Screener
XPP vs FLCH
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 vs Franklin FTSE China ETF
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.
- XPP is classified as cryptocurrency, while FLCH is equity — different risk/return profiles.
- XPP follows a leveraged strategy; FLCH uses index tracking.
- 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
| XPP | FLCH | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.95% | 0.19% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $11M | $282M |
| Since | 2009 | 2017 |
| Dividend yield | 2.43% | 2.47% |
| Asset class | cryptocurrency | equity |
| Region | — | emerging markets |
| Strategy | leveraged | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | -8.4% | +6.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +5.4% | +9.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | -19.1% | -4.4% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.31 | 0.35 |
| Volatility 1Y | 38.82% | 19.14% |
| Max drawdown | -89.90% | -62.09% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to XPP and FLCH
Explore further