FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS
Compare and contrast key facts about Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.AS).
FLXC.L and IWDA.AS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FLXC.L is a passively managed fund by Franklin Templeton that tracks the performance of the MSCI China NR USD. It was launched on Jun 4, 2019. IWDA.AS is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI ACWI NR USD. It was launched on Sep 25, 2009. Both FLXC.L and IWDA.AS are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLXC.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF | -7.21% | 32.15% | 19.36% | -12.74% | -22.72% | -20.67% | 31.22% | 16.03% |
IWDA.AS iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | -4.54% | 21.46% | 19.36% | 23.68% | -18.74% | 23.51% | 15.60% | 11.40% |
Different Trading Currencies
FLXC.L is traded in USD, while IWDA.AS is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the IWDA.AS values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLXC.L achieves a -7.21% return, which is significantly lower than IWDA.AS's -4.54% return.
FLXC.L
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- -6.88%
- YTD
- -7.21%
- 6M
- -13.58%
- 1Y
- 6.74%
- 3Y*
- 6.92%
- 5Y*
- -5.15%
- 10Y*
- —
IWDA.AS
- 1D
- 0.81%
- 1M
- -6.82%
- YTD
- -4.54%
- 6M
- -0.60%
- 1Y
- 19.06%
- 3Y*
- 16.81%
- 5Y*
- 10.00%
- 10Y*
- 11.87%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLXC.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than IWDA.AS'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%.
Return for Risk
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS — Risk / Return Rank
FLXC.L
IWDA.AS
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.AS). 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.L | IWDA.AS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.31 | 1.16 | -0.85 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.57 | 1.66 | -1.09 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.25 | -0.17 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.42 | 2.50 | -2.08 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.11 | 11.25 | -10.14 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FLXC.L | IWDA.AS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 | 1.16 | -0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.16 | 0.64 | -0.79 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.74 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.08 | 0.63 | -0.54 |
Correlation
The correlation between FLXC.L and IWDA.AS is 0.49, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS - Dividend Comparison
Neither FLXC.L nor IWDA.AS has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLXC.L drawdown since its inception was -67.90%, which is greater than IWDA.AS's maximum drawdown of -34.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLXC.L and IWDA.AS.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLXC.L | IWDA.AS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.90% | -33.63% | -34.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.45% | -13.27% | -2.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -62.78% | -21.59% | -41.19% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.63% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.31% | -5.98% | -28.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.82% | -4.28% | -27.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.91% | 1.66% | +4.25% |
Volatility
FLXC.L vs. IWDA.AS - Volatility Comparison
Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) has a higher volatility of 6.60% compared to iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.AS) at 4.38%. This indicates that FLXC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWDA.AS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| FLXC.L | IWDA.AS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.60% | 4.38% | +2.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.19% | 8.37% | +4.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.63% | 16.25% | +5.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.71% | 15.49% | +17.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.84% | 15.77% | +15.07% |