XLF vs. FLJP
XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) and FLJP (Franklin FTSE Japan ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLF is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Financial Select Sector Index, while FLJP is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XLF returned 9.15%/yr vs 8.82%/yr for FLJP. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XLF charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLJP.
Performance
XLF vs. FLJP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLF achieves a -2.11% return, which is significantly lower than FLJP's 14.83% return.
XLF
- 1D
- 1.37%
- 1M
- 4.00%
- YTD
- -2.11%
- 6M
- -2.09%
- 1Y
- 8.41%
- 3Y*
- 18.86%
- 5Y*
- 9.15%
- 10Y*
- 13.33%
FLJP
- 1D
- 0.56%
- 1M
- 0.15%
- YTD
- 14.83%
- 6M
- 14.62%
- 1Y
- 31.78%
- 3Y*
- 16.94%
- 5Y*
- 8.82%
- 10Y*
- —
XLF vs. FLJP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | -2.11% | 14.90% | 30.56% | 12.03% | -10.59% | 34.80% | -1.74% | 31.88% | -13.06% | 4.70% |
FLJP Franklin FTSE Japan ETF | 14.83% | 26.79% | 6.99% | 20.00% | -16.57% | 0.99% | 15.76% | 18.99% | -14.01% | 2.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLF and FLJP is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017 | 0.54 |
The correlation between XLF and FLJP shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.54 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XLF vs. FLJP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XLF
FLJP
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
XLF
FLJP
Technology
XLF
FLJP
Industrials
XLF
FLJP
Basic Materials
XLF
-
FLJP
Communication Services
XLF
-
FLJP
Consumer Cyclical
XLF
-
FLJP
Consumer Defensive
XLF
-
FLJP
Energy
XLF
-
FLJP
Healthcare
XLF
-
FLJP
Real Estate
XLF
-
FLJP
Utilities
XLF
-
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
XLF vs. FLJP — Risk / Return Rank
XLF
FLJP
XLF vs. FLJP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) 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.
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.
| XLF | FLJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.30 | -0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.42 | 2.33 | -1.91 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.08 | 8.10 | -7.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XLF vs. FLJP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, which is greater than FLJP's maximum drawdown of -32.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and FLJP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLF | FLJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -82.69% | -32.49% | -50.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.79% | -13.30% | -1.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.54% | -14.17% | -1.37% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.81% | -32.49% | +6.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.94% | -1.49% | -3.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.01% | -9.34% | -10.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.76% | 3.83% | +1.93% |
Volatility
XLF vs. FLJP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 4.23%, while Franklin FTSE Japan ETF (FLJP) has a volatility of 5.62%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLJP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XLF | FLJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.23% | 5.62% | -1.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.26% | 15.45% | -4.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.69% | 19.47% | -4.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.66% | 17.86% | +0.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.17% | 17.84% | +4.33% |
XLF vs. FLJP - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FLJP's 0.09% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
XLF vs. FLJP - Dividend Comparison
XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, less than FLJP's 4.48% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLJP Franklin FTSE Japan ETF | 4.48% | 5.15% | 4.56% | 3.00% | 1.92% | 2.40% | 1.51% | 2.26% | 1.50% | 0.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | 1.49% | 1.31% | 1.42% | 1.71% | 2.04% | 1.63% | 2.03% | 1.87% | 2.08% | 1.48% | 21.10% | 1.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XLF and FLJP have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FLJP has higher volatility (5.62%) compared to XLF (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLF dropped -82.69% vs FLJP's -32.49%.
On 5-year performance, XLF leads with 9.15% vs 8.82% for FLJP. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XLF has performed better with a 9.15% return vs 8.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.09% for FLJP.
FLJP has the higher dividend yield at 4.48%, compared with 1.49% for XLF.
XLF is categorized as Financials Equities, while FLJP is Japan Equities. XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index, while FLJP tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLF and 0.09% for FLJP.
FLJP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 0.42), 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 XLF 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