ICHKX vs. LNGZX

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

ICHKX (Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund) and LNGZX (Columbia Greater China Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, ICHKX returned 3.14%/yr vs 3.12%/yr for LNGZX. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ICHKX charges 1.71%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for LNGZX.

Performance

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX) and Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICHKX achieves a -5.84% return, which is significantly higher than LNGZX's -10.47% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ICHKX having a 3.14% annualized return and LNGZX not far behind at 3.12%.

ICHKX

• 1D: 1.46%
• 1M: -1.10%
• 6M: -9.78%
• YTD: -5.84%
• 1Y: 6.55%
• 3Y*: 2.48%
• 5Y*: -6.14%
• 10Y*: 3.14%

LNGZX

• 1D: 1.75%
• 1M: -1.74%
• 6M: -15.17%
• YTD: -10.47%
• 1Y: -3.49%
• 3Y*: 3.96%
• 5Y*: -10.62%
• 10Y*: 3.12%

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

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICHKX Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund	-5.84%	28.97%	0.05%	-14.52%	-23.67%	-6.90%	14.58%	30.08%	-20.50%	49.07%
LNGZX Columbia Greater China Fund	-10.47%	27.49%	12.29%	-18.70%	-28.42%	-25.21%	46.04%	32.95%	-20.01%	59.90%

Correlation

The correlation between ICHKX and LNGZX is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 1998	0.85

The correlation between ICHKX and LNGZX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ICHKX vs. LNGZX — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICHKX

ICHKX Risk / Return Rank: 6
ICHKX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
ICHKX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
ICHKX Omega Ratio Rank: 6
ICHKX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
ICHKX Martin Ratio Rank: 6

LNGZX

LNGZX Risk / Return Rank: 2
LNGZX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
LNGZX Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
LNGZX Omega Ratio Rank: 2
LNGZX Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
LNGZX Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX) and Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX). 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.

	ICHKX	LNGZX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.35	-0.17	+0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.62	-0.10	+0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	0.99	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.33	-0.16	+0.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.02	-0.34	+1.36

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICHKX Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is higher than the LNGZX Sharpe Ratio of -0.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICHKX and LNGZX, 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

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICHKX drawdown since its inception was -70.67%, roughly equal to the maximum LNGZX drawdown of -73.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICHKX and LNGZX.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICHKX	LNGZX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.67%	-73.37%	+2.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.33%	-23.54%	+5.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.10%	-26.71%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-49.40%	-60.85%	+11.45%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.39%	-67.94%	+9.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.08%	-53.30%	+13.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.25%	-26.63%	-0.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.89%	10.87%	-4.98%

Volatility

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX) is 6.16%, while Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX) has a volatility of 6.85%. This indicates that ICHKX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LNGZX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICHKX	LNGZX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.16%	6.85%	-0.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.21%	15.88%	-3.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.96%	21.64%	-4.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.75%	30.00%	-6.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.43%	26.59%	-4.16%

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICHKX has a 1.71% expense ratio, which is higher than LNGZX's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICHKX vs. LNGZX - Dividend Comparison

ICHKX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, less than LNGZX's 2.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICHKX Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund	1.12%	1.06%	1.11%	0.74%	0.86%	20.44%	3.57%	4.37%	12.53%	6.76%	5.31%	12.25%
LNGZX Columbia Greater China Fund	2.10%	1.88%	1.21%	0.67%	0.00%	0.00%	4.29%	1.40%	5.85%	1.20%	0.00%	4.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICHKX and LNGZX in my portfolio?

ICHKX and LNGZX 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.

Which is riskier, ICHKX or LNGZX?

LNGZX has higher volatility (6.85%) compared to ICHKX (6.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICHKX dropped -70.67% vs LNGZX's -73.37%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICHKX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.35 vs -0.17), 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.