FHKAX vs. MCSMX
Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) and Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX).
FHKAX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on May 9, 2008. MCSMX is managed by Matthews. It was launched on May 30, 2011.
Performance
FHKAX vs. MCSMX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
FHKAX vs. MCSMX - 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% |
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund | 10.66% | 28.85% | 2.82% | -17.50% | -31.25% | 6.71% | 82.73% | 35.41% | -17.65% | 53.71% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FHKAX achieves a 5.42% return, which is significantly lower than MCSMX's 10.66% return. Over the past 10 years, FHKAX has outperformed MCSMX with an annualized return of 11.83%, while MCSMX has yielded a comparatively lower 11.23% annualized return.
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%
MCSMX
- 1D
- -0.63%
- 1M
- -10.72%
- YTD
- 10.66%
- 6M
- 6.47%
- 1Y
- 31.98%
- 3Y*
- 6.45%
- 5Y*
- -2.56%
- 10Y*
- 11.23%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FHKAX vs. MCSMX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FHKAX has a 1.21% expense ratio, which is lower than MCSMX's 1.41% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
FHKAX vs. MCSMX — Risk / Return Rank
FHKAX
MCSMX
FHKAX vs. MCSMX - 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 Small Companies Fund (MCSMX). 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 | MCSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.85 | 1.48 | +0.37 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.39 | 1.94 | +0.45 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.29 | +0.06 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | 1.32 | +1.17 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.62 | 4.46 | +5.16 |
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
| FHKAX | MCSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.85 | 1.48 | +0.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | -0.11 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 | 0.51 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.34 | -0.03 |
Correlation
The correlation between FHKAX and MCSMX is 0.79, 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. MCSMX - Dividend Comparison
FHKAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, less than MCSMX's 2.01% 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% |
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund | 2.01% | 2.23% | 1.35% | 2.36% | 1.78% | 26.38% | 16.98% | 1.03% | 2.25% | 5.66% | 4.79% | 8.88% |
Drawdowns
FHKAX vs. MCSMX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FHKAX drawdown since its inception was -58.62%, which is greater than MCSMX's maximum drawdown of -55.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHKAX and MCSMX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| FHKAX | MCSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.62% | -55.77% | -2.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.97% | -15.69% | -0.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -54.04% | -53.98% | -0.06% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -58.62% | -55.77% | -2.85% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.83% | -24.92% | +14.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.15% | -20.31% | +1.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.12% | 5.63% | -1.51% |
Volatility
FHKAX vs. MCSMX - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) has a higher volatility of 9.26% compared to Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) at 8.13%. This indicates that FHKAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MCSMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| FHKAX | MCSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.26% | 8.13% | +1.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.44% | 14.70% | +1.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.16% | 22.12% | +1.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.95% | 24.01% | -0.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.09% | 21.99% | +0.10% |