FEAAX vs. ICHKX

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FEAAX (Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A) and ICHKX (Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund) are both mutual funds - FEAAX is a Asia Pacific Equities fund managed by Fidelity, while ICHKX is a China Equities fund managed by Guinness Atkinson. Over the past 10 years, FEAAX returned 15.08%/yr vs 3.09%/yr for ICHKX. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FEAAX charges 1.20%/yr vs 1.71%/yr for ICHKX.

Performance

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A (FEAAX) and Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEAAX achieves a 33.87% return, which is significantly higher than ICHKX's -7.32% return. Over the past 10 years, FEAAX has outperformed ICHKX with an annualized return of 15.08%, while ICHKX has yielded a comparatively lower 3.09% annualized return.

FEAAX

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.97%
• 6M: 25.69%
• YTD: 33.87%
• 1Y: 56.72%
• 3Y*: 32.21%
• 5Y*: 7.69%
• 10Y*: 15.08%

ICHKX

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -2.84%
• 6M: -11.09%
• YTD: -7.32%
• 1Y: 6.20%
• 3Y*: 2.67%
• 5Y*: -6.31%
• 10Y*: 3.09%

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

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FEAAX Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A	33.87%	36.67%	20.63%	13.50%	-30.79%	-15.06%	72.51%	30.64%	-15.11%	45.96%
ICHKX Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund	-7.32%	28.97%	0.05%	-14.52%	-23.67%	-6.90%	14.58%	30.08%	-20.50%	49.07%

Correlation

The correlation between FEAAX and ICHKX is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 1995	0.77

Over the past year, the correlation between FEAAX and ICHKX has dropped to 0.56 - well below their long-term average of 0.77, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

FEAAX vs. ICHKX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEAAX

FEAAX Risk / Return Rank: 87
FEAAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FEAAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
FEAAX Omega Ratio Rank: 84
FEAAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FEAAX Martin Ratio Rank: 91

ICHKX

ICHKX Risk / Return Rank: 7
ICHKX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
ICHKX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
ICHKX Omega Ratio Rank: 7
ICHKX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
ICHKX Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A (FEAAX) and Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX). 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.

	FEAAX	ICHKX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	0.39	+1.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.86	0.67	+2.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.08	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.21	0.36	+3.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.87	1.15	+12.71

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEAAX Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is higher than the ICHKX Sharpe Ratio of 0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEAAX and ICHKX, 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

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEAAX drawdown since its inception was -60.87%, smaller than the maximum ICHKX drawdown of -70.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEAAX and ICHKX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEAAX	ICHKX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.87%	-70.67%	+9.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.56%	-18.33%	+4.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.33%	-28.10%	+10.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.64%	-50.51%	-1.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.90%	-58.39%	+0.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.34%	-41.02%	+35.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.15%	-27.25%	+7.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.10%	5.70%	-1.60%

Volatility

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A (FEAAX) has a higher volatility of 11.36% compared to Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX) at 5.90%. This indicates that FEAAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICHKX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEAAX	ICHKX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.36%	5.90%	+5.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.53%	12.19%	+9.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.91%	16.87%	+7.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.63%	23.75%	-0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.34%	22.43%	-1.09%

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEAAX has a 1.20% expense ratio, which is lower than ICHKX's 1.71% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEAAX vs. ICHKX - Dividend Comparison

FEAAX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ICHKX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FEAAX Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	12.88%	6.62%	5.21%	6.49%	0.03%	1.10%	0.84%
ICHKX Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund	1.14%	1.06%	1.11%	0.74%	0.86%	20.44%	3.57%	4.37%	12.53%	6.76%	5.31%	12.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEAAX and ICHKX in my portfolio?

FEAAX and ICHKX have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FEAAX or ICHKX?

FEAAX has higher volatility (11.36%) compared to ICHKX (5.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEAAX dropped -60.87% vs ICHKX's -70.67%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEAAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 0.39), 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.