PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) and Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLXC.L achieves a -6.24% return, which is significantly higher than ASIU.L's -6.80% return.


FLXC.L

1D
-0.43%
1M
-3.03%
YTD
-6.24%
6M
-7.47%
1Y
6.65%
3Y*
10.95%
5Y*
-4.83%
10Y*

ASIU.L

1D
-0.43%
1M
-1.65%
YTD
-6.80%
6M
-8.35%
1Y
5.55%
3Y*
9.71%
5Y*
-6.88%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FLXC.L
Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF
-6.24%32.15%19.36%-12.74%-22.72%-20.67%31.22%16.03%
ASIU.L
Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc
-6.80%36.59%18.62%-16.23%-26.27%-23.38%6.66%1.36%

Correlation

The correlation between FLXC.L and ASIU.L is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.98

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

0.61

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

0.57

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2019

0.52

Over the past year, FLXC.L and ASIU.L have become more correlated (0.98) than their long-term average of 0.52, meaning their price movements have been converging.

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLXC.L
ASIU.L

Consumer Cyclical

30.8%
29.8%

Communication Services

23.6%
21.2%

Financial Services

15.5%
19.0%

Technology

9.3%
11.7%

Healthcare

6.0%
5.9%

Industrials

4.1%
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
2.8%

Energy

2.4%
0.1%

Basic Materials

2.3%
3.1%

Utilities

1.8%
0.6%

Real Estate

0.7%
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FLXC.L
30.8%
ASIU.L
29.8%

Communication Services

FLXC.L
23.6%
ASIU.L
21.2%

Financial Services

FLXC.L
15.5%
ASIU.L
19.0%

Technology

FLXC.L
9.3%
ASIU.L
11.7%

Healthcare

FLXC.L
6.0%
ASIU.L
5.9%

Industrials

FLXC.L
4.1%
ASIU.L
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

FLXC.L
3.2%
ASIU.L
2.8%

Energy

FLXC.L
2.4%
ASIU.L
0.1%

Basic Materials

FLXC.L
2.3%
ASIU.L
3.1%

Utilities

FLXC.L
1.8%
ASIU.L
0.6%

Real Estate

FLXC.L
0.7%
ASIU.L
1.5%

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

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLXC.L
FLXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
FLXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
FLXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLXC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

ASIU.L
ASIU.L Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
ASIU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) and Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L). 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.


FLXC.LASIU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.06

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.42

0.30

+0.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.89

0.61

+0.28

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLXC.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is higher than the ASIU.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLXC.L and ASIU.L, 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


FLXC.LASIU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

0.26

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.15

-0.30

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.09

-0.22

+0.31

Drawdowns

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLXC.L drawdown since its inception was -67.90%, roughly equal to the maximum ASIU.L drawdown of -64.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLXC.L and ASIU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLXC.LASIU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.90%

-64.71%

-3.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.67%

-18.29%

+2.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-40.11%

-27.50%

-12.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-62.63%

-58.89%

-3.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.63%

-40.19%

+6.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-31.82%

-36.13%

+4.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.48%

9.13%

-1.65%

Volatility

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) is 7.36%, while Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L) has a volatility of 8.90%. This indicates that FLXC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASIU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLXC.LASIU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.36%

8.90%

-1.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.38%

15.55%

-2.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.83%

21.39%

-2.56%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

32.74%

40.97%

-8.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.64%

39.95%

-9.31%

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLXC.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ASIU.L's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLXC.L vs. ASIU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FLXC.L nor ASIU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, FLXC.L and ASIU.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, FLXC.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FLXC.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASIU.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLXC.L and 0.65% for ASIU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLXC.L and ASIU.L

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