FLUD vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLUD (Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLUD is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. FLUD is actively managed, while FLCH is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLUD returned 3.63%/yr vs -4.93%/yr for FLCH. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLUD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

FLUD vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) 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, FLUD achieves a 1.53% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -6.30% return.

FLUD

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 1.53%
• 6M: 1.88%
• 1Y: 4.60%
• 3Y*: 5.33%
• 5Y*: 3.63%
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: -6.30%
• 6M: -7.45%
• 1Y: 8.36%
• 3Y*: 10.66%
• 5Y*: -4.93%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLUD vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FLUD Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.53%	5.36%	5.44%	5.95%	0.16%	0.09%	0.77%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.30%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	15.76%

Correlation

The correlation between FLUD and FLCH is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.00
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 17, 2020	0.02

FLUD vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLUD	FLCH
Financial Services	13.9%	18.2%
Industrials	2.3%	9.1%
Consumer Cyclical	1.9%	23.4%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.7%
Healthcare	1.1%	5.3%
Basic Materials	0.9%	5.5%
Communication Services	0.9%	14.2%
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	3.3%
Utilities	0.2%	2.0%
Technology	0.1%	12.9%
Energy	0.1%	3.7%

Return for Risk

FLUD vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLUD

FLUD Risk / Return Rank: 92
FLUD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
FLUD Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
FLUD Omega Ratio Rank: 91
FLUD Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FLUD Martin Ratio Rank: 97

FLCH

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

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.

FLUD vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) 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.

	FLUD	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.76	0.44	+2.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.42	0.75	+3.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.09	+0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.55	0.54	+10.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	41.82	1.14	+40.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLUD vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLUD Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLUD 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLUD	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.76	0.44	+2.32
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	2.73	-0.17	+2.90
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.59	0.02	+2.57

Drawdowns

FLUD vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLUD drawdown since its inception was -1.66%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLUD and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLUD	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.66%	-62.09%	+60.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.44%	-15.52%	+15.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.59%	-25.43%	+24.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-1.66%	-55.78%	+54.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-33.95%	+33.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.24%	-30.53%	+30.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.11%	7.38%	-7.27%

Volatility

FLUD vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) is 0.33%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 6.59%. This indicates that FLUD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLUD	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.33%	6.59%	-6.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.74%	13.67%	-12.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.68%	19.22%	-17.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.34%	29.59%	-28.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.26%	27.91%	-26.65%

FLUD vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLUD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FLCH's 0.19% 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

FLUD vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FLUD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, more than FLCH's 2.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.52%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
FLUD Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.27%	4.51%	4.97%	4.72%	1.39%	0.92%	0.93%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLUD and FLCH in my portfolio?

FLUD and FLCH have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLUD or FLCH?

FLCH has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to FLUD (0.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLUD dropped -1.66% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, FLUD or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLUD leads with 3.63% vs -4.93% for FLCH. On fees, FLUD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLUD has been the lower-risk option at 0.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLUD or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLUD has performed better with a 3.63% return vs -4.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLUD or FLCH?

FLUD is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLCH.

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

FLUD has the higher dividend yield at 4.27%, compared with 2.52% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between FLUD and FLCH?

FLUD is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while FLCH is China Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLUD and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLUD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.76 vs 0.44), 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.