FLCH vs IVV
Franklin FTSE China ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. FLCH offers more diversification with 1,030 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FLCH | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.19% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $334M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.33% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 1,030 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -11.14% | +12.96% | |
| 1Y Return | -6.20% | +20.70% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.58% | +22.10% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -1.68% | +13.40% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 25.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -62.1% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 2, 2017 | May 15, 2000 |
FLCH vs IVV Performance
Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FLCH returned -6.20% while IVV returned +20.70%. Year to date, FLCH is down 11.14% versus a gain of 12.96% for IVV.
Over three years, FLCH compounded at +11.58% per year against +22.10% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -1.68% and +13.40% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.01% annualized vs -0.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FLCH has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 25.0% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -62.1% for FLCH and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.33. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLCH charges 0.19% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $19 vs $3 annually, a gap of $16 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLCH currently yields 2.33% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FLCH and IVV share 0 holdings out of 1452 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FLCH or IVV?
FLCH has an expense ratio of 0.19% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $16 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FLCH or IVV?
Over the past year FLCH returned -6.20% vs +20.70% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), FLCH annualized -0.26% vs +7.01% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FLCH or IVV?
FLCH has been the more volatile fund at 25.0% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FLCH -62.1% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FLCH and IVV?
FLCH and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.33, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FLCH and IVV?
FLCH and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1452 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLCH or IVV?
FLCH yields 2.33% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FLCH currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.