FHKAX vs. MCDFX

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) and Matthews China Dividend Fund (MCDFX).

FHKAX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on May 9, 2008. MCDFX is managed by Matthews. It was launched on Nov 29, 2009.

Performance

FHKAX vs. MCDFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) and Matthews China Dividend Fund (MCDFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FHKAX vs. MCDFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
MCDFX Matthews China Dividend Fund	5.60%	29.41%	14.93%	-20.68%	-16.72%	-0.60%	26.88%	15.03%	-9.93%	37.52%

Returns By Period

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%

MCDFX

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FHKAX vs. MCDFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHKAX has a 1.21% expense ratio, which is higher than MCDFX's 1.20% expense ratio.

FHKAX

Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A

MCDFX

Matthews China Dividend Fund

Return for Risk

FHKAX vs. MCDFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FHKAX

FHKAX Risk / Return Rank: 88
FHKAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FHKAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
FHKAX Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FHKAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
FHKAX Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

FHKAX vs. MCDFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) and Matthews China Dividend Fund (MCDFX). 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.

	FHKAX	MCDFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.48	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.62	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FHKAX	MCDFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.85	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.11	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	—	—

Correlation

The correlation between FHKAX and MCDFX is 0.84, 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

FHKAX vs. MCDFX - Dividend Comparison

FHKAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, less than MCDFX's 3.84% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
MCDFX Matthews China Dividend Fund	3.84%	4.05%	3.97%	4.08%	5.56%	10.35%	3.91%	1.60%	11.25%	9.52%	3.38%	6.42%

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	FHKAX	MCDFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.97%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-54.04%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.83%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.15%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.12%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FHKAX	MCDFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.26%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.44%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.16%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.95%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.09%	—	—