PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LVHD vs. FLCH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LVHD vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Legg Mason Low Volatility High Dividend ETF (LVHD) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LVHD achieves a 7.25% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -6.60% return.


LVHD

1D
0.50%
1M
-1.09%
YTD
7.25%
6M
7.40%
1Y
10.89%
3Y*
9.64%
5Y*
6.16%
10Y*
8.04%

FLCH

1D
-0.31%
1M
-2.97%
YTD
-6.60%
6M
-7.51%
1Y
5.91%
3Y*
10.54%
5Y*
-4.99%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LVHD vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LVHD
Legg Mason Low Volatility High Dividend ETF
7.25%7.50%10.18%-0.95%-1.82%26.90%-1.28%22.91%-5.58%4.28%
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
-6.60%32.55%18.00%-11.21%-22.74%-20.87%30.09%24.32%-19.52%0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between LVHD and FLCH is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.09

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.22

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017

0.25

The correlation between LVHD and FLCH shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (1 year) to 0.25 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LVHD vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LVHD
FLCH

Utilities

25.5%
2.0%

Consumer Defensive

18.5%
3.3%

Real Estate

15.0%
1.7%

Financial Services

8.6%
18.2%

Consumer Cyclical

6.8%
23.4%

Energy

6.7%
3.7%

Technology

5.9%
12.9%

Industrials

4.6%
9.1%

Healthcare

4.6%
5.3%

Communication Services

3.8%
14.2%

Basic Materials

-

5.5%

Utilities

LVHD
25.5%
FLCH
2.0%

Consumer Defensive

LVHD
18.5%
FLCH
3.3%

Real Estate

LVHD
15.0%
FLCH
1.7%

Financial Services

LVHD
8.6%
FLCH
18.2%

Consumer Cyclical

LVHD
6.8%
FLCH
23.4%

Energy

LVHD
6.7%
FLCH
3.7%

Technology

LVHD
5.9%
FLCH
12.9%

Industrials

LVHD
4.6%
FLCH
9.1%

Healthcare

LVHD
4.6%
FLCH
5.3%

Communication Services

LVHD
3.8%
FLCH
14.2%

Basic Materials

LVHD

-

FLCH
5.5%

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

LVHD vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

LVHD
LVHD Risk / Return Rank: 3333
Overall Rank
LVHD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LVHD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
LVHD Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
LVHD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
LVHD Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

FLCH
FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

LVHD vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Legg Mason Low Volatility High Dividend ETF (LVHD) 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.


LVHDFLCHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.07

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.77

0.38

+1.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.49

0.80

+3.69

LVHD vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LVHD Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LVHD 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LVHDFLCHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.15

0.31

+0.84

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

-0.17

+0.65

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.57

0.02

+0.55

Drawdowns

LVHD vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LVHD drawdown since its inception was -37.32%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LVHD and FLCH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LVHDFLCHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.32%

-62.09%

+24.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.17%

-15.52%

+9.35%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.29%

-25.43%

+11.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.75%

-55.78%

+39.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.37%

-34.16%

+29.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.05%

-30.53%

+26.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.43%

7.43%

-5.00%

Volatility

LVHD vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Legg Mason Low Volatility High Dividend ETF (LVHD) is 2.89%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 6.59%. This indicates that LVHD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LVHDFLCHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.89%

6.59%

-3.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.61%

13.67%

-7.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.53%

19.20%

-9.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.87%

29.59%

-16.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.50%

27.91%

-12.41%

LVHD vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

LVHD has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

LVHD vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

LVHD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.39%, more than FLCH's 2.53% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
FLCH
Franklin FTSE China ETF
2.53%2.36%2.87%3.47%2.69%1.48%0.91%1.98%1.92%0.01%0.00%
LVHD
Legg Mason Low Volatility High Dividend ETF
3.39%3.35%4.23%3.55%3.30%2.56%3.27%3.30%3.82%3.33%2.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


LVHD and FLCH have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLCH has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to LVHD (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LVHD dropped -37.32% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

On 5-year performance, LVHD leads with 6.16% vs -4.99% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, LVHD has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, LVHD has performed better with a 6.16% return vs -4.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for LVHD.

LVHD has the higher dividend yield at 3.39%, compared with 2.53% for FLCH.

LVHD is categorized as Volatility Hedged Equity, while FLCH is China Equities. LVHD tracks QS Low Volatility High Dividend Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for LVHD and 0.19% for FLCH.

LVHD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.15 vs 0.31), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LVHD and FLCH

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