FXP vs. MCH
FXP (ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50) and MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) are both China Equities funds. FXP is passively managed, while MCH is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FXP returned -27.96%/yr vs 9.01%/yr for MCH. Their -0.91 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. FXP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for MCH.
Performance
FXP vs. MCH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FXP achieves a 6.18% return, which is significantly higher than MCH's 0.60% return.
FXP
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- -23.97%
- 6M
- 9.78%
- YTD
- 6.18%
- 1Y
- -1.26%
- 3Y*
- -27.96%
- 5Y*
- -21.08%
- 10Y*
- -22.22%
- ALL TIME*
- -28.45%
MCH
- 1D
- 1.35%
- 1M
- 1.55%
- 6M
- -2.23%
- YTD
- 0.60%
- 1Y
- 12.16%
- 3Y*
- 9.01%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 4.31%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $103.24K | $95.91K | $96.09K | |
| $41.25K | $45.58K | $81.23K |
FXP vs. MCH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 | 6.18% | -45.32% | -52.46% | 12.74% | -0.53% |
MCH Matthews China Active ETF | 0.60% | 30.20% | 17.32% | -19.91% | -3.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between FXP and MCH is -0.79, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2022 | -0.91 |
The correlation between FXP and MCH shifts across timeframes, from -0.91 (all time) to -0.79 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FXP vs. MCH — Risk / Return Rank
FXP
MCH
FXP vs. MCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) and Matthews China Active ETF (MCH). 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.
| FXP | MCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.11 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.05 | 0.81 | -0.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.11 | 1.96 | -2.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FXP vs. MCH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FXP drawdown since its inception was -99.94%, which is greater than MCH's maximum drawdown of -40.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXP and MCH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FXP | MCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.94% | -40.53% | -59.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.65% | -15.05% | -10.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -82.34% | -30.57% | -51.77% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -87.85% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -93.56% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.92% | -6.55% | -93.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -94.18% | -17.99% | -76.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.62% | 6.21% | +5.41% |
Volatility
FXP vs. MCH - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) has a higher volatility of 10.97% compared to Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) at 7.61%. This indicates that FXP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FXP | MCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.97% | 7.61% | +3.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.41% | 16.63% | +12.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.60% | 21.97% | +18.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.72% | 29.39% | +33.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.81% | 29.39% | +25.42% |
FXP vs. MCH - Expense Ratio Comparison
FXP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than MCH's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
FXP vs. MCH - Dividend Comparison
FXP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.39%, more than MCH's 1.75% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 | 3.39% | 9.57% | 3.55% | 2.20% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 0.06% | 1.20% | 0.16% |
MCH Matthews China Active ETF | 1.75% | 1.76% | 1.31% | 1.62% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FXP and MCH have a correlation of -0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FXP has higher volatility (10.97%) compared to MCH (7.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FXP dropped -99.94% vs MCH's -40.53%.
On 3-year performance, MCH leads with 9.01% vs -27.96% for FXP. On fees, MCH is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, MCH has been the lower-risk option at 7.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MCH has performed better with a 9.01% return vs -27.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MCH is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FXP.
FXP has the higher dividend yield at 3.39%, compared with 1.75% for MCH.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FXP and 0.79% for MCH.
MCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.56 vs -0.03), 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.
Find the right allocation for FXP and MCH
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer