CNXT vs. MCH

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

CNXT (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF) and MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) are both China Equities funds. CNXT is passively managed, while MCH is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNXT returned 30.57%/yr vs 14.88%/yr for MCH. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNXT charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for MCH.

Performance

CNXT vs. MCH - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNXT achieves a 42.18% return, which is significantly higher than MCH's 6.57% return.

CNXT

• 1D: 2.79%
• 1M: 12.07%
• YTD: 42.18%
• 6M: 40.51%
• 1Y: 133.47%
• 3Y*: 30.57%
• 5Y*: 5.56%
• 10Y*: 7.89%

MCH

• 1D: 1.78%
• 1M: 3.34%
• YTD: 6.57%
• 6M: 5.27%
• 1Y: 28.39%
• 3Y*: 14.88%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CNXT vs. MCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	42.18%	59.31%	12.42%	-21.47%	-17.60%
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	6.57%	30.20%	17.32%	-19.91%	-3.57%

Correlation

The correlation between CNXT and MCH is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2022	0.72

The correlation between CNXT and MCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNXT vs. MCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNXT	MCH
Industrials	42.4%	17.0%
Technology	39.9%	17.5%
Basic Materials	4.7%	7.0%
Healthcare	3.8%	4.4%
Financial Services	3.4%	20.7%
Consumer Defensive	1.4%	0.6%
Communication Services	1.0%	12.2%
Consumer Cyclical	0.7%	13.3%
Energy	-	0.8%
Real Estate	-	2.9%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CNXT vs. MCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNXT

CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 95
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 96

MCH

MCH Risk / Return Rank: 38
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 38
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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.

CNXT vs. MCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	CNXT	MCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.20	1.38	+2.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.73	1.98	+2.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.24	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.00	1.90	+9.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	32.51	5.01	+27.50

CNXT vs. MCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNXT Sharpe Ratio is 4.20, which is higher than the MCH Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNXT and MCH, 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

CNXT vs. MCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNXT drawdown since its inception was -68.98%, which is greater than MCH's maximum drawdown of -40.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNXT and MCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNXT	MCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.98%	-40.53%	-28.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.21%	-15.05%	+2.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.60%	-30.57%	-18.03%
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	0.00%	-1.00%	+1.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.78%	-18.32%	-24.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.12%	5.68%	-1.56%

Volatility

CNXT vs. MCH - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) has a higher volatility of 11.81% compared to Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) at 7.54%. This indicates that CNXT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNXT	MCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.81%	7.54%	+4.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.89%	15.40%	+6.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.03%	20.72%	+11.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.48%	29.49%	+5.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.76%	29.49%	+2.27%

CNXT vs. MCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNXT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than MCH's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNXT vs. MCH - Dividend Comparison

CNXT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than MCH's 1.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	0.13%	0.18%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	9.22%	0.01%	0.45%	0.00%	0.19%
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	1.65%	1.76%	1.31%	1.62%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNXT and MCH in my portfolio?

CNXT and MCH have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CNXT or MCH?

CNXT has higher volatility (11.81%) compared to MCH (7.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNXT dropped -68.98% vs MCH's -40.53%.

Which ETF is better, CNXT or MCH?

On 3-year performance, CNXT leads with 30.57% vs 14.88% for MCH. On fees, CNXT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, MCH has been the lower-risk option at 7.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNXT or MCH?

Over the 3-year period, CNXT has performed better with a 30.57% return vs 14.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNXT or MCH?

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

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

MCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.65%, compared with 0.13% for CNXT.

What is the main difference between CNXT and MCH?

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CNXT and 0.79% for MCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.20 vs 1.38), 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.