KURE vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both China Equities funds - KURE tracks the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index while FLCH tracks the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KURE returned -16.33%/yr vs -4.93%/yr for FLCH. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KURE charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

KURE vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) 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, KURE achieves a -10.68% return, which is significantly lower than FLCH's -6.30% return.

KURE

• 1D: -2.87%
• 1M: -12.23%
• YTD: -10.68%
• 6M: -15.54%
• 1Y: -5.05%
• 3Y*: -6.04%
• 5Y*: -16.33%
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: -6.30%
• 6M: -7.45%
• 1Y: 8.36%
• 3Y*: 10.66%
• 5Y*: -4.93%
• 10Y*: —

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

KURE vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF	-10.68%	24.87%	-17.83%	-17.70%	-25.43%	-16.01%	68.97%	34.30%	-30.07%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.30%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-26.90%

Correlation

The correlation between KURE and FLCH is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.67
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2018	0.67

The correlation between KURE and FLCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

KURE vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KURE	FLCH
Healthcare	99.3%	5.3%
Consumer Defensive	0.7%	3.3%
Basic Materials	-	5.5%
Communication Services	-	14.2%
Consumer Cyclical	-	23.4%
Energy	-	3.7%
Financial Services	-	18.2%
Industrials	-	9.1%
Real Estate	-	1.7%
Technology	-	12.9%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

KURE vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

KURE

KURE Risk / Return Rank: 7
KURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
KURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
KURE Omega Ratio Rank: 7
KURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
KURE Martin Ratio Rank: 7

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 15
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

KURE vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) 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.

	KURE	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.19	0.44	-0.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.09	0.75	-0.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.09	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.18	0.54	-0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.39	1.14	-1.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KURE vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KURE Sharpe Ratio is -0.19, which is lower than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KURE 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KURE	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.19	0.44	-0.63
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.52	-0.17	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.11	0.02	-0.12

Drawdowns

KURE vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, which is greater than FLCH's maximum drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	KURE	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.53%	-62.09%	-6.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.53%	-15.52%	-12.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.05%	-25.43%	-8.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-67.94%	-55.78%	-12.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-61.11%	-33.95%	-27.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-38.07%	-30.53%	-7.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.13%	7.38%	+5.75%

Volatility

KURE vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) has a higher volatility of 7.23% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 6.59%. This indicates that KURE'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

	KURE	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.23%	6.59%	+0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.67%	13.67%	+4.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.49%	19.22%	+7.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.86%	29.59%	+2.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.39%	27.91%	+4.48%

KURE vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

KURE has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

KURE vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, more than FLCH's 2.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.52%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF	4.70%	4.19%	1.29%	0.65%	0.05%	14.12%	0.00%	0.25%	0.21%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KURE and FLCH in my portfolio?

KURE and FLCH have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KURE or FLCH?

KURE has higher volatility (7.23%) compared to FLCH (6.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, KURE or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -4.93% vs -16.33% for KURE. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 6.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KURE or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLCH has performed better with a -4.93% return vs -16.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KURE or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for KURE.

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

KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 2.52% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between KURE and FLCH?

KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for KURE and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.44 vs -0.19), 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.