FRCH.L vs. FLRK.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FRCH.L (Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF) and FLRK.L (Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FRCH.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China NR USD, while FLRK.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Korea NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FRCH.L returned -3.83%/yr vs 20.63%/yr for FLRK.L. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FRCH.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLRK.L.

Performance

FRCH.L vs. FLRK.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) and Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF (FLRK.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FRCH.L achieves a -6.14% return, which is significantly lower than FLRK.L's 111.17% 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*: —

FLRK.L

• 1D: -5.06%
• 1M: 19.12%
• YTD: 111.17%
• 6M: 129.46%
• 1Y: 234.17%
• 3Y*: 46.37%
• 5Y*: 20.63%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FRCH.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF	-6.14%	23.22%	21.12%	-17.46%	-13.83%	-19.34%	26.80%	-10.87%
FLRK.L Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF	111.17%	82.09%	-20.56%	14.16%	-19.37%	-5.90%	42.60%	-14.15%

Correlation

The correlation between FRCH.L and FLRK.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2019	0.48

The correlation between FRCH.L and FLRK.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (1 year) to 0.48 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FRCH.L vs. FLRK.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FRCH.L	FLRK.L
Consumer Cyclical	24.5%	5.5%
Financial Services	18.3%	8.7%
Communication Services	16.4%	2.3%
Technology	11.3%	57.4%
Industrials	7.9%	17.7%
Basic Materials	5.6%	2.4%
Healthcare	5.5%	3.0%
Energy	3.5%	0.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	1.7%
Utilities	2.0%	0.4%
Real Estate	1.7%	-

Return for Risk

FRCH.L vs. FLRK.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: 15
FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
FRCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FRCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FRCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FRCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 14

FLRK.L

FLRK.L Risk / Return Rank: 97
FLRK.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
FLRK.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
FLRK.L Omega Ratio Rank: 97
FLRK.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FLRK.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. FLRK.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) and Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF (FLRK.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.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.43	6.24	-5.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.71	5.75	-5.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.85	-0.76
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.48	10.98	-10.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.00	39.30	-38.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.43, which is lower than the FLRK.L Sharpe Ratio of 6.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FRCH.L and FLRK.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FRCH.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43	6.24	-5.81
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.12	0.81	-0.93
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.04	0.67	-0.71

Drawdowns

FRCH.L vs. FLRK.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FRCH.L drawdown since its inception was -56.27%, which is greater than FLRK.L's maximum drawdown of -41.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRCH.L and FLRK.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FRCH.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.27%	-41.57%	-14.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.77%	-21.18%	+5.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.42%	-27.82%	-1.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-49.18%	-38.68%	-10.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-31.36%	-5.62%	-25.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.72%	-19.95%	-9.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.53%	5.93%	+1.60%

Volatility

FRCH.L vs. FLRK.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) is 6.61%, while Franklin FTSE Korea UCITS ETF (FLRK.L) has a volatility of 18.09%. This indicates that FRCH.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLRK.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FRCH.L	FLRK.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.61%	18.09%	-11.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.34%	32.92%	-20.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.57%	37.31%	-19.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.60%	25.31%	+7.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.15%	27.31%	+3.84%

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

FRCH.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than FLRK.L's 0.09% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FRCH.L vs. FLRK.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FRCH.L and FLRK.L in my portfolio?

FRCH.L and FLRK.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FRCH.L or FLRK.L?

On fees, FLRK.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FRCH.L or FLRK.L?

FLRK.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FRCH.L.

What is the main difference between FRCH.L and FLRK.L?

FRCH.L is categorized as China Equities, while FLRK.L is Asia Pacific Equities. FRCH.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while FLRK.L tracks MSCI Korea NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FRCH.L and 0.09% for FLRK.L.