	-27.51%	29.46%	29.77%	31.23%	-9.32%	-1.28%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-10.49%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between FLTW and FLCH is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.52

The correlation between FLTW and FLCH shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (1 year) to 0.52 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLTW vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLTW	FLCH
Technology	78.7%	16.8%
Financial Services	11.2%	14.4%
Industrials	3.3%	15.5%
Basic Materials	2.5%	6.0%
Consumer Cyclical	1.5%	25.5%
Communication Services	1.4%	2.1%
Consumer Defensive	0.7%	1.2%
Healthcare	0.6%	2.1%
Energy	0.1%	12.6%
Real Estate	-	1.6%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

FLTW vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLTW

FLTW Risk / Return Rank: 96
FLTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
FLTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
FLTW Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FLTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
FLTW Martin Ratio Rank: 96

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 10
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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.

FLTW vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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.

	FLTW	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.41	0.13	+4.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.66	0.32	+4.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.68	1.04	+0.65
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.52	0.14	+11.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	34.60	0.31	+34.30

FLTW vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLTW Sharpe Ratio is 4.41, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLTW and FLCH, 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

FLTW vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLTW drawdown since its inception was -38.00%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLTW and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLTW	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.00%	-62.09%	+24.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.87%	-18.29%	+7.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.45%	-25.43%	-1.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.00%	-55.78%	+17.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-36.90%	+36.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.41%	-30.55%	+22.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.61%	8.23%	-4.62%

Volatility

FLTW vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW) has a higher volatility of 14.69% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 5.46%. This indicates that FLTW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLTW	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.69%	5.46%	+9.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.19%	13.98%	+10.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.45%	19.37%	+9.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.07%	29.63%	-6.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.11%	27.86%	-5.75%

FLTW vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLTW and FLCH have an expense ratio of 0.19%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLTW vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FLTW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, less than FLCH's 1.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	1.73%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF	1.33%	2.51%	1.89%	2.85%	3.16%	2.31%	2.14%	3.00%	1.06%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLTW and FLCH in my portfolio?

FLTW and FLCH have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLTW or FLCH?

FLTW has higher volatility (14.69%) compared to FLCH (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLTW dropped -38.00% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, FLTW or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLTW leads with 23.20% vs -5.32% for FLCH. Both ETFs have the same 0.19% expense ratio. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLTW or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLTW has performed better with a 23.20% return vs -5.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLTW or FLCH?

FLTW and FLCH have the same expense ratio: 0.19% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLTW or FLCH?

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.73%, compared with 1.33% for FLTW.

What is the main difference between FLTW and FLCH?

FLTW is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. FLTW tracks FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.41 vs 0.13), 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.