BCHI vs. EMSF

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BCHI (GMO Beyond China ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BCHI returned 64.74% vs 70.16% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BCHI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

BCHI vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCHI achieves a 35.93% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 54.93% return.

BCHI

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 6.18%
• YTD: 35.93%
• 6M: 37.59%
• 1Y: 64.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMSF

• 1D: 2.13%
• 1M: 12.23%
• YTD: 54.93%
• 6M: 56.33%
• 1Y: 70.16%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCHI vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF	35.93%	26.33%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	54.93%	15.84%

Correlation

The correlation between BCHI and EMSF is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.85

The correlation between BCHI and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BCHI vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCHI

BCHI Risk / Return Rank: 88
BCHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
BCHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
BCHI Omega Ratio Rank: 90
BCHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
BCHI Martin Ratio Rank: 87

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 81
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

BCHI vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.

	BCHI	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.98	2.57	+0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.77	3.15	+0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.45	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.60	4.84	-0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.73	15.83	+1.90

BCHI vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCHI Sharpe Ratio is 2.98, which is comparable to the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCHI and EMSF, 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

BCHI vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCHI drawdown since its inception was -14.33%, smaller than the maximum EMSF drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCHI and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCHI	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.33%	-24.75%	+10.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.14%	-14.57%	+0.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.09%	0.00%	-1.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.26%	-5.72%	+3.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.66%	4.45%	-0.79%

Volatility

BCHI vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) is 11.10%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 12.41%. This indicates that BCHI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCHI	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.10%	12.41%	-1.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.96%	23.61%	-3.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.88%	27.55%	-5.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.77%	23.59%	-1.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.77%	23.59%	-1.82%

BCHI vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCHI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCHI vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

BCHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.70%, more than EMSF's 1.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF	2.70%	3.67%	0.00%	0.00%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.21%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCHI and EMSF in my portfolio?

BCHI and EMSF have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BCHI or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (12.41%) compared to BCHI (11.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCHI dropped -14.33% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, BCHI or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 70.16% vs 64.74% for BCHI. On fees, BCHI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, BCHI has been the lower-risk option at 11.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCHI or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 70.16% return vs 64.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCHI or EMSF?

BCHI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCHI or EMSF?

BCHI has the higher dividend yield at 2.70%, compared with 1.21% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between BCHI and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: GMO and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BCHI and 0.79% for EMSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCHI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.98 vs 2.56), 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.