PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IPAC vs. FCHKX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class C (FCHKX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAC achieves a 13.73% return, which is significantly lower than FCHKX's 39.30% return. Over the past 10 years, IPAC has underperformed FCHKX with an annualized return of 9.13%, while FCHKX has yielded a comparatively higher 14.23% annualized return.


IPAC

1D
-0.11%
1M
4.62%
YTD
13.73%
6M
15.39%
1Y
28.03%
3Y*
17.03%
5Y*
7.65%
10Y*
9.13%

FCHKX

1D
2.60%
1M
7.10%
YTD
39.30%
6M
42.37%
1Y
84.77%
3Y*
32.76%
5Y*
7.98%
10Y*
14.23%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IPAC
iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF
13.73%25.16%6.18%14.51%-13.68%3.09%12.39%19.44%-12.78%25.97%
FCHKX
Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class C
39.30%41.13%21.90%-1.27%-24.66%-14.60%46.29%33.74%-18.29%50.37%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAC and FCHKX is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.59

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

0.60

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2014

0.62

The correlation between IPAC and FCHKX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IPAC
FCHKX

Financial Services

22.9%
10.6%

Industrials

21.3%
7.0%

Technology

12.9%
50.8%

Consumer Cyclical

10.8%
11.3%

Basic Materials

8.2%
5.5%

Communication Services

5.7%
9.0%

Real Estate

5.5%
0.5%

Healthcare

5.3%
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
1.2%

Utilities

1.9%

-

Energy

1.8%

-

Financial Services

IPAC
22.9%
FCHKX
10.6%

Industrials

IPAC
21.3%
FCHKX
7.0%

Technology

IPAC
12.9%
FCHKX
50.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IPAC
10.8%
FCHKX
11.3%

Basic Materials

IPAC
8.2%
FCHKX
5.5%

Communication Services

IPAC
5.7%
FCHKX
9.0%

Real Estate

IPAC
5.5%
FCHKX
0.5%

Healthcare

IPAC
5.3%
FCHKX
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

IPAC
4.0%
FCHKX
1.2%

Utilities

IPAC
1.9%
FCHKX

-

Energy

IPAC
1.8%
FCHKX

-

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

IPAC vs. FCHKX — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPAC
IPAC Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
IPAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IPAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
IPAC Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
IPAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
IPAC Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

FCHKX
FCHKX Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
FCHKX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCHKX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCHKX Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
FCHKX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCHKX 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.

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class C (FCHKX). 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.


IPACFCHKXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.68

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.45

7.91

-5.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.83

24.44

-15.61

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAC Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is lower than the FCHKX Sharpe Ratio of 4.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAC and FCHKX, 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


IPACFCHKXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.72

4.05

-2.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

0.33

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

0.64

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.25

+0.20

Drawdowns

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, smaller than the maximum FCHKX drawdown of -59.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and FCHKX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IPACFCHKXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.99%

-59.14%

+28.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.49%

-10.88%

-0.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.45%

-22.42%

+6.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.64%

-53.07%

+23.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.99%

-59.14%

+28.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.56%

0.00%

-0.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.48%

-21.33%

+13.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.18%

3.52%

-0.34%

Volatility

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) is 4.00%, while Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class C (FCHKX) has a volatility of 7.43%. This indicates that IPAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCHKX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IPACFCHKXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.00%

7.43%

-3.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.09%

16.64%

-3.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.41%

21.26%

-4.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.62%

24.23%

-7.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.58%

22.32%

-5.74%

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than FCHKX's 1.96% expense ratio.


Dividends

IPAC vs. FCHKX - Dividend Comparison

IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.80%, more than FCHKX's 0.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCHKX
Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class C
0.63%0.88%0.63%0.63%0.00%11.31%4.38%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.08%0.00%
IPAC
iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF
3.80%4.32%3.43%3.16%2.76%4.03%1.68%3.37%2.95%2.98%2.66%2.60%

Frequently Asked Questions


IPAC and FCHKX have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCHKX has higher volatility (7.43%) compared to IPAC (4.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAC dropped -30.99% vs FCHKX's -59.14%.

FCHKX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.05 vs 1.72), 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 IPAC and FCHKX

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