IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L
IDFX.L (iShares China Large Cap UCITS) and FRCH.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 -4.84%/yr for FRCH.L. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IDFX.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FRCH.L.
Performance
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
IDFX.L is traded in USD, while FRCH.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FRCH.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IDFX.L achieves a -7.34% return, which is significantly lower than FRCH.L's -6.37% 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%
FRCH.L
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- -2.93%
- YTD
- -6.37%
- 6M
- -7.44%
- 1Y
- 6.52%
- 3Y*
- 10.85%
- 5Y*
- -4.84%
- 10Y*
- —
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.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% | 11.30% |
FRCH.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF | -6.37% | 32.52% | 19.10% | -13.11% | -23.05% | -20.07% | 30.68% | -6.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between IDFX.L and FRCH.L is 0.93, 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 | 0.93 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2019 | 0.93 |
The correlation between IDFX.L and FRCH.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Energy
Basic Materials
Industrials
Healthcare
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Financial Services
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Consumer Cyclical
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Communication Services
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Technology
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Energy
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Basic Materials
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Industrials
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Healthcare
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Real Estate
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Consumer Defensive
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Utilities
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L — Risk / Return Rank
IDFX.L
FRCH.L
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.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 (FRCH.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 | FRCH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.07 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.02 | 0.41 | -0.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.04 | 0.85 | -0.82 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IDFX.L | FRCH.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 | -0.14 | +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 | -0.02 | +0.14 |
Drawdowns
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IDFX.L drawdown since its inception was -70.30%, which is greater than FRCH.L's maximum drawdown of -61.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IDFX.L and FRCH.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IDFX.L | FRCH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.30% | -61.85% | -8.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.54% | -15.94% | +0.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.74% | -35.20% | +6.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -54.41% | -55.60% | +1.19% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -60.44% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -26.55% | -33.72% | +7.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.92% | -32.79% | -1.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.25% | 7.63% | -0.38% |
Volatility
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares China Large Cap UCITS (IDFX.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) have volatilities of 7.60% and 7.25%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IDFX.L | FRCH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.60% | 7.25% | +0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.86% | 13.32% | +0.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.26% | 18.55% | +0.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.88% | 33.88% | -4.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.08% | 32.23% | -6.15% |
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IDFX.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FRCH.L's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
IDFX.L vs. FRCH.L - Dividend Comparison
IDFX.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, while FRCH.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FRCH.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
With a correlation of 0.93, IDFX.L and FRCH.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.
On fees, FRCH.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FRCH.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IDFX.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 FRCH.L.
Find the right allocation for IDFX.L and FRCH.L
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer