FLJH vs QQQ
Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
FLJH has a lower expense ratio. FLJH delivered stronger 1-year returns. FLJH offers more diversification with 500 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FLJH | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.09% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $206M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.52% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 500 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +21.33% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +33.34% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +26.64% | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +21.24% | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.2% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 2, 2017 | Mar 10, 1999 |
FLJH vs QQQ Performance
Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FLJH returned +33.34% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, FLJH is up 21.33% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Over three years, FLJH compounded at +26.64% per year against +25.96% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +21.24% and +14.54% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, FLJH has the edge at +13.56% annualized vs +13.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 15.0% for FLJH. 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 -35.2% for FLJH and -83.0% for QQQ. 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 0.60. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLJH charges 0.09% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $9 vs $18 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLJH currently yields 2.52% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
FLJH and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 577 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, FLJH or QQQ?
FLJH has an expense ratio of 0.09% while QQQ charges 0.18%. FLJH is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $9 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FLJH or QQQ?
Over the past year FLJH returned +33.34% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so FLJH leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), FLJH annualized +13.56% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FLJH or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 15.0% for FLJH. Worst drawdown: FLJH -35.2% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both FLJH and QQQ?
FLJH and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.60, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FLJH and QQQ?
FLJH and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 577 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLJH or QQQ?
FLJH yields 2.52% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so FLJH 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.