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

Performance

FRCH.L vs. KSTR.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) and KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (KSTR.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FRCH.L is traded in GBP, while KSTR.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the KSTR.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 -11.07% return, which is significantly lower than KSTR.L's 33.32% return.


FRCH.L

1D
-2.59%
1M
-2.77%
6M
-14.34%
YTD
-11.07%
1Y
-4.16%
3Y*
7.29%
5Y*
-4.43%
10Y*

KSTR.L

1D
-5.47%
1M
-8.15%
6M
16.44%
YTD
33.32%
1Y
79.44%
3Y*
17.96%
5Y*
-0.98%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FRCH.L
Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF
-11.07%23.19%21.16%-17.47%-13.83%-16.58%
KSTR.L
KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
33.32%32.59%7.07%-22.86%-30.81%7.24%

Correlation

The correlation between FRCH.L and KSTR.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.46

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

0.52

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

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2021

0.48

The correlation between FRCH.L and KSTR.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.52 - 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. KSTR.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: 88
Overall Rank
FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

KSTR.L
KSTR.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
KSTR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KSTR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
KSTR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
KSTR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
KSTR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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. KSTR.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) and KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (KSTR.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


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

-2.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.98

1.34

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.20

3.20

-3.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.42

10.66

-11.09

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

The current FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.23, which is lower than the KSTR.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FRCH.L and KSTR.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...

Drawdowns

FRCH.L vs. KSTR.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FRCH.L drawdown since its inception was -56.28%, smaller than the maximum KSTR.L drawdown of -65.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRCH.L and KSTR.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FRCH.LKSTR.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.28%

-65.22%

+8.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.57%

-24.67%

+4.10%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.36%

-38.63%

+5.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-46.08%

-65.22%

+19.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-34.97%

-24.67%

-10.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.77%

-35.63%

+5.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.79%

7.43%

+2.36%

Volatility

FRCH.L vs. KSTR.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) is 5.80%, while KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (KSTR.L) has a volatility of 19.75%. This indicates that FRCH.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KSTR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FRCH.LKSTR.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.80%

19.75%

-13.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.60%

33.85%

-21.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.89%

40.68%

-22.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.73%

33.90%

-4.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.89%

33.83%

-4.94%

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

FRCH.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than KSTR.L's 0.82% expense ratio.


Dividends

FRCH.L vs. KSTR.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FRCH.L and KSTR.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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 0.82% for KSTR.L.

FRCH.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while KSTR.L tracks SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FRCH.L and 0.82% for KSTR.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FRCH.L and KSTR.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