FTMN vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FTMN (Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FTMN is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Actively Managed, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FTMN charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

FTMN vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF (FTMN) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTMN achieves a 1.52% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -6.30% return.

FTMN

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.55%
• YTD: 1.52%
• 6M: 2.03%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: -6.30%
• 6M: -7.45%
• 1Y: 8.36%
• 3Y*: 10.66%
• 5Y*: -4.93%
• 10Y*: —

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

FTMN vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FTMN Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF	1.52%	0.61%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.30%	-5.69%

Correlation

The correlation between FTMN and FLCH is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2025	0.11

Return for Risk

FTMN vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 15
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

FTMN vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF (FTMN) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FTMN	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.44	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.17	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.94	0.02	+0.93

Drawdowns

FTMN vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTMN drawdown since its inception was -3.10%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTMN and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FTMN	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.10%	-62.09%	+58.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-15.52%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-25.43%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-55.78%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-33.95%	+33.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.71%	-30.53%	+29.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	7.38%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FTMN	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.59%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	13.67%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.14%	19.22%	-15.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.14%	29.59%	-25.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.14%	27.91%	-23.77%

FTMN vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTMN has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

FTMN vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FTMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than FLCH's 2.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.52%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
FTMN Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF	1.83%	0.50%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FTMN and FLCH in my portfolio?

FTMN and FLCH have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FTMN or FLCH?

On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FTMN or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for FTMN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FTMN or FLCH?

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 1.83% for FTMN.

What is the main difference between FTMN and FLCH?

FTMN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FLCH is China Equities. FTMN tracks Actively Managed, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FTMN and 0.19% for FLCH.