SQLV vs. FLJP
SQLV (Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF) and FLJP (Franklin FTSE Japan ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SQLV is a Small Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while FLJP is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Index. SQLV is actively managed, while FLJP is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SQLV returned 6.01%/yr vs 9.03%/yr for FLJP. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SQLV charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLJP.
Performance
SQLV vs. FLJP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SQLV achieves a 12.76% return, which is significantly lower than FLJP's 16.23% return.
SQLV
- 1D
- -1.66%
- 1M
- 1.74%
- YTD
- 12.76%
- 6M
- 12.70%
- 1Y
- 25.91%
- 3Y*
- 12.10%
- 5Y*
- 6.01%
- 10Y*
- —
FLJP
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- 6.40%
- YTD
- 16.23%
- 6M
- 17.97%
- 1Y
- 32.70%
- 3Y*
- 18.66%
- 5Y*
- 9.03%
- 10Y*
- —
SQLV vs. FLJP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF | 12.76% | 2.50% | 4.76% | 21.21% | -12.86% | 37.14% | 7.13% | 17.41% | -10.55% | 5.23% |
FLJP Franklin FTSE Japan ETF | 16.23% | 26.79% | 6.99% | 20.00% | -16.57% | 0.99% | 15.76% | 18.99% | -14.01% | 2.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between SQLV and FLJP is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017 | 0.47 |
The correlation between SQLV and FLJP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.
SQLV vs. FLJP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SQLV
FLJP
Financial Services
Healthcare
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Energy
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Utilities
Financial Services
SQLV
FLJP
Healthcare
SQLV
FLJP
Technology
SQLV
FLJP
Consumer Cyclical
SQLV
FLJP
Industrials
SQLV
FLJP
Consumer Defensive
SQLV
FLJP
Communication Services
SQLV
FLJP
Energy
SQLV
FLJP
Basic Materials
SQLV
FLJP
Real Estate
SQLV
FLJP
Utilities
SQLV
FLJP
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
SQLV vs. FLJP — Risk / Return Rank
SQLV
FLJP
SQLV vs. FLJP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) and Franklin FTSE Japan ETF (FLJP). 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.
| SQLV | FLJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.33 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.94 | 2.47 | +0.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.77 | 8.62 | +0.15 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SQLV | FLJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.48 | 1.74 | -0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 | 0.51 | -0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.38 | 0.45 | -0.07 |
Drawdowns
SQLV vs. FLJP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SQLV drawdown since its inception was -48.34%, which is greater than FLJP's maximum drawdown of -32.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SQLV and FLJP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SQLV | FLJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.34% | -32.49% | -15.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.84% | -13.30% | +4.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.86% | -14.17% | -12.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.86% | -32.49% | +5.63% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.66% | -0.07% | -1.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.95% | -9.37% | +0.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.96% | 3.80% | -0.84% |
Volatility
SQLV vs. FLJP - Volatility Comparison
Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) and Franklin FTSE Japan ETF (FLJP) have volatilities of 4.30% and 4.11%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SQLV | FLJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.30% | 4.11% | +0.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.36% | 14.72% | -3.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.70% | 18.92% | -1.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.99% | 17.75% | +3.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.36% | 17.79% | +5.57% |
SQLV vs. FLJP - Expense Ratio Comparison
SQLV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJP's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
SQLV vs. FLJP - Dividend Comparison
SQLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than FLJP's 4.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLJP Franklin FTSE Japan ETF | 4.43% | 5.15% | 4.56% | 3.00% | 1.92% | 2.40% | 1.51% | 2.26% | 1.50% | 0.10% |
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF | 1.01% | 1.15% | 1.11% | 1.09% | 1.24% | 1.12% | 1.22% | 1.20% | 1.08% | 0.40% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SQLV and FLJP have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SQLV has higher volatility (4.30%) compared to FLJP (4.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SQLV dropped -48.34% vs FLJP's -32.49%.
On 5-year performance, FLJP leads with 9.03% vs 6.01% for SQLV. On fees, FLJP is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLJP has been the lower-risk option at 4.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLJP has performed better with a 9.03% return vs 6.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLJP is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SQLV.
FLJP has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 1.01% for SQLV.
SQLV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while FLJP is Japan Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for SQLV and 0.09% for FLJP.
FLJP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.48), 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.
Find the right allocation for SQLV and FLJP
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