IASMX vs. FHKCX

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

IASMX (Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund) and FHKCX (Fidelity China Region Fund) are both mutual funds - IASMX is a Asia Pacific Equities fund managed by Guinness Atkinson, while FHKCX is a China Equities fund managed by Fidelity. Over the past 10 years, IASMX returned 8.01%/yr vs 13.58%/yr for FHKCX. Their correlation of 0.81 means they have usually moved in the same direction. IASMX charges 1.98%/yr vs 0.91%/yr for FHKCX.

Performance

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund (IASMX) and Fidelity China Region Fund (FHKCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IASMX achieves a 15.04% return, which is significantly lower than FHKCX's 29.02% return. Over the past 10 years, IASMX has underperformed FHKCX with an annualized return of 8.01%, while FHKCX has yielded a comparatively higher 13.58% annualized return.

IASMX

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 3.30%
• 6M: 10.10%
• YTD: 15.04%
• 1Y: 23.94%
• 3Y*: 14.18%
• 5Y*: 2.32%
• 10Y*: 8.01%
• ALL TIME*: 4.10%

FHKCX

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -2.43%
• 6M: 16.32%
• YTD: 29.02%
• 1Y: 54.37%
• 3Y*: 29.43%
• 5Y*: 9.13%
• 10Y*: 13.58%
• ALL TIME*: 9.90%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FHKCX Fidelity China Region Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
IASMX Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IASMX Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund	15.04%	29.64%	4.38%	5.95%	-28.04%	-6.46%	26.02%	29.32%	-17.58%	47.12%
FHKCX Fidelity China Region Fund	29.02%	42.56%	23.15%	-0.29%	-23.87%	-13.69%	47.85%	35.12%	-17.43%	51.94%

Correlation

The correlation between IASMX and FHKCX is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.89
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 29, 1996	0.81

The correlation between IASMX and FHKCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IASMX vs. FHKCX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IASMX

IASMX Risk / Return Rank: 44
IASMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
IASMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
IASMX Omega Ratio Rank: 34
IASMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IASMX Martin Ratio Rank: 43

FHKCX

FHKCX Risk / Return Rank: 88
FHKCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FHKCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
FHKCX Omega Ratio Rank: 81
FHKCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
FHKCX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund (IASMX) and Fidelity China Region Fund (FHKCX). 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.

	IASMX	FHKCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	2.30	-0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.87	2.85	-0.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.39	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.58	4.64	-2.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.90	13.03	-6.13

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IASMX Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the FHKCX Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IASMX and FHKCX, 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

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IASMX drawdown since its inception was -76.53%, which is greater than FHKCX's maximum drawdown of -61.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IASMX and FHKCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	IASMX	FHKCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.53%	-61.96%	-14.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.00%	-12.24%	+2.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.62%	-22.02%	+2.40%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.76%	-48.17%	+4.41%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.51%	-58.41%	+5.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.59%	-7.78%	+3.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.06%	-20.18%	-12.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.73%	4.35%	-0.62%

Volatility

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund (IASMX) is 6.77%, while Fidelity China Region Fund (FHKCX) has a volatility of 8.67%. This indicates that IASMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FHKCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IASMX	FHKCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.77%	8.67%	-1.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.94%	20.75%	-4.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.26%	24.79%	-5.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.62%	24.71%	-3.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.90%	22.68%	-1.78%

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IASMX has a 1.98% expense ratio, which is higher than FHKCX's 0.91% expense ratio.

Dividends

IASMX vs. FHKCX - Dividend Comparison

IASMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.02%, more than FHKCX's 1.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FHKCX Fidelity China Region Fund	1.36%	1.75%	1.39%	1.92%	1.05%	10.77%	4.85%	0.66%	0.83%	0.39%	1.35%	15.47%
IASMX Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund	6.02%	6.92%	1.51%	1.16%	3.40%	9.14%	5.78%	6.61%	12.82%	0.90%	1.44%	1.18%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IASMX and FHKCX in my portfolio?

IASMX and FHKCX have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IASMX or FHKCX?

FHKCX has higher volatility (8.67%) compared to IASMX (6.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IASMX dropped -76.53% vs FHKCX's -61.96%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FHKCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.34), 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.