FLGV vs TYLG
Franklin US Treasury Bond ETF vs Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
FLGV has a lower expense ratio. TYLG delivered stronger 1-year returns. TYLG offers more diversification with 78 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FLGV | TYLG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.09% | 0.60% | |
| AUM | $1.0B | $15M | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.23% | 8.89% | |
| Holdings | 51 | 78 | |
| YTD Return | -0.31% | +21.18% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.85% | +35.64% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.66% | +23.66% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.58% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.0% | 15.8% | |
| Max Drawdown | -18.4% | -24.5% | |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Global X by mirae Asset | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Alternative | |
| Inception | Jun 9, 2020 | Nov 21, 2022 |
FLGV vs TYLG Performance
Franklin US Treasury Bond ETF (FLGV) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year FLGV returned +1.85% while TYLG returned +35.64%. Year to date, FLGV is down 0.31% versus a gain of 21.18% for TYLG.
Over three years, FLGV compounded at +3.66% per year against +23.66% for TYLG. Across the full 4-year window we track, TYLG has the edge at +25.12% annualized vs -0.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TYLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.8% compared with 5.0% for FLGV. 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 -18.4% for FLGV and -24.5% for TYLG. 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 0.34. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLGV charges 0.09% per year while TYLG charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $9 vs $60 annually, a gap of $51 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLGV currently yields 4.23% against 8.89% for TYLG.
Holdings Overlap
FLGV and TYLG share 0 holdings out of 75 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, FLGV or TYLG?
FLGV has an expense ratio of 0.09% while TYLG charges 0.60%. FLGV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $51 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FLGV or TYLG?
Over the past year FLGV returned +1.85% vs +35.64% for TYLG, so TYLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), FLGV annualized -0.88% vs +25.12% for TYLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FLGV or TYLG?
TYLG has been the more volatile fund at 15.8% annualized versus 5.0% for FLGV. Worst drawdown: FLGV -18.4% vs TYLG -24.5%.
Should I hold both FLGV and TYLG?
FLGV and TYLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.34, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FLGV and TYLG?
FLGV and TYLG share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 75 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLGV or TYLG?
FLGV yields 4.23% while TYLG yields 8.89%, so TYLG 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.