MAGC vs. FLCH

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

MAGC (Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both China Equities funds. MAGC is actively managed, while FLCH is passively managed. Over the past year, MAGC returned -15.61% vs 11.26% for FLCH. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MAGC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.

Performance

MAGC vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) 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, MAGC achieves a -15.36% return, which is significantly lower than FLCH's -4.71% return.

MAGC

• 1D: 4.10%
• 1M: -2.34%
• YTD: -15.36%
• 6M: -17.67%
• 1Y: -15.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: 2.58%
• 1M: -1.61%
• YTD: -4.71%
• 6M: -6.63%
• 1Y: 11.26%
• 3Y*: 11.28%
• 5Y*: -4.43%
• 10Y*: —

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

MAGC vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF	-15.36%	16.35%	-14.54%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-4.71%	32.55%	-13.56%

Correlation

The correlation between MAGC and FLCH is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024	0.91

The correlation between MAGC and FLCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MAGC vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAGC

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

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 18
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 18
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

MAGC vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) 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.

	MAGC	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.59	0.59	-1.18
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.73	0.95	-1.69
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.12	-0.20
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.44	0.78	-1.22
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.85	1.65	-2.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MAGC vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAGC Sharpe Ratio is -0.59, which is lower than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAGC 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

	MAGC	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.59	0.59	-1.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.15	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.29	0.03	-0.32

Drawdowns

MAGC vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAGC drawdown since its inception was -32.86%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGC and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAGC	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.86%	-62.09%	+29.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.86%	-15.52%	-17.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-25.43%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-55.78%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.88%	-32.83%	+3.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.12%	-30.53%	+15.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.98%	7.32%	+9.66%

Volatility

MAGC vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) has a higher volatility of 10.63% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 6.40%. This indicates that MAGC'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

	MAGC	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.63%	6.40%	+4.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.54%	13.58%	+5.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.65%	19.16%	+7.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.36%	29.60%	+4.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.36%	27.91%	+6.45%

MAGC vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAGC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

MAGC vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

MAGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.85%, more than FLCH's 2.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.48%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF	4.85%	4.10%	1.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MAGC and FLCH in my portfolio?

MAGC and FLCH have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MAGC or FLCH?

MAGC has higher volatility (10.63%) compared to FLCH (6.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGC dropped -32.86% vs FLCH's -62.09%.

Which ETF is better, MAGC or FLCH?

On 1-year performance, FLCH leads with 11.26% vs -15.61% for MAGC. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FLCH has been the lower-risk option at 6.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MAGC or FLCH?

Over the 1-year period, FLCH has performed better with a 11.26% return vs -15.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MAGC or FLCH?

FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for MAGC.

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

MAGC has the higher dividend yield at 4.85%, compared with 2.48% for FLCH.

What is the main difference between MAGC and FLCH?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for MAGC and 0.19% for FLCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.59 vs -0.59), 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.