BGCBX vs. MCSMX

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Baillie Gifford China Equities Fund (BGCBX) and Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX).

BGCBX is managed by Baillie Gifford Funds. It was launched on Jul 6, 2021. MCSMX is managed by Matthews. It was launched on May 30, 2011.

Performance

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Baillie Gifford China Equities Fund (BGCBX) and Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BGCBX Baillie Gifford China Equities Fund	-7.39%	36.51%	9.74%	-18.00%	-28.56%	-17.30%
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	10.66%	28.85%	2.82%	-17.50%	-31.25%	-4.58%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BGCBX achieves a -7.39% return, which is significantly lower than MCSMX's 10.66% return.

BGCBX

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: -8.19%
• YTD: -7.39%
• 6M: -12.16%
• 1Y: 9.09%
• 3Y*: 3.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MCSMX

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: -10.72%
• YTD: 10.66%
• 6M: 6.47%
• 1Y: 31.98%
• 3Y*: 6.45%
• 5Y*: -2.56%
• 10Y*: 11.23%

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

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

BGCBX has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is lower than MCSMX's 1.41% expense ratio.

MCSMX

Matthews China Small Companies Fund

BGCBX

Baillie Gifford China Equities Fund

Return for Risk

BGCBX vs. MCSMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

BGCBX

BGCBX Risk / Return Rank: 14
BGCBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
BGCBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
BGCBX Omega Ratio Rank: 13
BGCBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
BGCBX Martin Ratio Rank: 14

MCSMX

MCSMX Risk / Return Rank: 67
MCSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
MCSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
MCSMX Omega Ratio Rank: 76
MCSMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
MCSMX Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baillie Gifford China Equities Fund (BGCBX) and Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX). 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.

	BGCBX	MCSMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.40	1.48	-1.08
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.67	1.94	-1.27
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.29	-0.20
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.40	1.32	-0.92
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.29	4.46	-3.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BGCBX Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the MCSMX Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BGCBX and MCSMX, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BGCBX	MCSMX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40	1.48	-1.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.30	0.34	-0.64

Correlation

The correlation between BGCBX and MCSMX is 0.82, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Dividend Comparison

BGCBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, less than MCSMX's 2.01% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BGCBX Baillie Gifford China Equities Fund	0.99%	0.91%	2.03%	1.50%	0.66%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	2.01%	2.23%	1.35%	2.36%	1.78%	26.38%	16.98%	1.03%	2.25%	5.66%	4.79%	8.88%

Drawdowns

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BGCBX drawdown since its inception was -59.07%, which is greater than MCSMX's maximum drawdown of -55.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGCBX and MCSMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	BGCBX	MCSMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.07%	-55.77%	-3.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.02%	-15.69%	-0.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-53.98%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-55.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-33.71%	-24.92%	-8.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-38.61%	-20.31%	-18.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.94%	5.63%	-0.69%

Volatility

BGCBX vs. MCSMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Baillie Gifford China Equities Fund (BGCBX) is 6.03%, while Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) has a volatility of 8.13%. This indicates that BGCBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCSMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BGCBX	MCSMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.03%	8.13%	-2.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.23%	14.70%	-1.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.42%	22.12%	-0.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.29%	24.01%	+3.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.29%	21.99%	+5.30%