PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FRCH.L is traded in GBP, while CNSG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CNSG.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FRCH.L achieves a -6.14% return, which is significantly lower than CNSG.L's -4.82% return.


FRCH.L

1D
-0.31%
1M
-2.10%
YTD
-6.14%
6M
-8.12%
1Y
7.54%
3Y*
8.07%
5Y*
-3.83%
10Y*

CNSG.L

1D
-1.91%
1M
-0.52%
YTD
-4.82%
6M
-6.30%
1Y
3.32%
3Y*
4.77%
5Y*
-5.51%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FRCH.L
Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF
-6.14%23.22%21.12%-17.46%-13.83%-19.34%26.80%8.01%
CNSG.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
-4.82%15.02%19.26%-19.78%-13.48%-18.60%25.87%2.75%

Correlation

The correlation between FRCH.L and CNSG.L is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.95

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

0.94

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

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2019

0.94

The correlation between FRCH.L and CNSG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FRCH.L
FRCH.L Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

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

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.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.


FRCH.LCNSG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.06

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.48

0.34

+0.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.00

0.73

+0.27

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.43, which is higher than the CNSG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FRCH.L and CNSG.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


FRCH.LCNSG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.43

0.29

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.12

-0.21

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.04

-0.03

-0.02

Drawdowns

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FRCH.L drawdown since its inception was -56.27%, roughly equal to the maximum CNSG.L drawdown of -57.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRCH.L and CNSG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FRCH.LCNSG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.27%

-57.38%

+1.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.77%

-14.08%

-1.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.42%

-27.72%

-1.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-49.18%

-51.82%

+2.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-31.36%

-36.10%

+4.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.72%

-30.15%

+0.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.53%

6.56%

+0.97%

Volatility

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) has a higher volatility of 6.61% compared to UBS ETF (LU) MSCI China ESG Universal Low Carbon Select UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (CNSG.L) at 6.07%. This indicates that FRCH.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNSG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FRCH.LCNSG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.61%

6.07%

+0.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.34%

11.61%

+0.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.57%

16.73%

+0.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

32.60%

26.90%

+5.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.15%

25.84%

+5.31%

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FRCH.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than CNSG.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

FRCH.L vs. CNSG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FRCH.L nor CNSG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, FRCH.L and CNSG.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, FRCH.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FRCH.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CNSG.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FRCH.L and 0.45% for CNSG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FRCH.L and CNSG.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