FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L
FRCH.L (Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF) and HMCD.L (HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from Franklin Templeton and HSBC respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FRCH.L returned -3.83%/yr vs -4.13%/yr for HMCD.L. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FRCH.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for HMCD.L.
Performance
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FRCH.L is traded in GBP, while HMCD.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the HMCD.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 higher than HMCD.L's -6.81% 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*
- —
HMCD.L
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -1.83%
- YTD
- -6.81%
- 6M
- -9.18%
- 1Y
- 5.78%
- 3Y*
- 7.88%
- 5Y*
- -4.13%
- 10Y*
- 5.59%
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.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% |
HMCD.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF | -6.81% | 22.20% | 20.76% | -15.94% | -13.31% | -21.35% | 25.52% | 12.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between FRCH.L and HMCD.L is 0.96 - 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 | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2019 | 0.96 |
The correlation between FRCH.L and HMCD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Financial Services
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Communication Services
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Technology
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Industrials
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Basic Materials
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Healthcare
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Energy
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Consumer Defensive
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Utilities
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
Real Estate
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
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. HMCD.L — Risk / Return Rank
FRCH.L
HMCD.L
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) and HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.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 | HMCD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.06 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.48 | 0.34 | +0.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.00 | 0.70 | +0.30 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FRCH.L | HMCD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 | 0.30 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.12 | -0.15 | +0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.22 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.04 | 0.16 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FRCH.L drawdown since its inception was -56.27%, roughly equal to the maximum HMCD.L drawdown of -56.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRCH.L and HMCD.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FRCH.L | HMCD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.27% | -56.56% | +0.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.77% | -17.12% | +1.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.42% | -24.84% | -4.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -49.18% | -49.36% | +0.18% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -56.56% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -31.36% | -32.66% | +1.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.72% | -20.52% | -9.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.53% | 8.22% | -0.69% |
Volatility
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) is 6.61%, while HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCD.L) has a volatility of 7.71%. This indicates that FRCH.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HMCD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FRCH.L | HMCD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.61% | 7.71% | -1.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.34% | 14.24% | -1.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.57% | 19.56% | -1.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.60% | 27.89% | +4.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.15% | 25.66% | +5.49% |
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FRCH.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than HMCD.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
FRCH.L vs. HMCD.L - Dividend Comparison
FRCH.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HMCD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FRCH.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HMCD.L HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF | 2.15% | 2.25% | 2.20% | 2.08% | 1.95% | 1.31% | 0.86% | 1.59% | 1.46% | 0.75% | 2.07% | 2.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, FRCH.L and HMCD.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 0.30% for HMCD.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FRCH.L and 0.30% for HMCD.L.
Find the right allocation for FRCH.L and HMCD.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