HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

HMCT.L (HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF) and MCHS.L (Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds - HMCT.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY while MCHS.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMCT.L returned 0.47%/yr vs -4.48%/yr for MCHS.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. HMCT.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for MCHS.L.

Performance

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) and Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

HMCT.L is traded in USD, while MCHS.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the MCHS.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMCT.L achieves a 12.93% return, which is significantly higher than MCHS.L's -5.05% return.

HMCT.L

• 1D: 2.41%
• 1M: 3.03%
• YTD: 12.93%
• 6M: 13.12%
• 1Y: 37.69%
• 3Y*: 13.69%
• 5Y*: 0.47%
• 10Y*: —

MCHS.L

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -3.86%
• YTD: -5.05%
• 6M: -4.96%
• 1Y: 7.53%
• 3Y*: 9.74%
• 5Y*: -4.48%
• 10Y*: —

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

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
HMCT.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF	12.93%	25.91%	11.74%	-13.89%	-25.90%	0.23%
MCHS.L Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc	-5.05%	28.39%	16.86%	-13.19%	-24.11%	5,687.13%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCT.L and MCHS.L is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2021	0.84

The correlation between HMCT.L and MCHS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HMCT.L	MCHS.L
Technology	32.1%	20.2%
Financial Services	17.5%	19.0%
Industrials	15.3%	9.2%
Basic Materials	11.2%	7.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	4.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.2%	16.4%
Healthcare	3.9%	4.4%
Utilities	3.3%	2.4%
Energy	3.1%	3.4%
Communication Services	1.3%	11.9%
Real Estate	0.5%	1.2%

Return for Risk

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HMCT.L

HMCT.L Risk / Return Rank: 85
HMCT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
HMCT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
HMCT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 82
HMCT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
HMCT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

MCHS.L

MCHS.L Risk / Return Rank: 20
MCHS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
MCHS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
MCHS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 19
MCHS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
MCHS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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.

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) and Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L). 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.

	HMCT.L	MCHS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	0.43	+1.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	0.71	+2.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.09	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.47	0.58	+4.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.98	1.32	+13.66

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMCT.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is higher than the MCHS.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCT.L and MCHS.L, 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

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCT.L drawdown since its inception was -49.07%, smaller than the maximum MCHS.L drawdown of -52.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCT.L and MCHS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	HMCT.L	MCHS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.07%	-52.32%	+3.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.57%	-12.94%	+5.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.42%	-30.80%	+2.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.11%	-50.58%	+6.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.43%	-24.00%	+14.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.55%	-31.09%	+9.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	5.69%	-2.92%

Volatility

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCT.L) and Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L) have volatilities of 6.11% and 6.20%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HMCT.L	MCHS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.11%	6.20%	-0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.59%	12.75%	-0.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.32%	17.53%	-0.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.48%	29.28%	-6.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.70%	3,095.19%	-3,071.49%

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HMCT.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than MCHS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

HMCT.L vs. MCHS.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCT.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, while MCHS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
HMCT.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF	1.61%	1.73%	2.03%	2.16%	1.69%	1.12%	0.84%	1.71%	0.29%
MCHS.L Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HMCT.L and MCHS.L in my portfolio?

HMCT.L and MCHS.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HMCT.L or MCHS.L?

On fees, HMCT.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HMCT.L or MCHS.L?

HMCT.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MCHS.L.

What is the main difference between HMCT.L and MCHS.L?

HMCT.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while MCHS.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCT.L and 0.35% for MCHS.L.