HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

HULC.TO (Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF) and FLUS.TO (Franklin U.S. Large Cap Multifactor Index ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - HULC.TO tracks the Solactive US Large Cap Index (CA NTR) while FLUS.TO tracks the LibertyQ U.S. Large Cap Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HULC.TO returned 15.77%/yr vs 16.46%/yr for FLUS.TO. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HULC.TO charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for FLUS.TO.

Performance

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF (HULC.TO) and Franklin U.S. Large Cap Multifactor Index ETF (FLUS.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HULC.TO achieves a 12.06% return, which is significantly lower than FLUS.TO's 14.64% return.

HULC.TO

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 12.06%
• 6M: 11.04%
• 1Y: 26.57%
• 3Y*: 23.97%
• 5Y*: 15.77%
• 10Y*: —

FLUS.TO

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 1.24%
• YTD: 14.64%
• 6M: 9.84%
• 1Y: 25.43%
• 3Y*: 23.56%
• 5Y*: 16.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
HULC.TO Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF	12.06%	12.69%	35.93%	24.43%	-14.75%	26.89%	27.48%
FLUS.TO Franklin U.S. Large Cap Multifactor Index ETF	14.64%	10.51%	34.62%	20.97%	-9.96%	25.50%	11.27%

Correlation

The correlation between HULC.TO and FLUS.TO is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020	0.66

The correlation between HULC.TO and FLUS.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HULC.TO	FLUS.TO
Technology	38.8%	37.0%
Communication Services	10.8%	11.7%
Financial Services	10.7%	9.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	11.3%
Healthcare	8.5%	10.1%
Industrials	8.3%	9.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	4.1%
Energy	3.2%	0.9%
Utilities	2.1%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.7%
Real Estate	1.6%	2.7%

Return for Risk

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HULC.TO

HULC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 71
HULC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
HULC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
HULC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 74
HULC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
HULC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 67

FLUS.TO

FLUS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 62
FLUS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FLUS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
FLUS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 70
FLUS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
FLUS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF (HULC.TO) and Franklin U.S. Large Cap Multifactor Index ETF (FLUS.TO). 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.

	HULC.TO	FLUS.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	1.76	+0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	2.51	+0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.36	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	2.59	+0.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.83	9.05	+1.78

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HULC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the FLUS.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HULC.TO and FLUS.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HULC.TO drawdown since its inception was -23.94%, smaller than the maximum FLUS.TO drawdown of -28.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HULC.TO and FLUS.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HULC.TO	FLUS.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.94%	-28.24%	+4.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.73%	-9.85%	+1.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.46%	-18.82%	-0.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.94%	-19.11%	-4.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.56%	-1.17%	-0.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.83%	-3.70%	-1.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	2.82%	-0.36%

Volatility

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF (HULC.TO) is 4.52%, while Franklin U.S. Large Cap Multifactor Index ETF (FLUS.TO) has a volatility of 4.77%. This indicates that HULC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLUS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HULC.TO	FLUS.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.52%	4.77%	-0.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.00%	11.48%	-1.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.05%	14.53%	-1.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.33%	14.91%	+1.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.19%	15.94%	+3.25%

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HULC.TO has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FLUS.TO's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

HULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO - Dividend Comparison

HULC.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FLUS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLUS.TO Franklin U.S. Large Cap Multifactor Index ETF	0.57%	0.74%	0.94%	1.24%	1.77%	1.80%	1.67%	1.89%	1.72%	0.60%
HULC.TO Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HULC.TO and FLUS.TO in my portfolio?

HULC.TO and FLUS.TO have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HULC.TO or FLUS.TO?

On fees, HULC.TO is cheaper at 0.08% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HULC.TO or FLUS.TO?

HULC.TO is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for FLUS.TO.

What is the main difference between HULC.TO and FLUS.TO?

HULC.TO tracks Solactive US Large Cap Index (CA NTR), while FLUS.TO tracks LibertyQ U.S. Large Cap Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Franklin. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for HULC.TO and 0.29% for FLUS.TO.