IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IDFX.L (iShares China Large Cap UCITS) and FLXC.L (Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from iShares and Franklin Templeton respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IDFX.L returned -3.09%/yr vs -4.83%/yr for FLXC.L. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IDFX.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLXC.L.

Performance

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares China Large Cap UCITS (IDFX.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IDFX.L achieves a -7.34% return, which is significantly lower than FLXC.L's -6.24% return.

IDFX.L

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: -2.66%
• YTD: -7.34%
• 6M: -8.50%
• 1Y: 0.27%
• 3Y*: 12.09%
• 5Y*: -3.09%
• 10Y*: 2.94%

FLXC.L

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: -3.03%
• YTD: -6.24%
• 6M: -7.47%
• 1Y: 6.65%
• 3Y*: 10.95%
• 5Y*: -4.83%
• 10Y*: —

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

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
IDFX.L iShares China Large Cap UCITS	-7.34%	28.34%	31.04%	-13.61%	-20.49%	-20.45%	10.44%	9.97%
FLXC.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF	-6.24%	32.15%	19.36%	-12.74%	-22.72%	-20.67%	31.22%	16.03%

Correlation

The correlation between IDFX.L and FLXC.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2019	0.96

The correlation between IDFX.L and FLXC.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IDFX.L	FLXC.L
Financial Services	34.7%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	26.6%	30.8%
Communication Services	16.2%	23.6%
Technology	5.4%	9.3%
Energy	5.2%	2.4%
Basic Materials	4.1%	2.3%
Industrials	3.1%	4.1%
Healthcare	2.3%	6.0%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.7%
Consumer Defensive	0.9%	3.2%
Utilities	0.4%	1.8%

Return for Risk

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IDFX.L

IDFX.L Risk / Return Rank: 9
IDFX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
IDFX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
IDFX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9
IDFX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
IDFX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9

FLXC.L

FLXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 14
FLXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FLXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FLXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 14
FLXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
FLXC.L 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.

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large Cap UCITS (IDFX.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.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.

	IDFX.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.01	0.35	-0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.16	0.63	-0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.07	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.02	0.42	-0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.04	0.89	-0.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IDFX.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.01, which is lower than the FLXC.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IDFX.L and FLXC.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

	IDFX.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.01	0.35	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.10	-0.15	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.11	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.13	0.09	+0.04

Drawdowns

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IDFX.L drawdown since its inception was -70.30%, roughly equal to the maximum FLXC.L drawdown of -67.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IDFX.L and FLXC.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IDFX.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.30%	-67.90%	-2.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.54%	-15.67%	+0.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.74%	-40.11%	+11.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-54.41%	-62.63%	+8.22%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-60.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.55%	-33.63%	+7.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.92%	-31.82%	-2.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.25%	7.48%	-0.23%

Volatility

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares China Large Cap UCITS (IDFX.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) have volatilities of 7.60% and 7.36%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IDFX.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.60%	7.36%	+0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.86%	13.38%	+0.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.26%	18.83%	+0.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.88%	32.74%	-2.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.08%	30.64%	-4.56%

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IDFX.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FLXC.L's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

IDFX.L vs. FLXC.L - Dividend Comparison

IDFX.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, while FLXC.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLXC.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IDFX.L iShares China Large Cap UCITS	1.92%	1.76%	2.38%	2.43%	2.36%	1.86%	2.39%	2.44%	3.04%	2.35%	2.47%	2.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IDFX.L and FLXC.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, IDFX.L and FLXC.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, IDFX.L or FLXC.L?

On fees, FLXC.L 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, IDFX.L or FLXC.L?

FLXC.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IDFX.L.

What is the main difference between IDFX.L and FLXC.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for IDFX.L and 0.19% for FLXC.L.