EWC ranks 1st and FLGB 3rd of 38 funds in the Developed Single Country Category.
EWC vs FLGB
FLGB −0.41pt a year
0.50%0.09%
EWC 15.9×the volume
1.68M106K
FLGB +0.3pt
+11.4%+11.7%
EWC vs FLGB Performance
+71.2%+74.3%
- EWC 0.50%
- FLGB 0.09%, better
- EWC $7.58B
- FLGB $878M
- EWC +21.1%, better
- FLGB +15.9%
- EWC 1.24%
- FLGB 2.87%, better
- EWC 83
- FLGB 89
- EWC 1.68M sh, better
- FLGB 106K sh
- EWC $60.62
- FLGB $36.82
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | EWC | FLGB |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B55 | A93Higher |
| Mission | A90Higher | A73 |
| Risk | A87Higher | A73 |
| Tradability | A97Higher | B62 |
| Holdings | A78Higher | A72 |
| Durability | A80Higher | C53 |
Rank among Developed Single Country funds
Same Category. EWC and FLGB are both graded against the same 38 Developed Single Country funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
EWCA
FLGBA
In short
EWC A 1996 original: Canada's large and mid caps in one ticker, back when single-country funds were still a novelty. About 80 names, held through a capped MSCI index built so one giant can't swamp the basket.
FLGB Britain in one ticker for nine basis points. Franklin's UK tracker follows a capped FTSE index of roughly 110 British companies and charges a small fraction of what the typical index fund in its peer group costs.
Stated mandate
EWC The fund seeks to track an index representing Canadian equities, providing exposure to large- and mid-sized companies in Canada.
FLGB The fund seeks to track, before fees and expenses, the performance of the FTSE UK RIC Capped Index.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
EWC vs FLGB Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
EWC vs FLGB Cost
Overpaying EWC vs FLGB
$8,081
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
EWC 0.50%
$9,979
FLGB 0.09%
$1,898
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | EWC | FLGB | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $900 | $165 | $735 |
| 20 | $3,460 | $646 | $2,814 |
| 30 | $9,979 | $1,898 | $8,081 |
- 0.50%EWC
- 0.09%FLGB, cheaper
- Middle half of Developed Single Country funds
- Median 0.50%
FLGB cheapest of 38 funds
EWC 14th cheapest of 38 funds
EWC vs FLGB Dividends
- EWC 1.24%
- FLGB 2.87%, better
- EWC $0.75
- FLGB $1.06
- EWC $0.28
- FLGB $0.47
- EWC Jun 15, 2026
- FLGB Jun 26, 2026
- EWC Jun 18, 2026
- FLGB Jul 6, 2026
- EWC Twice a year
- FLGB Twice a year
Distribution history
EWC vs FLGB Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- EWC
- FLGB
Risk facts
- Volatility
- EWC 13.1%FLGB 11.0%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- EWC 1.54, betterFLGB 1.44
- Worst fall
- EWC −24.8%, betterFLGB −25.9%
- Market sensitivity
- EWC 0.88FLGB 0.75
EWC and FLGB in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.50% · 0.09%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.09% · 0.09%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.50% · 0.19%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.09% · 0.19%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.50% · 0.09%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.09% · 0.09%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.




