PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
^RTSI vs. MCHFX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility

^RTSI vs. MCHFX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

^RTSI (RTS Index) is an index, while MCHFX (Matthews China Fund) is China Equities fund managed by Matthews. Over the past 10 years, ^RTSI returned 2.17%/yr vs 6.83%/yr for MCHFX. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

^RTSI vs. MCHFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in RTS Index (^RTSI) and Matthews China Fund (MCHFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ^RTSI achieves a 0.37% return, which is significantly higher than MCHFX's -1.92% return. Over the past 10 years, ^RTSI has underperformed MCHFX with an annualized return of 2.17%, while MCHFX has yielded a comparatively higher 6.83% annualized return.

^RTSI

1D
-1.70%
1M
1.53%
YTD
0.37%
6M
-0.37%
1Y
0.87%
3Y*
2.07%
5Y*
-7.45%
10Y*
2.17%

MCHFX

1D
-3.49%
1M
-3.87%
YTD
-1.92%
6M
-3.81%
1Y
17.05%
3Y*
10.63%
5Y*
-7.08%
10Y*
6.83%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

^RTSI vs. MCHFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
^RTSI
RTS Index		0.37%24.73%-17.56%11.63%-39.18%15.01%-10.42%44.93%-7.42%0.18%
MCHFX
Matthews China Fund		-1.92%29.82%17.84%-19.21%-24.38%-19.41%43.07%34.57%-21.17%59.08%

Correlation

The correlation between ^RTSI and MCHFX is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.01

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.06

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.11

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.21

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 1998

0.26

Over the past year, the correlation between ^RTSI and MCHFX has dropped to 0.01 - well below their long-term average of 0.26, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

RTS Index

Matthews China Fund

Often compared with ^RTSI:
^RTSI vs. BTC-USD^RTSI vs. NASDX^RTSI vs. DJSC.AS^RTSI vs. HFSAX^RTSI vs. ^GSPC^RTSI vs. COTZX^RTSI vs. INCO
Often compared with MCHFX:
MCHFX vs. SMHMCHFX vs. ENTIXMCHFX vs. SCHGMCHFX vs. CQQQMCHFX vs. KWEBMCHFX vs. MCSMXMCHFX vs. CAF

Return for Risk

^RTSI vs. MCHFX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
^RTSI
^RTSI Risk / Return Rank: 1111
Overall Rank
^RTSI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
^RTSI Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
^RTSI Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
^RTSI Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
^RTSI Martin Ratio Rank: 1111
Martin Ratio Rank
MCHFX
MCHFX Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
MCHFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCHFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCHFX Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
MCHFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCHFX Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

^RTSI vs. MCHFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RTS Index (^RTSI) and Matthews China Fund (MCHFX). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

^RTSIMCHFXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.06
0.87

-0.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.07
1.36

-1.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.01

1.16

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.07

1.13

-1.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.15

2.99

-3.14

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

^RTSI vs. MCHFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ^RTSI Sharpe Ratio is -0.06, which is lower than the MCHFX Sharpe Ratio of 0.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ^RTSI and MCHFX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

^RTSIMCHFXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.06

0.87

-0.93

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.21

-0.24

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.07

0.26

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.21

0.31

-0.10

Drawdowns

^RTSI vs. MCHFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ^RTSI drawdown since its inception was -93.26%, which is greater than MCHFX's maximum drawdown of -67.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ^RTSI and MCHFX.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

^RTSIMCHFXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-93.26%

-67.02%

-26.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.79%

-15.58%

-2.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-40.03%

-27.77%

-12.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-62.14%

-59.96%

-2.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-62.14%

-64.75%

+2.61%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-55.05%

-39.51%

-15.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-43.30%

-22.11%

-21.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.17%

5.78%

+2.39%

Volatility

^RTSI vs. MCHFX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for RTS Index (^RTSI) is 5.98%, while Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) has a volatility of 8.02%. This indicates that ^RTSI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCHFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

^RTSIMCHFXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.98%

8.02%

-2.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.81%

15.55%

-2.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.07%

20.27%

+0.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

36.06%

29.99%

+6.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.01%

26.65%

+4.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

^RTSI and MCHFX have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCHFX has higher volatility (8.02%) compared to ^RTSI (5.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ^RTSI dropped -93.26% vs MCHFX's -67.02%.

MCHFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.87 vs -0.06), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ^RTSI and MCHFX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer