BILZ vs. MCHS

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

BILZ (PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund) and MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BILZ is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PIMCO, while MCHS is a China Equities fund actively managed by Matthews. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BILZ returned 3.85% vs 44.77% for MCHS. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. BILZ charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for MCHS.

Performance

BILZ vs. MCHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund (BILZ) and Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BILZ achieves a 1.91% return, which is significantly lower than MCHS's 31.65% return.

BILZ

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.31%
• 6M: 1.79%
• YTD: 1.91%
• 1Y: 3.85%
• 3Y*: 4.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MCHS

• 1D: -5.71%
• 1M: -10.31%
• 6M: 24.60%
• YTD: 31.65%
• 1Y: 44.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BILZ vs. MCHS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BILZ PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund	1.91%	4.21%	5.12%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	31.65%	31.19%	6.53%

Correlation

The correlation between BILZ and MCHS is -0.14, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	-0.08

Return for Risk

BILZ vs. MCHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BILZ

BILZ Risk / Return Rank: 100
BILZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Omega Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Martin Ratio Rank: 100

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 59
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 59
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

BILZ vs. MCHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund (BILZ) and Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS). 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.

	BILZ	MCHS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	18.41	1.56	+16.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	116.11	2.06	+114.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	44.34	1.29	+43.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	195.38	2.40	+192.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1,856.97	9.28	+1,847.69

BILZ vs. MCHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BILZ Sharpe Ratio is 18.41, which is higher than the MCHS Sharpe Ratio of 1.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BILZ and MCHS, 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

BILZ vs. MCHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BILZ drawdown since its inception was -0.52%, smaller than the maximum MCHS drawdown of -23.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BILZ and MCHS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BILZ	MCHS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.52%	-23.75%	+23.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.02%	-18.75%	+18.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-18.75%	+18.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.01%	-7.54%	+7.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.00%	4.84%	-4.84%

Volatility

BILZ vs. MCHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund (BILZ) is 0.07%, while Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a volatility of 16.23%. This indicates that BILZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BILZ	MCHS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.07%	16.23%	-16.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.15%	25.92%	-25.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21%	28.77%	-28.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.52%	30.01%	-29.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.52%	30.01%	-29.49%

BILZ vs. MCHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BILZ has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than MCHS's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

BILZ vs. MCHS - Dividend Comparison

BILZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.02%, more than MCHS's 2.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BILZ PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund	4.02%	4.19%	4.95%	2.23%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.71%	3.56%	5.48%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BILZ and MCHS in my portfolio?

BILZ and MCHS have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BILZ or MCHS?

MCHS has higher volatility (16.23%) compared to BILZ (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BILZ dropped -0.52% vs MCHS's -23.75%.

Which ETF is better, BILZ or MCHS?

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 44.77% vs 3.85% for BILZ. On fees, BILZ is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BILZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BILZ or MCHS?

Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 44.77% return vs 3.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BILZ or MCHS?

BILZ is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BILZ or MCHS?

BILZ has the higher dividend yield at 4.02%, compared with 2.71% for MCHS.

What is the main difference between BILZ and MCHS?

BILZ is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while MCHS is China Equities. They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for BILZ and 0.89% for MCHS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BILZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (18.41 vs 1.56), 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.