IPAC vs. FLTW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IPAC (iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF) and FLTW (Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - IPAC tracks the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index while FLTW tracks the FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IPAC returned 7.65%/yr vs 21.84%/yr for FLTW. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IPAC charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLTW.

Performance

IPAC vs. FLTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAC achieves a 13.73% return, which is significantly lower than FLTW's 73.16% return.

IPAC

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 4.62%
• YTD: 13.73%
• 6M: 15.39%
• 1Y: 28.03%
• 3Y*: 17.03%
• 5Y*: 7.65%
• 10Y*: 9.13%

FLTW

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 20.90%
• YTD: 73.16%
• 6M: 78.07%
• 1Y: 122.77%
• 3Y*: 43.09%
• 5Y*: 21.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

IPAC vs. FLTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	13.73%	25.16%	6.18%	14.51%	-13.68%	3.09%	12.39%	19.44%	-12.78%	2.76%
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF	73.16%	32.00%	16.68%	30.05%	-27.51%	29.46%	29.77%	31.23%	-9.32%	-1.25%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAC and FLTW is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017	0.63

The correlation between IPAC and FLTW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

IPAC vs. FLTW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IPAC	FLTW
Financial Services	22.9%	12.6%
Industrials	21.3%	4.0%
Technology	12.9%	75.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.8%	1.7%
Basic Materials	8.2%	2.9%
Communication Services	5.7%	1.6%
Real Estate	5.5%	-
Healthcare	5.3%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	0.9%
Utilities	1.9%	-
Energy	1.8%	0.1%

Return for Risk

IPAC vs. FLTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPAC

IPAC Risk / Return Rank: 50
IPAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Omega Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Martin Ratio Rank: 52

FLTW

FLTW Risk / Return Rank: 96
FLTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
FLTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
FLTW Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FLTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FLTW Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

IPAC vs. FLTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW). 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.

	IPAC	FLTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	4.75	-3.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	5.21	-2.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.73	-0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	11.36	-8.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.83	35.77	-26.94
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IPAC vs. FLTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAC Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is lower than the FLTW Sharpe Ratio of 4.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAC and FLTW, 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

	IPAC	FLTW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.72	4.75	-3.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.98	-0.52
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.95	-0.51

Drawdowns

IPAC vs. FLTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, smaller than the maximum FLTW drawdown of -38.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and FLTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	IPAC	FLTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.99%	-38.00%	+7.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.49%	-10.87%	-0.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.45%	-26.45%	+11.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.64%	-38.00%	+8.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-0.16%	-0.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.48%	-8.43%	+0.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.18%	3.45%	-0.27%

Volatility

IPAC vs. FLTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) is 4.00%, while Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW) has a volatility of 11.77%. This indicates that IPAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IPAC	FLTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.00%	11.77%	-7.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.09%	21.29%	-8.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.41%	26.00%	-9.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.62%	22.44%	-5.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.58%	21.77%	-5.19%

IPAC vs. FLTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than FLTW'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%.

Dividends

IPAC vs. FLTW - Dividend Comparison

IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.80%, more than FLTW's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF	1.45%	2.51%	1.89%	2.85%	3.16%	2.31%	2.14%	3.00%	1.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	3.80%	4.32%	3.43%	3.16%	2.76%	4.03%	1.68%	3.37%	2.95%	2.98%	2.66%	2.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IPAC and FLTW in my portfolio?

IPAC and FLTW have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IPAC or FLTW?

FLTW has higher volatility (11.77%) compared to IPAC (4.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAC dropped -30.99% vs FLTW's -38.00%.

Which ETF is better, IPAC or FLTW?

On 5-year performance, FLTW leads with 21.84% vs 7.65% for IPAC. On fees, IPAC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IPAC has been the lower-risk option at 4.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IPAC or FLTW?

Over the 5-year period, FLTW has performed better with a 21.84% return vs 7.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IPAC or FLTW?

IPAC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for FLTW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IPAC or FLTW?

IPAC has the higher dividend yield at 3.80%, compared with 1.45% for FLTW.

What is the main difference between IPAC and FLTW?

IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while FLTW tracks FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IPAC and 0.19% for FLTW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.75 vs 1.72), 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.