LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L
LCCN.L (Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc) and FLQA.L (Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - LCCN.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while FLQA.L tracks the Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LCCN.L returned -4.23%/yr vs 12.63%/yr for FLQA.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LCCN.L charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for FLQA.L.
Performance
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LCCN.L achieves a -8.72% return, which is significantly lower than FLQA.L's 32.52% return.
LCCN.L
- 1D
- 2.05%
- 1M
- -0.85%
- 6M
- -13.44%
- YTD
- -8.72%
- 1Y
- -0.57%
- 3Y*
- 8.66%
- 5Y*
- -4.23%
- 10Y*
- —
FLQA.L
- 1D
- -1.74%
- 1M
- -9.13%
- 6M
- 26.58%
- YTD
- 32.52%
- 1Y
- 52.26%
- 3Y*
- 25.15%
- 5Y*
- 12.63%
- 10Y*
- —
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LCCN.L Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc | -8.72% | 31.99% | 19.37% | -11.59% | -22.21% | -21.87% | 29.79% | 21.86% | -10.25% |
FLQA.L Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF | 32.52% | 29.84% | 7.76% | 12.02% | -12.93% | 4.57% | 6.71% | 9.75% | -5.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between LCCN.L and FLQA.L is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018 | 0.69 |
Over the past year, the correlation between LCCN.L and FLQA.L has dropped to 0.47 - well below their long-term average of 0.69, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L — Risk / Return Rank
LCCN.L
FLQA.L
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) and Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF (FLQA.L). 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.
| LCCN.L | FLQA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.37 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.03 | 3.75 | -3.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.05 | 11.86 | -11.92 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LCCN.L drawdown since its inception was -62.38%, which is greater than FLQA.L's maximum drawdown of -29.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCCN.L and FLQA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LCCN.L | FLQA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.38% | -29.21% | -33.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.74% | -13.77% | -8.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.53% | -22.19% | -3.34% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.18% | -25.38% | -27.80% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -35.27% | -12.64% | -22.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.90% | -7.22% | -22.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.49% | 4.36% | +6.13% |
Volatility
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) is 5.49%, while Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF (FLQA.L) has a volatility of 11.18%. This indicates that LCCN.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLQA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LCCN.L | FLQA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.49% | 11.18% | -5.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.17% | 22.99% | -7.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.46% | 25.11% | -4.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.35% | 17.74% | +11.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.61% | 18.52% | +9.09% |
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
LCCN.L has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than FLQA.L's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
LCCN.L vs. FLQA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither LCCN.L nor FLQA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LCCN.L and FLQA.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FLQA.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FLQA.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for LCCN.L.
LCCN.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while FLQA.L tracks Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Franklin. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for LCCN.L and 0.14% for FLQA.L.
Find the right allocation for LCCN.L and FLQA.L
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