NORW vs. FLGB

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

NORW (Global X MSCI Norway ETF) and FLGB (Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF) are both Europe Equities funds - NORW tracks the MSCI Norway IMI 25/50 Index while FLGB tracks the FTSE UK RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NORW returned 6.22%/yr vs 11.43%/yr for FLGB. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NORW charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLGB.

Performance

NORW vs. FLGB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MSCI Norway ETF (NORW) and Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NORW achieves a 17.03% return, which is significantly higher than FLGB's 6.88% return.

NORW

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: -5.46%
• 6M: 15.05%
• YTD: 17.03%
• 1Y: 22.30%
• 3Y*: 17.52%
• 5Y*: 6.22%
• 10Y*: 9.10%

FLGB

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: -0.02%
• 6M: 4.43%
• YTD: 6.88%
• 1Y: 19.32%
• 3Y*: 17.22%
• 5Y*: 11.43%
• 10Y*: —

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

NORW vs. FLGB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NORW Global X MSCI Norway ETF	17.03%	32.59%	-2.50%	5.03%	-12.55%	13.65%	26.00%	14.39%	-10.39%	-0.76%
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	6.88%	33.73%	8.77%	14.33%	-6.00%	17.14%	-9.47%	23.23%	-11.60%	1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between NORW and FLGB is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017	0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between NORW and FLGB has dropped to 0.43 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

NORW vs. FLGB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NORW	FLGB
Energy	27.3%	9.5%
Financial Services	22.9%	27.5%
Industrials	14.7%	13.4%
Consumer Defensive	12.1%	14.2%
Basic Materials	11.5%	8.1%
Communication Services	5.9%	2.4%
Technology	4.4%	0.6%
Utilities	0.6%	4.7%
Real Estate	0.4%	0.9%
Consumer Cyclical	0.2%	5.1%
Healthcare	-	13.4%

Return for Risk

NORW vs. FLGB — Risk / Return Rank

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

NORW

NORW Risk / Return Rank: 43
NORW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
NORW Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
NORW Omega Ratio Rank: 43
NORW Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
NORW Martin Ratio Rank: 41

FLGB

FLGB Risk / Return Rank: 47
FLGB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
FLGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
FLGB Omega Ratio Rank: 46
FLGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
FLGB Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

NORW vs. FLGB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI Norway ETF (NORW) and Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB). 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.

	NORW	FLGB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.31	1.33	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.90	1.95	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.24	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.55	1.89	-0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.20	6.35	-1.15

NORW vs. FLGB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NORW Sharpe Ratio is 1.31, which is comparable to the FLGB Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NORW and FLGB, 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

NORW vs. FLGB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NORW drawdown since its inception was -35.62%, smaller than the maximum FLGB drawdown of -42.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NORW and FLGB.

Drawdown Indicators

	NORW	FLGB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.62%	-42.61%	+6.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.49%	-10.26%	-4.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.06%	-13.13%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.78%	-25.90%	-6.88%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.63%	-3.11%	-7.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.13%	-6.65%	-3.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.30%	3.05%	+1.25%

Volatility

NORW vs. FLGB - Volatility Comparison

Global X MSCI Norway ETF (NORW) has a higher volatility of 5.67% compared to Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF (FLGB) at 4.47%. This indicates that NORW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLGB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NORW	FLGB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.67%	4.47%	+1.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.89%	12.61%	+1.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.20%	14.61%	+2.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.97%	16.62%	+5.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.53%	18.93%	+1.60%

NORW vs. FLGB - Expense Ratio Comparison

NORW has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FLGB's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

NORW vs. FLGB - Dividend Comparison

NORW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.69%, more than FLGB's 2.97% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLGB Franklin FTSE United Kingdom ETF	2.97%	3.50%	4.42%	3.95%	4.23%	2.93%	2.67%	4.30%	3.92%	0.43%	0.00%	0.00%
NORW Global X MSCI Norway ETF	7.69%	3.44%	6.02%	5.27%	4.01%	1.51%	1.13%	2.47%	3.53%	3.64%	3.79%	2.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NORW and FLGB in my portfolio?

NORW and FLGB have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NORW or FLGB?

NORW has higher volatility (5.67%) compared to FLGB (4.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NORW dropped -35.62% vs FLGB's -42.61%.

Which ETF is better, NORW or FLGB?

On 5-year performance, FLGB leads with 11.43% vs 6.22% for NORW. On fees, FLGB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLGB has been the lower-risk option at 4.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NORW or FLGB?

Over the 5-year period, FLGB has performed better with a 11.43% return vs 6.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NORW or FLGB?

FLGB is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for NORW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NORW or FLGB?

NORW has the higher dividend yield at 7.69%, compared with 2.97% for FLGB.

What is the main difference between NORW and FLGB?

NORW tracks MSCI Norway IMI 25/50 Index, while FLGB tracks FTSE UK RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for NORW and 0.09% for FLGB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLGB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.33 vs 1.31), 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.