Screener
FLCH vs XPP
Franklin FTSE China ETF vs ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50
Key differences
- FLCH costs 0.76% less per year.
- FLCH is significantly larger than XPP — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- FLCH is classified as equity, while XPP is cryptocurrency — different risk/return profiles.
- FLCH follows a index tracking strategy; XPP uses leveraged.
- Over the last 3 years, FLCH has delivered higher annualized returns.
- XPP has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| FLCH | XPP | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.19% | 0.95% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $282M | $11M |
| Since | 2017 | 2009 |
| Dividend yield | 2.47% | 2.43% |
| Asset class | equity | cryptocurrency |
| Region | emerging markets | — |
| Strategy | index tracking | leveraged |
| CAGR 1Y | +6.0% | -8.4% |
| CAGR 3Y | +9.8% | +5.4% |
| CAGR 5Y | -4.4% | -19.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.35 | 0.31 |
| Volatility 1Y | 19.14% | 38.82% |
| Max drawdown | -62.09% | -89.90% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to FLCH and XPP
Explore further