IPAC vs. FLTW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

IPAC (iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF) and FLTW (Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IPAC is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific IMI Index (Net), while FLTW is a Taiwan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IPAC returned 8.37%/yr vs 18.91%/yr for FLTW. Their 0.63 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. 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 14.24% return, which is significantly lower than FLTW's 53.07% return.

IPAC

• 1D: -0.96%
• 1M: 0.87%
• 6M: 7.59%
• YTD: 14.24%
• 1Y: 26.06%
• 3Y*: 16.33%
• 5Y*: 8.37%
• 10Y*: 8.82%
• ALL TIME*: 7.31%

FLTW

• 1D: 3.38%
• 1M: -8.11%
• 6M: 41.10%
• YTD: 53.07%
• 1Y: 78.62%
• 3Y*: 36.54%
• 5Y*: 18.91%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 18.45%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF	$79.26M	$58.46M	$67.03M
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	$5.46M	$8.24M	$8.98M

IPAC vs. FLTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	14.24%	25.16%	6.18%	14.51%	-13.68%	3.09%	12.39%	19.44%	-12.78%	2.89%
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF	53.07%	32.00%	16.68%	30.05%	-27.51%	29.46%	29.77%	31.23%	-9.32%	-1.28%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAC and FLTW is 0.64, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 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	24.9%	12.5%
Industrials	20.5%	3.0%
Technology	13.7%	77.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	1.6%
Basic Materials	8.3%	2.9%
Healthcare	5.4%	0.7%
Real Estate	5.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	0.7%
Communication Services	3.8%	1.3%
Energy	1.7%	0.1%
Utilities	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

IPAC vs. FLTW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IPAC

IPAC Risk / Return Rank: 67
IPAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
IPAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IPAC Omega Ratio Rank: 69
IPAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
IPAC Martin Ratio Rank: 67

FLTW

FLTW Risk / Return Rank: 90
FLTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
FLTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FLTW Omega Ratio Rank: 89
FLTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
FLTW Martin Ratio Rank: 91

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

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.

	IPAC	FLTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	2.49	-0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	2.92	-0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.41	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.32	3.73	-1.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.11	15.39	-7.28

IPAC vs. FLTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAC Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is lower than the FLTW Sharpe Ratio of 2.49. 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.

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%	-21.34%	+9.85%
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	-1.71%	-14.83%	+13.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.41%	-8.43%	+1.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.29%	5.16%	-1.87%

Volatility

IPAC vs. FLTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) is 5.93%, while Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW) has a volatility of 13.59%. 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	5.93%	13.59%	-7.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.93%	28.76%	-13.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.58%	32.00%	-14.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	24.04%	-7.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.65%	22.60%	-5.95%

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 3.86%, more than FLTW's 1.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF	1.76%	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	3.86%	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 0.64, 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 (13.59%) compared to IPAC (5.93%). 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 18.91% vs 8.37% for IPAC. On fees, IPAC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IPAC has been the lower-risk option at 5.93%. 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 18.91% return vs 8.37%. 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 3.86%, compared with 1.76% for FLTW.

What is the main difference between IPAC and FLTW?

IPAC is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FLTW is Taiwan Equities. IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific IMI Index (Net), 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 (2.49 vs 1.52), 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.