Scope & Assumptions:
- US-listed ETFs only
- Unhedged exposure (foreign exchange risk retained)
- Broad large/mid-cap "beta" exposure (no small-cap-only or factor funds)
- Focus on liquidity, cost, and benchmark quality
Table of Contents
North America
Asia-Pacific
North America
🇨🇦
Canada
TOP PICK: FLCA
Why FLCA?
FLCA tracks the FTSE Canada RIC Capped Index (large & mid caps) with very similar sector mix to MSCI Canada, but at ~41 bps lower fee. AUM is ~$500M+ with reasonable trading volume, so spreads are acceptable for most tickets. EWC is deeper (AUM $3.3B+) and older, but for a strategic allocation FLCA's fee advantage dominates unless you're trading very large blocks or need the derivatives ecosystem around EWC.
Concentration Notes
Both funds are diversified but tilted to financials and energy. EWC's top 10 ≈43% of assets; RBC ~8%, Shopify ~7%, TD ~5%; no single name is dominant.
Europe
🇬🇧
United Kingdom
TOP PICK: FLGB
Why FLGB?
FLGB tracks FTSE UK RIC Capped (large/mid-cap "plain vanilla" UK beta) and now has substantial AUM (~$800M+) with decent liquidity, while charging just 0.09%. EWU tracks MSCI UK and is still larger and more liquid, but the 41 bps fee gap is a persistent drag. Index coverage and sector profile are extremely similar (mega-cap staples, financials, energy). For a strategic UK sleeve, FLGB offers essentially the same exposure at a fraction of the cost; EWU is the trading/derivatives workhorse.
Concentration Notes
Both funds are moderately concentrated: top 10 ≈48–50%. AstraZeneca, HSBC and Shell are each high-single-digit weights but no single stock exceeds ~10%.
🇩🇪
Germany
TOP PICK: EWG
Why EWG?
EWG has multi-billion AUM and heavy daily volume, plus an options ecosystem, making it the institutional liquidity vehicle for Germany. It tracks MSCI Germany 25/50, giving standard large/mid-cap exposure. FLGR is much cheaper (0.09%) but still relatively small (~$80M AUM) with low average volume; for larger trades, spread and market impact can eat up the fee advantage. So: EWG for deep liquidity and scalability, FLGR as a fee-minimizing core for smaller/less active allocations.
Concentration Notes
Germany is moderately concentrated: in EWG, SAP ~13.5%, Siemens ~10.4%, Allianz ~8.7%; top 10 ≈61% of assets. Investors should treat this as a bet on a handful of global industrials and insurers.
🇫🇷
France
TOP PICK: EWQ
Why EWQ?
Here the liquidity gap is enormous: EWQ has hundreds of millions in AUM and healthy volume; FLFR has only a few million and "low volume" flags. For any meaningful size, EWQ's tighter spreads and depth more than offset its higher fee. Both track broad large/mid-cap France (MSCI vs FTSE France RIC Capped) and end up with similar sector tilts (luxury, industrials, energy, healthcare). So EWQ is the practical, scalable beta vehicle, FLFR is only suitable for very small, patient trades.
Concentration Notes
EWQ's top 10 ≈58%, led by LVMH (~8.3%), Schneider Electric (~6.8%), Airbus (~6.6%), TotalEnergies (~6.2%), Safran (~5.9%). Strong tilt toward luxury and industrials.
🇨🇭
Switzerland
TOP PICK: EWL
Why EWL?
Switzerland is structurally concentrated and defensive. EWL is the large, liquid MSCI Switzerland product with a long history and robust depth; FLSW is far smaller (~$58M AUM). Given the 0.50% vs 0.09% fee, a small, long-only allocator might prefer FLSW, but at institutional scale the liquidity, tighter spreads, and ease of execution in EWL dominate. Both are similar in sector mix (healthcare, financials, staples).
Concentration Notes
EWL is very top-heavy: Roche, Nestlé and Novartis are ~13–14% each; top 10 ≈67% of assets. Owning "Switzerland" via EWL is largely a bet on those three pharma/consumer giants plus UBS and Richemont.
🇮🇹
Italy
TOP PICK: EWI
Why EWI?
EWI has ~$600M+ AUM and meaningful daily volume, tracking MSCI Italy 25/50. FLIY is extremely small (~$5M AUM, low volume). With such limited scale, FLIY's 41 bps fee advantage can easily be overwhelmed by trading costs and poor block execution. For a global PM, EWI is clearly the scalable, tradable choice, with FLIY as a niche, low-fee option only for very small tickets.
Concentration Notes
Italy is highly concentrated in financials and utilities: in EWI, UniCredit ~14%, Intesa Sanpaolo ~13%, Enel also double-digit; top 10 ≈68% of assets. This is effectively a concentrated bet on a small financials/utilities complex.
Asia–Pacific
🇯🇵
Japan
TOP PICK: FLJP
Why FLJP?
Both track broad, cap-weighted large/mid-cap Japan (FTSE Japan RIC Capped vs MSCI Japan 25/50). EWJ is older and still the deepest liquidity + options vehicle, but FLJP has grown to substantial AUM and reasonable volume while charging ~1/5 the fee. For a strategic Japan allocation, FLJP is usually superior on cost/coverage, with EWJ reserved for very large, tactical or derivatives-driven use.
Concentration Notes
Japan is relatively diversified; top holdings like Toyota, Sony, Mitsubishi UFJ and other megacaps are generally in the mid-single-digit range each; top 10 around ~25–30%. No single stock dominates the index.
🇨🇳
China
TOP PICK: MCHI
Why MCHI?
Fees are identical, so you care about benchmark and scale. MCHI tracks MSCI China, the de facto benchmark for many institutions, and has significantly higher AUM and liquidity. GXC tracks S&P China BMI, which is slightly broader with somewhat lower top-10 concentration, but has much smaller AUM. For global allocation and benchmark alignment, MCHI wins.
Concentration Notes
In MCHI, top 10 ≈48.5% of assets; Tencent ~18%, Alibaba ~12%, followed by banks and internet names. This is a very strong bet on Chinese mega-cap platforms and financials.
🇮🇳
India
TOP PICK: INDA
Why INDA over EPI?
INDA is cap-weighted MSCI India, giving clean "beta" to India's large/mid-cap universe with lower tracking error vs standard benchmarks. EPI is an earnings-weighted strategy: it overweights high-earnings names and often tilts to value, financials and mid-caps, adding factor risk and cyclicality—better viewed as an active tilt, not a core beta sleeve. FLIN is a very cheap FTSE India alternative but with much lower AUM and thinner volume; suitable only if you're very fee-sensitive and trading modest size.
Concentration Notes
India has no TSMC-style single-stock dominance; top names (Reliance, HDFC Bank, ICICI, Infosys, etc.) are usually mid-single-digit weights, with top 10 around ~40–45%, giving a reasonably diversified country exposure.
🇹🇼
Taiwan
TOP PICK: EWT
Why EWT?
EWT is the liquidity king in Taiwan: large AUM, very high volume, and a developed options/derivatives ecosystem. It tracks MSCI Taiwan; FLTW tracks FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped with a 40-bps fee advantage and decent but smaller AUM (~$600–700M). For institutional-size trades and tactical use, EWT is superior; for low-turnover, cost-sensitive core allocations where you're not pushing capacity, FLTW is a strong low-fee alternative.
Concentration Notes
Taiwan is extremely TSMC-dominated. In EWT, TSMC is ~23.7% of the fund; top 10 ≈25–26%. Both funds therefore embed a very large single-name and semiconductor exposure.
🇰🇷
South Korea
TOP PICK: EWY
Why EWY?
EWY is the dominant Korean ETF by AUM (~$5.6B) and volume, tracking MSCI Korea 25/50. FLKR's 0.09% fee is attractive, but with AUM in the low-hundreds of millions and thinner volume, it's better suited to smaller or slower-trading portfolios. For a global PM running size or using options, EWY is the default. FLKR is the cost-efficient second choice if you can tolerate execution risk.
Concentration Notes
Korea is highly concentrated in chaebol names: Samsung Electronics is typically around 20% of EWY, with SK Hynix and a few financial/industrial conglomerates making the top 10 ~50–60% of assets. You're effectively long a handful of tech/industrial giants.
🇦🇺
Australia
TOP PICK: EWA
Why EWA?
EWA is the long-standing, highly liquid MSCI Australia product and is still the best execution venue for Australian beta, especially at size; it has very large AUM and deep volume. FLAU offers FTSE Australia RIC Capped exposure at 0.09% but with AUM ~$80M—fine for moderate tickets and long-only allocations but not comparable in capacity. For most global portfolios, EWA is "best-in-class" on tradability, with FLAU as a fee-minimizing satellite.
Concentration Notes
Australia is concentrated in banks and miners. In EWA, Commonwealth Bank ~13.3%, BHP ~11%, with other big banks (Westpac, NAB, ANZ) and diversified industrials; top 10 ≈62% of assets.
Latin America
🇧🇷
Brazil
TOP PICK: EWZ
Why EWZ?
EWZ is the macro/liquidity vehicle for Brazil: very large AUM, high volume, and tight spreads, tracking MSCI Brazil. FLBR offers FTSE Brazil RIC Capped exposure at a much lower 0.19% fee, but with AUM in the low-hundreds of millions and substantially less trading depth. For global macro trades, overlay hedges, or large reallocations, EWZ remains the superior choice; FLBR is attractive for smaller, longer-term buy-and-hold allocations where cost is the priority.
Concentration Notes
Brazil is quite concentrated: in EWZ, top 10 ≈57% of assets, led by Nubank (~12.4%), Itaú, Vale, Petrobras (common & pref), and large financials/exchanges. Investors are effectively long a cluster of financials, materials and energy.
🇲🇽
Mexico
TOP PICK: EWW
Why EWW?
EWW is the primary, liquid MSCI Mexico product with multi-billion AUM and strong volume; it's one of the few ways to get clean Mexico-only exposure, which is why it's widely used in macro and EM mandates. FLMX tracks FTSE Mexico RIC Capped at 0.19%, but with AUM ~$60–70M and thinner trading. For most institutional portfolios, EWW is the "best-in-class" core; FLMX is the cheaper but capacity-constrained alternative.
Concentration Notes
EWW's top 10 ≈63% of assets; Grupo Mexico and Banorte alone are ~11–12% and ~10–11%, respectively, with other large industrials and financials rounding out the list. Investors should be comfortable with heavy exposure to a few conglomerates.
Quick Pattern Summary (Portfolio Construction Guide)
Understanding the Franklin FTSE vs iShares MSCI Trade-Off:
- Franklin (FLxx tickers) almost always offers FTSE RIC Capped exposure at 0.09–0.19% TER with smaller but often "good enough" AUM.
- iShares (EWx/EWx-style tickers + MCHI, EWT, EWY, etc.) offers MSCI exposure with far deeper liquidity and derivatives, but at ~0.50–0.59% TER.
Where to favor Franklin on cost (liquidity now solid):
- Canada (FLCA), UK (FLGB), Japan (FLJP) – AUM is substantial and spreads are generally fine, so the structural fee advantage is compelling for core beta.
Where to still favor iShares on liquidity/capacity:
- Germany, France, Switzerland, Italy, Australia, Korea, Brazil, Mexico, Taiwan (if trading size), China (MCHI), India (INDA vs EPI) – the Franklin versions are great secondary tools, but the iShares flagships remain best-in-class for large, frequent or derivative-linked flows.