ILF vs. FLBR

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

ILF (iShares Latin American 40 ETF) and FLBR (Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF) are both Latin America Equities funds - ILF tracks the S&P Latin America 40 Index while FLBR tracks the FTSE Brazil RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ILF returned 9.00%/yr vs 5.06%/yr for FLBR. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ILF charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLBR.

Performance

ILF vs. FLBR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ILF having a 13.05% return and FLBR slightly higher at 13.23%.

ILF

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: -1.45%
• YTD: 13.05%
• 6M: 14.29%
• 1Y: 40.46%
• 3Y*: 13.51%
• 5Y*: 9.00%
• 10Y*: 8.49%

FLBR

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: -5.60%
• YTD: 13.23%
• 6M: 16.93%
• 1Y: 30.75%
• 3Y*: 9.88%
• 5Y*: 5.06%
• 10Y*: —

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

ILF vs. FLBR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF	13.05%	52.65%	-23.11%	33.14%	9.81%	-13.59%	-11.71%	13.77%	-6.85%	3.00%
FLBR Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF	13.23%	45.57%	-27.58%	33.19%	10.44%	-16.78%	-20.13%	28.47%	-2.13%	2.27%

Correlation

The correlation between ILF and FLBR is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.92

The correlation between ILF and FLBR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

ILF vs. FLBR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ILF	FLBR
Financial Services	33.3%	25.6%
Basic Materials	24.0%	16.5%
Energy	12.0%	19.3%
Consumer Defensive	9.5%	4.6%
Industrials	9.3%	11.6%
Utilities	4.4%	13.7%
Communication Services	4.4%	1.9%
Consumer Cyclical	1.3%	2.6%
Healthcare	1.1%	2.8%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.8%
Technology	-	0.8%

Return for Risk

ILF vs. FLBR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILF

ILF Risk / Return Rank: 54
ILF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
ILF Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
ILF Omega Ratio Rank: 51
ILF Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
ILF Martin Ratio Rank: 51

FLBR

FLBR Risk / Return Rank: 34
FLBR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FLBR Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
FLBR Omega Ratio Rank: 34
FLBR Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
FLBR Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

ILF vs. FLBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR). 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.

	ILF	FLBR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	1.22	+0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.44	1.72	+0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.22	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.92	1.68	+1.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.56	4.91	+3.65

ILF vs. FLBR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILF Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is higher than the FLBR Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILF and FLBR, 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

ILF vs. FLBR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILF drawdown since its inception was -67.48%, which is greater than FLBR's maximum drawdown of -57.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILF and FLBR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILF	FLBR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.48%	-57.42%	-10.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.94%	-18.38%	+4.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.97%	-28.97%	+5.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.71%	-32.74%	+3.03%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.65%	-17.23%	+7.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.91%	-18.60%	-5.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.74%	6.28%	-1.54%

Volatility

ILF vs. FLBR - Volatility Comparison

iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR) have volatilities of 6.44% and 6.41%, 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

	ILF	FLBR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.44%	6.41%	+0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.33%	20.03%	-1.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.25%	25.37%	-3.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.28%	27.73%	-4.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.40%	33.02%	-4.62%

ILF vs. FLBR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than FLBR's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILF vs. FLBR - Dividend Comparison

ILF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, less than FLBR's 4.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLBR Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF	4.79%	7.71%	7.68%	8.84%	11.99%	8.71%	2.32%	3.42%	3.72%	0.42%	0.00%	0.00%
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF	3.47%	4.39%	7.44%	4.61%	12.72%	8.47%	1.88%	3.09%	3.12%	1.80%	1.59%	3.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ILF and FLBR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, ILF and FLBR 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 is riskier, ILF or FLBR?

ILF has higher volatility (6.44%) compared to FLBR (6.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILF dropped -67.48% vs FLBR's -57.42%.

Which ETF is better, ILF or FLBR?

On 5-year performance, ILF leads with 9.00% vs 5.06% for FLBR. On fees, FLBR is cheaper at 0.19% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ILF or FLBR?

Over the 5-year period, ILF has performed better with a 9.00% return vs 5.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILF or FLBR?

FLBR is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for ILF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ILF or FLBR?

FLBR has the higher dividend yield at 4.79%, compared with 3.47% for ILF.

What is the main difference between ILF and FLBR?

ILF tracks S&P Latin America 40 Index, while FLBR tracks FTSE Brazil RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for ILF and 0.19% for FLBR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.22), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.