KWEB vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both China Equities funds - KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet while FLCH tracks the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KWEB returned -14.28%/yr vs -4.93%/yr for FLCH. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. KWEB charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

KWEB vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) 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, KWEB achieves a -20.06% return, which is significantly lower than FLCH's -6.30% return.

KWEB

• 1D: -3.92%
• 1M: -4.79%
• YTD: -20.06%
• 6M: -22.24%
• 1Y: -12.78%
• 3Y*: 4.05%
• 5Y*: -14.28%
• 10Y*: 0.02%

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)

KWEB vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-20.06%	23.55%	12.01%	-9.06%	-17.24%	-49.01%	58.23%	29.92%	-33.80%	0.47%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-6.30%	32.55%	18.00%	-11.21%	-22.74%	-20.87%	30.09%	24.32%	-19.52%	0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between KWEB and FLCH is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017	0.92

The correlation between KWEB and FLCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

KWEB vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KWEB	FLCH
Consumer Cyclical	37.7%	23.4%
Communication Services	24.8%	14.2%
Technology	17.6%	12.9%
Healthcare	6.0%	5.3%
Real Estate	5.2%	1.7%
Industrials	3.1%	9.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.1%	3.3%
Financial Services	2.2%	18.2%
Basic Materials	-	5.5%
Energy	-	3.7%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

KWEB vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 5
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

KWEB vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) 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.

	KWEB	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.47	0.44	-0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.52	0.75	-1.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	1.09	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.38	0.54	-0.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.76	1.14	-1.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KWEB vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KWEB Sharpe Ratio is -0.47, which is lower than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KWEB 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

	KWEB	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.47	0.44	-0.91
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.30	-0.17	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.00	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.06	0.02	+0.04

Drawdowns

KWEB vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KWEB drawdown since its inception was -80.92%, which is greater than FLCH's maximum drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KWEB and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	KWEB	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.92%	-62.09%	-18.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.13%	-15.52%	-18.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.13%	-25.43%	-8.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-72.17%	-55.78%	-16.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-80.92%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-68.52%	-33.95%	-34.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.24%	-30.53%	-4.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.85%	7.38%	+9.47%

Volatility

KWEB vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a higher volatility of 11.52% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 6.59%. This indicates that KWEB'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

	KWEB	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.52%	6.59%	+4.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.11%	13.67%	+6.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.25%	19.22%	+8.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.67%	29.59%	+18.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	39.99%	27.91%	+12.08%

KWEB vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

KWEB has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

KWEB vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

KWEB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.70%, more than FLCH's 2.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	7.70%	6.16%	3.51%	1.71%	0.00%	7.07%	0.29%	0.08%	3.40%	0.58%	1.19%	0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KWEB and FLCH in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, KWEB 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, KWEB or FLCH?

KWEB has higher volatility (11.52%) compared to FLCH (6.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KWEB dropped -80.92% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, KWEB or FLCH?

On 5-year performance, FLCH leads with -4.93% vs -14.28% for KWEB. 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, KWEB or FLCH?

Over the 5-year period, FLCH has performed better with a -4.93% return vs -14.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KWEB or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for KWEB.

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

KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 7.70%, compared with 2.52% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between KWEB and FLCH?

KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for KWEB and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.44 vs -0.47), 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.