FHKTX vs. ICHKX
Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class M (FHKTX) and Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX).
FHKTX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on May 9, 2008. ICHKX is managed by Guinness Atkinson. It was launched on Jun 29, 1994.
Performance
FHKTX vs. ICHKX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
FHKTX vs. ICHKX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FHKTX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class M | 8.22% | 41.85% | 22.53% | -0.84% | -24.32% | -14.20% | 46.95% | 34.26% | -17.96% | 50.94% |
ICHKX Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund | -2.77% | 28.97% | 0.05% | -14.52% | -23.67% | -6.90% | 14.58% | 30.08% | -20.50% | 49.07% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FHKTX achieves a 8.22% return, which is significantly higher than ICHKX's -2.77% return. Over the past 10 years, FHKTX has outperformed ICHKX with an annualized return of 11.79%, while ICHKX has yielded a comparatively lower 4.00% annualized return.
FHKTX
- 1D
- 2.71%
- 1M
- -6.17%
- YTD
- 8.22%
- 6M
- 7.57%
- 1Y
- 45.66%
- 3Y*
- 20.30%
- 5Y*
- 2.38%
- 10Y*
- 11.79%
ICHKX
- 1D
- 0.83%
- 1M
- -5.95%
- YTD
- -2.77%
- 6M
- -3.81%
- 1Y
- 13.55%
- 3Y*
- 1.41%
- 5Y*
- -6.79%
- 10Y*
- 4.00%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FHKTX vs. ICHKX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FHKTX has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is lower than ICHKX's 1.71% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
FHKTX vs. ICHKX — Risk / Return Rank
FHKTX
ICHKX
FHKTX vs. ICHKX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class M (FHKTX) 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.
| FHKTX | ICHKX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.03 | 0.73 | +1.29 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.59 | 1.06 | +1.52 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.15 | +0.22 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.88 | 0.96 | +1.92 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.05 | 3.99 | +7.05 |
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
| FHKTX | ICHKX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.03 | 0.73 | +1.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 | -0.29 | +0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 | 0.18 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.19 | +0.12 |
Correlation
The correlation between FHKTX and ICHKX is 0.86, 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
FHKTX vs. ICHKX - Dividend Comparison
FHKTX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, more than ICHKX's 1.09% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FHKTX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class M | 1.17% | 1.27% | 1.10% | 1.27% | 0.29% | 10.88% | 4.51% | 0.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.69% | 14.81% |
ICHKX Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund | 1.09% | 1.06% | 1.11% | 0.74% | 0.86% | 20.44% | 3.57% | 4.37% | 12.53% | 6.76% | 5.31% | 12.25% |
Drawdowns
FHKTX vs. ICHKX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FHKTX drawdown since its inception was -58.83%, smaller than the maximum ICHKX drawdown of -70.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHKTX and ICHKX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| FHKTX | ICHKX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.83% | -70.67% | +11.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.92% | -14.00% | -1.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -54.25% | -53.67% | -0.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -58.83% | -58.39% | -0.44% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.42% | -38.13% | +29.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.28% | -27.16% | +7.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.17% | 3.37% | +0.80% |
Volatility
FHKTX vs. ICHKX - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class M (FHKTX) has a higher volatility of 9.78% compared to Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX) at 5.50%. This indicates that FHKTX'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.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| FHKTX | ICHKX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.78% | 5.50% | +4.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.53% | 11.19% | +5.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.26% | 18.63% | +4.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.99% | 23.71% | +0.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.11% | 22.40% | -0.29% |