MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MCHS.L (Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc) and FLXC.L (Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds tracking the MSCI China NR USD, from Invesco and Franklin Templeton respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MCHS.L returned -2.78%/yr vs -3.73%/yr for FLXC.L. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCHS.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLXC.L.

Performance

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

MCHS.L is traded in GBp, while FLXC.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FLXC.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS.L achieves a -0.77% return, which is significantly higher than FLXC.L's -5.49% return.

MCHS.L

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: 0.46%
• YTD: -0.77%
• 6M: -0.85%
• 1Y: 17.78%
• 3Y*: 7.98%
• 5Y*: -2.78%
• 10Y*: —

FLXC.L

• 1D: -1.87%
• 1M: -2.00%
• YTD: -5.49%
• 6M: -7.27%
• 1Y: 10.02%
• 3Y*: 7.93%
• 5Y*: -3.73%
• 10Y*: —

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

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MCHS.L Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc	-0.77%	19.38%	18.84%	-17.54%	-14.53%	-17.01%
FLXC.L Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF	-5.49%	22.74%	21.44%	-17.10%	-13.73%	-24.61%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS.L and FLXC.L is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2021	0.92

The correlation between MCHS.L and FLXC.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCHS.L	FLXC.L
Technology	19.9%	9.3%
Financial Services	18.4%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	17.1%	30.8%
Communication Services	11.4%	23.6%
Industrials	9.5%	4.1%
Basic Materials	7.7%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	3.2%
Healthcare	4.5%	6.0%
Energy	3.4%	2.4%
Utilities	2.4%	1.8%
Real Estate	1.2%	0.7%

Return for Risk

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHS.L

MCHS.L Risk / Return Rank: 30
MCHS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
MCHS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
MCHS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 30
MCHS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
MCHS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 27

FLXC.L

FLXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 16
FLXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
FLXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FLXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 16
FLXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
FLXC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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.

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.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.

	MCHS.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.10	0.54	+0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.59	0.88	+0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.10	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.47	0.64	+0.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.52	1.36	+2.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is higher than the FLXC.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS.L and FLXC.L, 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

	MCHS.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.10	0.54	+0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.09	-0.12	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.12	0.07	-0.18

Drawdowns

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS.L drawdown since its inception was -47.34%, smaller than the maximum FLXC.L drawdown of -64.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS.L and FLXC.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHS.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.34%	-64.79%	+17.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.03%	-15.53%	+3.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.97%	-39.33%	+14.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.71%	-59.08%	+13.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.67%	-30.96%	+13.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.07%	-28.65%	+2.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.04%	7.34%	-2.30%

Volatility

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L) is 5.63%, while Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FLXC.L) has a volatility of 6.87%. This indicates that MCHS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLXC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHS.L	FLXC.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.63%	6.87%	-1.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.97%	13.02%	-2.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.16%	18.34%	-2.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.74%	31.62%	+0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.28%	29.78%	+1.50%

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FLXC.L's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCHS.L vs. FLXC.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MCHS.L nor FLXC.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCHS.L and FLXC.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, MCHS.L and FLXC.L 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 ETF is better, MCHS.L or FLXC.L?

On fees, FLXC.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCHS.L or FLXC.L?

FLXC.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MCHS.L.

What is the main difference between MCHS.L and FLXC.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MCHS.L and 0.19% for FLXC.L.