IQSU vs. FLJH
IQSU (IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF) and FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IQSU is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the IQ Candriam ESG US Equity Index, while FLJH is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IQSU returned 12.97%/yr vs 20.83%/yr for FLJH. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.09% expense ratio.
Performance
IQSU vs. FLJH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IQSU achieves a 13.69% return, which is significantly lower than FLJH's 20.41% return.
IQSU
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 5.78%
- YTD
- 13.69%
- 6M
- 14.19%
- 1Y
- 30.14%
- 3Y*
- 19.93%
- 5Y*
- 12.97%
- 10Y*
- —
FLJH
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 7.06%
- YTD
- 20.41%
- 6M
- 17.72%
- 1Y
- 48.16%
- 3Y*
- 28.28%
- 5Y*
- 20.83%
- 10Y*
- —
IQSU vs. FLJH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IQSU IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF | 13.69% | 14.44% | 16.64% | 32.96% | -22.10% | 30.53% | 28.24% | 1.24% |
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF | 20.41% | 25.26% | 25.89% | 36.02% | -2.75% | 12.68% | 10.65% | -2.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between IQSU and FLJH is 0.54, 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 | 0.54 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2019 | 0.61 |
The correlation between IQSU and FLJH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
IQSU vs. FLJH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IQSU
FLJH
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Energy
Utilities
Technology
IQSU
FLJH
Communication Services
IQSU
FLJH
Consumer Cyclical
IQSU
FLJH
Financial Services
IQSU
FLJH
Industrials
IQSU
FLJH
Healthcare
IQSU
FLJH
Consumer Defensive
IQSU
FLJH
Real Estate
IQSU
FLJH
Basic Materials
IQSU
FLJH
Energy
IQSU
FLJH
Utilities
IQSU
FLJH
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
IQSU vs. FLJH — Risk / Return Rank
IQSU
FLJH
IQSU vs. FLJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF (IQSU) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). 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.
| IQSU | FLJH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.50 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.71 | 4.48 | -1.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.03 | 17.57 | -6.54 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IQSU | FLJH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.19 | 2.70 | -0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 | 1.13 | -0.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.80 | 0.75 | +0.05 |
Drawdowns
IQSU vs. FLJH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IQSU drawdown since its inception was -31.29%, roughly equal to the maximum FLJH drawdown of -31.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQSU and FLJH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IQSU | FLJH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.29% | -31.51% | +0.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.18% | -10.80% | -0.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.96% | -20.39% | -0.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.76% | -20.39% | -6.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.98% | -5.31% | -0.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.74% | 2.75% | -0.01% |
Volatility
IQSU vs. FLJH - Volatility Comparison
IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF (IQSU) has a higher volatility of 3.48% compared to Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) at 3.25%. This indicates that IQSU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IQSU | FLJH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.48% | 3.25% | +0.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.83% | 13.38% | -3.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.85% | 17.97% | -4.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.88% | 18.51% | -0.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.67% | 19.82% | +0.85% |
IQSU vs. FLJH - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both IQSU and FLJH have an expense ratio of 0.09%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IQSU vs. FLJH - Dividend Comparison
IQSU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.97%, less than FLJH's 3.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF | 3.24% | 3.90% | 5.06% | 25.59% | 26.67% | 1.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 5.92% | 0.10% |
IQSU IQ Candriam ESG U.S. Equity ETF | 0.97% | 1.09% | 1.12% | 1.15% | 1.47% | 1.07% | 0.98% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IQSU and FLJH have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IQSU has higher volatility (3.48%) compared to FLJH (3.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQSU dropped -31.29% vs FLJH's -31.51%.
On 5-year performance, FLJH leads with 20.83% vs 12.97% for IQSU. Both ETFs have the same 0.09% expense ratio. On volatility, FLJH has been the lower-risk option at 3.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 20.83% return vs 12.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IQSU and FLJH have the same expense ratio: 0.09% per year.
FLJH has the higher dividend yield at 3.24%, compared with 0.97% for IQSU.
IQSU is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FLJH is Japan Equities. IQSU tracks IQ Candriam ESG US Equity Index, while FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. They also come from different issuers: New York Life and Franklin Templeton.
FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.19), 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.
Find the right allocation for IQSU and FLJH
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer