FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FRXT.L (Franklin FTSE Taiwan UCITS ETF) and LCAL.L (Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - FRXT.L tracks the MSCI Taiwan NR USD while LCAL.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FRXT.L returned 41.30%/yr vs 22.81%/yr for LCAL.L. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FRXT.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for LCAL.L.

Performance

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Taiwan UCITS ETF (FRXT.L) and Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc (LCAL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FRXT.L achieves a 67.83% return, which is significantly higher than LCAL.L's 30.19% return.

FRXT.L

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: 15.57%
• YTD: 67.83%
• 6M: 73.29%
• 1Y: 121.18%
• 3Y*: 41.30%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LCAL.L

• 1D: -1.65%
• 1M: 8.07%
• YTD: 30.19%
• 6M: 32.55%
• 1Y: 58.76%
• 3Y*: 22.81%
• 5Y*: 9.02%
• 10Y*: —

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

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FRXT.L Franklin FTSE Taiwan UCITS ETF	67.83%	25.34%	25.66%	22.61%	-17.25%
LCAL.L Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc	30.19%	24.10%	13.67%	0.95%	-5.22%

Correlation

The correlation between FRXT.L and LCAL.L is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2022	0.74

The correlation between FRXT.L and LCAL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FRXT.L

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

LCAL.L

LCAL.L Risk / Return Rank: 89
LCAL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
LCAL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
LCAL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
LCAL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
LCAL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Taiwan UCITS ETF (FRXT.L) and Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc (LCAL.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.

	FRXT.L	LCAL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.43	3.16	+2.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.12	4.06	+2.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.87	1.57	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	13.25	5.03	+8.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	38.41	17.08	+21.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FRXT.L Sharpe Ratio is 5.43, which is higher than the LCAL.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FRXT.L and LCAL.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

	FRXT.L	LCAL.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.43	3.16	+2.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.28	0.49	+0.79

Drawdowns

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FRXT.L drawdown since its inception was -28.86%, smaller than the maximum LCAL.L drawdown of -33.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRXT.L and LCAL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FRXT.L	LCAL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.86%	-33.83%	+4.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.09%	-11.62%	+2.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.86%	-17.61%	-11.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.57%	-2.72%	+1.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.95%	-12.58%	+5.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.14%	3.43%	-0.29%

Volatility

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Taiwan UCITS ETF (FRXT.L) has a higher volatility of 9.21% compared to Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc (LCAL.L) at 8.53%. This indicates that FRXT.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LCAL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FRXT.L	LCAL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.21%	8.53%	+0.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.85%	15.65%	+2.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.19%	18.54%	+3.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.73%	17.73%	+3.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.73%	19.02%	+1.71%

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FRXT.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than LCAL.L's 0.12% 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

FRXT.L vs. LCAL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FRXT.L nor LCAL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FRXT.L and LCAL.L in my portfolio?

FRXT.L and LCAL.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FRXT.L or LCAL.L?

On fees, LCAL.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FRXT.L or LCAL.L?

LCAL.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FRXT.L.

What is the main difference between FRXT.L and LCAL.L?

FRXT.L tracks MSCI Taiwan NR USD, while LCAL.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FRXT.L and 0.12% for LCAL.L.