PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ICHKX vs. TRCLX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ICHKX vs. TRCLX - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICHKX achieves a 0.74% return, which is significantly lower than TRCLX's 31.10% return.


ICHKX

1D
1.68%
1M
-1.68%
YTD
0.74%
6M
0.81%
1Y
18.91%
3Y*
6.41%
5Y*
-6.01%
10Y*
4.30%

TRCLX

1D
1.70%
1M
4.39%
YTD
31.10%
6M
34.03%
1Y
67.48%
3Y*
21.74%
5Y*
3.00%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ICHKX vs. TRCLX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
ICHKX
Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund
0.74%28.97%0.05%-14.52%-23.67%-6.90%14.58%8.45%
TRCLX
T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund
31.10%36.23%10.95%-15.51%-26.24%6.28%59.73%6.20%

Correlation

The correlation between ICHKX and TRCLX is 0.75, 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

0.75

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2019

0.84

The correlation between ICHKX and TRCLX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

ICHKX vs. TRCLX — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICHKX
ICHKX Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
ICHKX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICHKX Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICHKX Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
ICHKX Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICHKX Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

TRCLX
TRCLX Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
TRCLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TRCLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
TRCLX Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
TRCLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
TRCLX Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
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. TRCLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX) and T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund (TRCLX). 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.


ICHKXTRCLXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.55

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.63

-0.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.94

6.61

-4.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.34

23.69

-18.35

ICHKX vs. TRCLX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICHKX Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is lower than the TRCLX Sharpe Ratio of 3.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICHKX and TRCLX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ICHKXTRCLXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.25

3.80

-2.55

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.25

0.13

-0.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.20

0.57

-0.37

Drawdowns

ICHKX vs. TRCLX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICHKX drawdown since its inception was -70.67%, which is greater than TRCLX's maximum drawdown of -50.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICHKX and TRCLX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ICHKXTRCLXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-70.67%

-50.67%

-20.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.19%

-10.47%

+0.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.10%

-25.49%

-2.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-52.70%

-49.44%

-3.26%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-58.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-35.90%

-1.38%

-34.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-27.21%

-22.76%

-4.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.69%

2.91%

+0.78%

Volatility

ICHKX vs. TRCLX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund (ICHKX) is 5.56%, while T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund (TRCLX) has a volatility of 7.37%. This indicates that ICHKX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TRCLX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ICHKXTRCLXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.56%

7.37%

-1.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.96%

13.90%

-2.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.86%

18.21%

-2.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.68%

23.20%

+0.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.43%

23.42%

-0.99%

ICHKX vs. TRCLX - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICHKX has a 1.71% expense ratio, which is higher than TRCLX's 1.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

ICHKX vs. TRCLX - Dividend Comparison

ICHKX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than TRCLX's 1.25% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ICHKX
Guinness Atkinson China And Hong Kong Fund
1.05%1.06%1.11%0.74%0.86%20.44%3.57%4.37%12.53%6.76%5.31%12.25%
TRCLX
T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund
1.25%1.64%1.78%2.56%2.76%8.23%1.50%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ICHKX and TRCLX have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TRCLX has higher volatility (7.37%) compared to ICHKX (5.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICHKX dropped -70.67% vs TRCLX's -50.67%.

TRCLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.80 vs 1.25), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ICHKX and TRCLX

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