PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMSF vs. MCH
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

EMSF vs. MCH - Performance Comparison

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

Loading graphics...

EMSF vs. MCH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EMSF
Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF
9.54%19.20%-3.09%1.88%
MCH
Matthews China Active ETF
-6.67%30.20%17.32%-8.02%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMSF achieves a 9.54% return, which is significantly higher than MCH's -6.67% return.


EMSF

1D
4.37%
1M
-9.73%
YTD
9.54%
6M
8.20%
1Y
30.75%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

MCH

1D
2.06%
1M
-7.93%
YTD
-6.67%
6M
-11.51%
1Y
10.06%
3Y*
4.64%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


EMSF vs. MCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both EMSF and MCH have an expense ratio of 0.79%.


Return for Risk

EMSF vs. MCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMSF
EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

MCH
MCH Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EMSF vs. MCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


EMSFMCHDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.26

0.42

+0.83

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.74

0.72

+1.01

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.10

+0.14

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.05

0.54

+1.51

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

6.96

1.70

+5.26

EMSF vs. MCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.26, which is higher than the MCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMSF and MCH, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMSFMCHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.26

0.42

+0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.09

+0.40

Correlation

The correlation between EMSF and MCH is 0.71, 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

EMSF vs. MCH - Dividend Comparison

EMSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, less than MCH's 1.89% yield.


TTM202520242023
EMSF
Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF
1.72%1.88%3.29%0.02%
MCH
Matthews China Active ETF
1.89%1.76%1.31%1.62%

Drawdowns

EMSF vs. MCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMSF drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, smaller than the maximum MCH drawdown of -40.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMSF and MCH.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


EMSFMCHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.75%

-40.53%

+15.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.57%

-17.67%

+3.10%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.83%

-13.30%

+2.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.96%

-19.07%

+13.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.29%

5.58%

-1.29%

Volatility

EMSF vs. MCH - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a higher volatility of 12.64% compared to Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) at 7.81%. This indicates that EMSF'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.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


EMSFMCHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.64%

7.81%

+4.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.40%

14.52%

+4.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.55%

23.81%

+0.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.79%

29.87%

-8.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.79%

29.87%

-8.08%