KTEC vs. FLCH

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

KTEC (KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both China Equities funds - KTEC tracks the Hang Seng Tech Index while FLCH tracks the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KTEC returned -10.84%/yr vs -4.99%/yr for FLCH. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. KTEC charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

KTEC vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KTEC achieves a -17.62% return, which is significantly lower than FLCH's -11.65% return.

KTEC

• 1D: -1.07%
• 1M: -1.75%
• 6M: -25.13%
• YTD: -17.62%
• 1Y: -15.81%
• 3Y*: 1.41%
• 5Y*: -10.84%
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -1.36%
• 1M: -3.67%
• 6M: -17.28%
• YTD: -11.65%
• 1Y: -1.70%
• 3Y*: 7.36%
• 5Y*: -4.99%
• 10Y*: —

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

KTEC vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
KTEC KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF	-17.62%	21.01%	16.13%	-10.41%	-26.12%	-29.98%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-11.65%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-21.56%

Correlation

The correlation between KTEC and FLCH is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2021	0.93

The correlation between KTEC and FLCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

KTEC vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KTEC	FLCH
Consumer Cyclical	35.3%	20.0%
Technology	35.3%	13.9%
Communication Services	18.0%	14.9%
Industrials	8.3%	11.1%
Healthcare	1.9%	5.7%
Basic Materials	-	5.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.2%
Energy	-	3.3%
Financial Services	-	18.3%
Real Estate	-	1.6%
Utilities	-	1.8%

Return for Risk

KTEC vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

KTEC

KTEC Risk / Return Rank: 5
KTEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
KTEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
KTEC Omega Ratio Rank: 5
KTEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
KTEC Martin Ratio Rank: 5

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 8
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

KTEC vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC) 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.

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.

	KTEC	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.57	-0.09	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.68	0.01	-0.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.00	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.43	-0.08	-0.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.82	-0.18	-0.64

KTEC vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KTEC Sharpe Ratio is -0.57, which is lower than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of -0.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KTEC and FLCH, 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

KTEC vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KTEC drawdown since its inception was -66.90%, which is greater than FLCH's maximum drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KTEC and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	KTEC	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.90%	-62.09%	-4.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.49%	-21.48%	-15.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-36.49%	-25.43%	-11.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-64.03%	-53.29%	-10.74%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-48.02%	-37.72%	-10.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.03%	-30.60%	-13.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.26%	9.46%	+9.80%

Volatility

KTEC vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC) has a higher volatility of 6.94% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 5.45%. This indicates that KTEC'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.

Volatility by Period

	KTEC	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.94%	5.45%	+1.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.53%	13.87%	+6.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.05%	19.59%	+8.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.14%	29.57%	+13.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.89%	27.81%	+15.08%

KTEC vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

KTEC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

KTEC vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

KTEC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.07%, more than FLCH's 2.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.45%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
KTEC KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF	4.07%	3.36%	0.27%	0.81%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KTEC and FLCH in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, KTEC and FLCH move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, KTEC or FLCH?

KTEC has higher volatility (6.94%) compared to FLCH (5.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KTEC dropped -66.90% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, KTEC or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -4.99% vs -10.84% for KTEC. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 5.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KTEC or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLCH has performed better with a -4.99% return vs -10.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KTEC or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for KTEC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KTEC or FLCH?

KTEC has the higher dividend yield at 4.07%, compared with 2.45% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between KTEC and FLCH?

KTEC tracks Hang Seng Tech Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: KraneShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for KTEC and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.09 vs -0.57), 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.