INQQ vs. FLAU

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

INQQ (India Internet & Ecommerce ETF) and FLAU (Franklin FTSE Australia ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - INQQ is a India Equities fund tracking the INQQ The India Internet & Ecommerce Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while FLAU is a Australia Equities fund tracking the FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, INQQ returned 3.12%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for FLAU. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INQQ charges 0.86%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLAU.

Performance

INQQ vs. FLAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in India Internet & Ecommerce ETF (INQQ) and Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INQQ achieves a -10.94% return, which is significantly lower than FLAU's 9.27% return.

INQQ

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 7.90%
• 6M: -8.61%
• YTD: -10.94%
• 1Y: -18.33%
• 3Y*: 3.12%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLAU

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: -1.90%
• 6M: 7.53%
• YTD: 9.27%
• 1Y: 12.35%
• 3Y*: 10.93%
• 5Y*: 6.49%
• 10Y*: —

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

INQQ vs. FLAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
INQQ India Internet & Ecommerce ETF	-10.94%	-7.05%	19.12%	31.45%	-34.72%
FLAU Franklin FTSE Australia ETF	9.27%	15.95%	1.81%	12.58%	-12.30%

Correlation

The correlation between INQQ and FLAU is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 6, 2022	0.41

The correlation between INQQ and FLAU shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (1 year) to 0.41 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

INQQ vs. FLAU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	INQQ	FLAU
Financial Services	35.3%	37.1%
Consumer Cyclical	26.9%	6.6%
Technology	11.6%	1.8%
Communication Services	9.2%	1.9%
Energy	7.8%	4.8%
Healthcare	6.7%	4.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	3.7%
Basic Materials	-	26.6%
Industrials	-	5.6%
Real Estate	-	6.0%
Utilities	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

INQQ vs. FLAU — Risk / Return Rank

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

INQQ

INQQ Risk / Return Rank: 3
INQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
INQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
INQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2
INQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
INQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3

FLAU

FLAU Risk / Return Rank: 27
FLAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
FLAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FLAU Omega Ratio Rank: 24
FLAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
FLAU Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

INQQ vs. FLAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for India Internet & Ecommerce ETF (INQQ) and Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU). 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.

	INQQ	FLAU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.03	0.73	-1.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.44	1.11	-2.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	1.14	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.61	1.24	-1.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.17	3.50	-4.67

INQQ vs. FLAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INQQ Sharpe Ratio is -1.03, which is lower than the FLAU Sharpe Ratio of 0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INQQ and FLAU, 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

INQQ vs. FLAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INQQ drawdown since its inception was -40.53%, smaller than the maximum FLAU drawdown of -45.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INQQ and FLAU.

Drawdown Indicators

	INQQ	FLAU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.53%	-45.73%	+5.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.20%	-10.01%	-20.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.45%	-22.03%	-10.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.63%	-4.17%	-17.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.22%	-6.76%	-10.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.71%	3.54%	+12.17%

Volatility

INQQ vs. FLAU - Volatility Comparison

India Internet & Ecommerce ETF (INQQ) has a higher volatility of 5.31% compared to Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) at 4.85%. This indicates that INQQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INQQ	FLAU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.31%	4.85%	+0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.23%	14.48%	+0.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.94%	16.98%	+0.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.94%	19.65%	+0.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.94%	23.52%	-3.58%

INQQ vs. FLAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

INQQ has a 0.86% expense ratio, which is higher than FLAU's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

INQQ vs. FLAU - Dividend Comparison

INQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, less than FLAU's 3.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLAU Franklin FTSE Australia ETF	3.15%	3.25%	3.37%	3.62%	5.91%	5.14%	2.18%	4.37%	4.34%	0.18%
INQQ India Internet & Ecommerce ETF	2.50%	2.23%	1.18%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INQQ and FLAU in my portfolio?

INQQ and FLAU have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, INQQ or FLAU?

INQQ has higher volatility (5.31%) compared to FLAU (4.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INQQ dropped -40.53% vs FLAU's -45.73%.

Which ETF is better, INQQ or FLAU?

On 3-year performance, FLAU leads with 10.93% vs 3.12% for INQQ. On fees, FLAU is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLAU has been the lower-risk option at 4.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INQQ or FLAU?

Over the 3-year period, FLAU has performed better with a 10.93% return vs 3.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INQQ or FLAU?

FLAU is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for INQQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INQQ or FLAU?

FLAU has the higher dividend yield at 3.15%, compared with 2.50% for INQQ.

What is the main difference between INQQ and FLAU?

INQQ is categorized as India Equities, while FLAU is Australia Equities. INQQ tracks INQQ The India Internet & Ecommerce Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while FLAU tracks FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: India and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.86% for INQQ and 0.09% for FLAU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.73 vs -1.03), 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.