ISVBF vs. MCH

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) are both China Equities funds. ISVBF is passively managed, while MCH is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ISVBF returned 8.45%/yr vs 9.01%/yr for MCH. Their 0.41 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for MCH.

Performance

ISVBF vs. MCH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and Matthews China Active ETF (MCH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -6.75% return, which is significantly lower than MCH's 0.60% return.

ISVBF

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: 9.06%
• 6M: -8.63%
• YTD: -6.75%
• 1Y: -0.99%
• 3Y*: 8.45%
• 5Y*: -2.48%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -4.43%

MCH

• 1D: 1.35%
• 1M: 1.55%
• 6M: -2.23%
• YTD: 0.60%
• 1Y: 12.16%
• 3Y*: 9.01%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.31%

*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)
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	$147.49K	$255.95K	$315.23K
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	$41.25K	$45.58K	$81.23K

ISVBF vs. MCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	-6.75%	30.64%	18.96%	-9.28%	-15.63%
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	0.60%	30.20%	17.32%	-19.91%	-3.57%

Correlation

The correlation between ISVBF and MCH is 0.63, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2022	0.41

Over the past year, ISVBF and MCH have become more correlated (0.63) than their long-term average of 0.41, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

ISVBF vs. MCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

ISVBF

ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 10
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 9

MCH

MCH Risk / Return Rank: 23
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 22
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

ISVBF vs. MCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and Matthews China Active ETF (MCH). 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.

	ISVBF	MCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.03	0.56	-0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.18	0.91	-0.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.11	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	0.81	-0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.09	1.96	-2.05

ISVBF vs. MCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISVBF Sharpe Ratio is -0.03, which is lower than the MCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISVBF and MCH, 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

ISVBF vs. MCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, which is greater than MCH's maximum drawdown of -40.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and MCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISVBF	MCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.78%	-40.53%	-13.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.14%	-15.05%	-9.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.14%	-30.57%	+6.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.42%	-6.55%	-17.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.57%	-17.99%	-14.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.23%	6.21%	+5.02%

Volatility

ISVBF vs. MCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) is 6.46%, while Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) has a volatility of 7.61%. This indicates that ISVBF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ISVBF	MCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.46%	7.61%	-1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.45%	16.63%	+9.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.60%	21.97%	+9.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.08%	29.39%	+0.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.06%	29.39%	+0.67%

ISVBF vs. MCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than MCH's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISVBF vs. MCH - Dividend Comparison

ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	1.75%	1.76%	1.31%	1.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ISVBF and MCH in my portfolio?

ISVBF and MCH have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ISVBF or MCH?

MCH has higher volatility (7.61%) compared to ISVBF (6.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs MCH's -40.53%.

Which ETF is better, ISVBF or MCH?

On 3-year performance, MCH leads with 9.01% vs 8.45% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 6.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ISVBF or MCH?

Over the 3-year period, MCH has performed better with a 9.01% return vs 8.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ISVBF or MCH?

ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MCH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ISVBF or MCH?

MCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

What is the main difference between ISVBF and MCH?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.79% for MCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.56 vs -0.03), 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.