EVCGX vs. FHKAX
Compare and contrast key facts about Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund (EVCGX) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX).
EVCGX is managed by Eaton Vance. It was launched on Oct 27, 1992. FHKAX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on May 9, 2008.
Performance
EVCGX vs. FHKAX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
EVCGX vs. FHKAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EVCGX Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund | -9.64% | 26.06% | 9.30% | -17.33% | -22.53% | -9.61% | 25.22% | 23.32% | -9.90% | 49.26% |
FHKAX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A | 5.42% | 42.19% | 22.84% | -0.60% | -24.09% | -13.95% | 47.37% | 34.71% | -17.67% | 51.46% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EVCGX achieves a -9.64% return, which is significantly lower than FHKAX's 5.42% return. Over the past 10 years, EVCGX has underperformed FHKAX with an annualized return of 4.66%, while FHKAX has yielded a comparatively higher 11.83% annualized return.
EVCGX
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- -7.78%
- YTD
- -9.64%
- 6M
- -16.17%
- 1Y
- -0.54%
- 3Y*
- 0.48%
- 5Y*
- -7.00%
- 10Y*
- 4.66%
FHKAX
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- -9.06%
- YTD
- 5.42%
- 6M
- 6.13%
- 1Y
- 43.43%
- 3Y*
- 19.54%
- 5Y*
- 2.51%
- 10Y*
- 11.83%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
EVCGX vs. FHKAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
EVCGX has a 1.53% expense ratio, which is higher than FHKAX's 1.21% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
EVCGX vs. FHKAX — Risk / Return Rank
EVCGX
FHKAX
EVCGX vs. FHKAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund (EVCGX) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX). 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.
| EVCGX | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.03 | 1.85 | -1.88 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.10 | 2.39 | -2.30 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.34 | -0.33 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.14 | 2.48 | -2.62 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.39 | 9.62 | -10.01 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EVCGX | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.03 | 1.85 | -1.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.27 | 0.11 | -0.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 | 0.54 | -0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.23 | 0.31 | -0.07 |
Correlation
The correlation between EVCGX and FHKAX is 0.90, 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
EVCGX vs. FHKAX - Dividend Comparison
EVCGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, more than FHKAX's 1.51% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EVCGX Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund | 1.75% | 1.58% | 2.15% | 8.47% | 6.09% | 5.43% | 9.85% | 3.19% | 9.89% | 11.34% | 0.94% | 6.33% |
FHKAX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A | 1.51% | 1.59% | 1.22% | 1.58% | 0.59% | 10.80% | 4.71% | 0.38% | 0.39% | 0.21% | 0.99% | 15.33% |
Drawdowns
EVCGX vs. FHKAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EVCGX drawdown since its inception was -68.37%, which is greater than FHKAX's maximum drawdown of -58.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EVCGX and FHKAX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| EVCGX | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -68.37% | -58.62% | -9.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.35% | -15.97% | -1.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -54.46% | -54.04% | -0.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -56.84% | -58.62% | +1.78% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.76% | -10.83% | -25.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.03% | -19.15% | -8.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.18% | 4.12% | +2.06% |
Volatility
EVCGX vs. FHKAX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund (EVCGX) is 6.18%, while Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) has a volatility of 9.26%. This indicates that EVCGX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FHKAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| EVCGX | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.18% | 9.26% | -3.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.52% | 16.44% | -2.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.52% | 23.16% | -2.64% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.56% | 23.95% | +1.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.06% | 22.09% | -0.03% |