ISVBF vs. MCHS

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) are both China Equities funds. ISVBF is passively managed, while MCHS is actively managed. Over the past year, ISVBF returned -0.99% vs 37.75% for MCHS. Their 0.39 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for MCHS.

Performance

ISVBF vs. MCHS - 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 Discovery Active ETF (MCHS). 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 MCHS's 26.78% 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%

MCHS

• 1D: 2.61%
• 1M: -12.99%
• 6M: 12.83%
• YTD: 26.78%
• 1Y: 37.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 25.01%

*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
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	$335.69K	$544.80K	$781.84K

ISVBF vs. MCHS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	-6.75%	30.64%	21.01%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	26.78%	31.19%	6.53%

Correlation

The correlation between ISVBF and MCHS is 0.34, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.39

Return for Risk

ISVBF vs. MCHS — 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

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 43
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 46
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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. MCHS - 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 Discovery Active ETF (MCHS). 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	MCHS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.03	1.26	-1.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.18	1.74	-1.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.24	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	1.53	-1.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.09	5.39	-5.48

ISVBF vs. MCHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISVBF Sharpe Ratio is -0.03, which is lower than the MCHS Sharpe Ratio of 1.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISVBF and MCHS, 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. MCHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, which is greater than MCHS's maximum drawdown of -24.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and MCHS.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISVBF	MCHS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.78%	-24.83%	-28.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.14%	-24.83%	+0.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.14%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.42%	-21.76%	-2.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.57%	-7.84%	-24.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.23%	7.02%	+4.21%

Volatility

ISVBF vs. MCHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) is 6.46%, while Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a volatility of 13.78%. This indicates that ISVBF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ISVBF	MCHS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.46%	13.78%	-7.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.45%	27.26%	-0.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.60%	30.05%	+1.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.08%	30.25%	-0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.06%	30.25%	-0.19%

ISVBF vs. MCHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than MCHS's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISVBF vs. MCHS - Dividend Comparison

ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.81%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.81%	3.56%	5.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ISVBF and MCHS in my portfolio?

ISVBF and MCHS have a correlation of 0.34, 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 MCHS?

MCHS has higher volatility (13.78%) compared to ISVBF (6.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs MCHS's -24.83%.

Which ETF is better, ISVBF or MCHS?

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 37.75% vs -0.99% 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 MCHS?

Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 37.75% return vs -0.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ISVBF or MCHS?

ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

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

MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.81%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

What is the main difference between ISVBF and MCHS?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.89% for MCHS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.26 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.