FTMS vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

FTMS (Franklin Short-Term Municipal Income ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FTMS is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. FTMS is actively managed, while FLCH is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. FTMS charges 0.21%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

FTMS vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Short-Term Municipal Income ETF (FTMS) 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, FTMS achieves a 1.41% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -8.95% return.

FTMS

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 6M: 1.62%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: -7.63%
• YTD: -8.95%
• 6M: -11.33%
• 1Y: 2.76%
• 3Y*: 9.12%
• 5Y*: -5.47%
• 10Y*: —

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

FTMS vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FTMS Franklin Short-Term Municipal Income ETF	1.41%	0.37%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-8.95%	-6.64%

Correlation

The correlation between FTMS and FLCH is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2025	-0.01

Return for Risk

FTMS 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: 11
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 11

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.

FTMS vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Short-Term Municipal Income ETF (FTMS) 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

	FTMS	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.14	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.69	0.01	+1.69

Drawdowns

FTMS vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTMS drawdown since its inception was -1.24%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTMS and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FTMS	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.24%	-62.09%	+60.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-16.64%	—
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	-0.01%	-35.82%	+35.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.30%	-30.53%	+30.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	7.51%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FTMS	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.46%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	13.87%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.77%	19.27%	-17.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.77%	29.60%	-27.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.77%	27.91%	-26.14%

FTMS vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTMS has a 0.21% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% 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

FTMS vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

FTMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.97%, less than FLCH's 2.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.59%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
FTMS Franklin Short-Term Municipal Income ETF	1.97%	0.57%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FTMS and FLCH in my portfolio?

FTMS and FLCH have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FTMS 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, FTMS or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.21% for FTMS.

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

FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.59%, compared with 1.97% for FTMS.

What is the main difference between FTMS and FLCH?

FTMS is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FLCH is China Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.21% for FTMS and 0.19% for FLCH.