IPAC vs. FLCH
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH).
IPAC and FLCH are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IPAC is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index. It was launched on Jun 10, 2014. FLCH is a passively managed fund by Franklin Templeton that tracks the performance of the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. It was launched on Nov 2, 2017. Both IPAC and FLCH are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: IPAC or FLCH.
Key characteristics
| IPAC | FLCH | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 9.22% | 1.38% |
| 1Y Return | 14.19% | -4.04% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 0.65% | -13.82% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 5.70% | -4.43% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.97 | -0.21 |
| Daily Std Dev | 15.16% | 21.56% |
| Max Drawdown | -30.99% | -62.09% |
| Current Drawdown | -1.40% | -54.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between IPAC and FLCH is 0.60, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
IPAC vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, IPAC achieves a 9.22% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's 1.38% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
IPAC vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison
IPAC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
IPAC vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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.
Dividends
IPAC vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison
IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.98%, less than FLCH's 3.02% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF | 2.98% | 3.16% | 2.76% | 4.03% | 1.68% | 3.37% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 2.66% | 2.60% | 0.96% |
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF | 3.02% | 3.47% | 2.69% | 1.48% | 0.91% | 1.98% | 1.92% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
IPAC vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and FLCH. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
IPAC vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) has a higher volatility of 5.18% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 4.73%. This indicates that IPAC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.