MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

MLPS.L (Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF) and FRQX.L (Franklin AC Asia ex Japan UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPS.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FRQX.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MLPS.L returned 18.88%/yr vs 12.25%/yr for FRQX.L. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPS.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for FRQX.L.

Performance

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPS.L) and Franklin AC Asia ex Japan UCITS ETF (FRQX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

MLPS.L is traded in USD, while FRQX.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FRQX.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPS.L achieves a 21.07% return, which is significantly lower than FRQX.L's 30.09% return.

MLPS.L

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: 6.45%
• 6M: 15.12%
• YTD: 21.07%
• 1Y: 19.53%
• 3Y*: 17.73%
• 5Y*: 18.88%
• 10Y*: 6.82%

FRQX.L

• 1D: -1.92%
• 1M: -10.81%
• 6M: 22.74%
• YTD: 30.09%
• 1Y: 48.12%
• 3Y*: 24.50%
• 5Y*: 12.25%
• 10Y*: —

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

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MLPS.L Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF	21.07%	2.45%	22.60%	19.38%	31.92%	36.78%	-31.20%	7.20%	-18.34%
FRQX.L Franklin AC Asia ex Japan UCITS ETF	30.09%	30.28%	7.56%	11.37%	-12.95%	4.98%	6.31%	10.56%	-28.23%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPS.L and FRQX.L is -0.10, 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	-0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.10
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018	0.27

The correlation between MLPS.L and FRQX.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.27 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MLPS.L	FRQX.L
Energy	96.6%	2.0%
Utilities	3.2%	1.9%
Industrials	0.2%	8.0%
Basic Materials	-	3.1%
Communication Services	-	2.2%
Consumer Cyclical	-	4.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.0%
Financial Services	-	14.7%
Healthcare	-	2.0%
Real Estate	-	1.7%
Technology	-	57.8%

Return for Risk

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MLPS.L

MLPS.L Risk / Return Rank: 49
MLPS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
MLPS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
MLPS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 44
MLPS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
MLPS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 44

FRQX.L

FRQX.L Risk / Return Rank: 80
FRQX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
FRQX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
FRQX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 84
FRQX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FRQX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPS.L) and Franklin AC Asia ex Japan UCITS ETF (FRQX.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.

	MLPS.L	FRQX.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	1.96	-0.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	2.54	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.36	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.32	3.33	-1.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.60	10.69	-5.10

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the FRQX.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPS.L and FRQX.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.

Drawdowns

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPS.L drawdown since its inception was -82.23%, which is greater than FRQX.L's maximum drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPS.L and FRQX.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	MLPS.L	FRQX.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-82.23%	-43.56%	-38.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.39%	-14.38%	+5.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.67%	-22.03%	+4.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.76%	-25.37%	+3.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-75.70%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.40%	-14.38%	+12.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.93%	-15.74%	-12.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	4.49%	-1.01%

Volatility

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPS.L) is 3.29%, while Franklin AC Asia ex Japan UCITS ETF (FRQX.L) has a volatility of 11.37%. This indicates that MLPS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRQX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MLPS.L	FRQX.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.29%	11.37%	-8.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.97%	22.43%	-11.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.47%	24.44%	-9.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.16%	22.43%	-2.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.33%	22.84%	+5.49%

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPS.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FRQX.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPS.L vs. FRQX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MLPS.L nor FRQX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MLPS.L and FRQX.L in my portfolio?

MLPS.L and FRQX.L have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MLPS.L or FRQX.L?

On fees, FRQX.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MLPS.L or FRQX.L?

FRQX.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MLPS.L.

What is the main difference between MLPS.L and FRQX.L?

MLPS.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while FRQX.L is Asia Pacific Equities. MLPS.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FRQX.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MLPS.L and 0.40% for FRQX.L.