ASIA vs. CNXT

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

ASIA (Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF) and CNXT (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while CNXT is a China Equities fund tracking the SME-ChiNext 100 Index. ASIA is actively managed, while CNXT is passively managed. Over the past year, ASIA returned 41.39% vs 79.99% for CNXT. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ASIA charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CNXT.

Performance

ASIA vs. CNXT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ASIA having a 19.88% return and CNXT slightly higher at 20.68%.

ASIA

• 1D: -3.99%
• 1M: -6.33%
• 6M: 12.73%
• YTD: 19.88%
• 1Y: 41.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CNXT

• 1D: -4.22%
• 1M: -3.05%
• 6M: 10.97%
• YTD: 20.68%
• 1Y: 79.99%
• 3Y*: 22.79%
• 5Y*: 1.56%
• 10Y*: 5.41%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASIA vs. CNXT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF	19.88%	32.06%	3.41%	0.01%
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	20.68%	59.31%	12.42%	-1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between ASIA and CNXT is 0.58, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023	0.56

The correlation between ASIA and CNXT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

ASIA vs. CNXT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ASIA	CNXT
Technology	60.2%	44.3%
Financial Services	16.2%	3.7%
Industrials	7.4%	37.5%
Communication Services	4.8%	0.9%
Consumer Cyclical	3.6%	0.6%
Energy	2.5%	-
Healthcare	2.5%	3.9%
Real Estate	1.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.1%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.1%	4.9%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ASIA vs. CNXT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ASIA

ASIA Risk / Return Rank: 62
ASIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
ASIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
ASIA Omega Ratio Rank: 63
ASIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
ASIA Martin Ratio Rank: 65

CNXT

CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 88
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 80
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

ASIA vs. CNXT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ASIA	CNXT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	2.35	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.02	2.96	-0.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.37	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	5.23	-2.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.13	17.67	-8.54

ASIA vs. CNXT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASIA Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the CNXT Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASIA and CNXT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ASIA vs. CNXT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASIA drawdown since its inception was -23.95%, smaller than the maximum CNXT drawdown of -68.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASIA and CNXT.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASIA	CNXT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.95%	-68.98%	+45.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.47%	-15.37%	+0.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-48.60%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-61.21%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.52%	-15.37%	+1.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.91%	-42.61%	+37.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.55%	4.54%	+0.01%

Volatility

ASIA vs. CNXT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA) is 13.93%, while VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) has a volatility of 15.65%. This indicates that ASIA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNXT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASIA	CNXT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.93%	15.65%	-1.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.35%	25.28%	-0.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.59%	34.35%	-7.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.05%	35.85%	-13.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.05%	31.98%	-9.93%

ASIA vs. CNXT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASIA has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CNXT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASIA vs. CNXT - Dividend Comparison

ASIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, more than CNXT's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF	0.87%	1.05%	0.58%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	0.15%	0.18%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	9.22%	0.01%	0.45%	0.00%	0.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASIA and CNXT in my portfolio?

ASIA and CNXT have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ASIA or CNXT?

CNXT has higher volatility (15.65%) compared to ASIA (13.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASIA dropped -23.95% vs CNXT's -68.98%.

Which ETF is better, ASIA or CNXT?

On 1-year performance, CNXT leads with 79.99% vs 41.39% for ASIA. On fees, CNXT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASIA has been the lower-risk option at 13.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ASIA or CNXT?

Over the 1-year period, CNXT has performed better with a 79.99% return vs 41.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASIA or CNXT?

CNXT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for ASIA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ASIA or CNXT?

ASIA has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.15% for CNXT.

What is the main difference between ASIA and CNXT?

ASIA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while CNXT is China Equities. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ASIA and 0.65% for CNXT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.57), 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.