KSTR vs. MCHS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

KSTR (KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF) and MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) are both China Equities funds. KSTR is passively managed, while MCHS is actively managed. Over the past year, KSTR returned 66.48% vs 36.95% for MCHS. Their 0.67 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.89% expense ratio.

Performance

KSTR vs. MCHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR) 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, KSTR achieves a 26.49% return, which is significantly higher than MCHS's 23.90% return.

KSTR

• 1D: -1.30%
• 1M: -16.50%
• 6M: 12.10%
• YTD: 26.49%
• 1Y: 66.48%
• 3Y*: 18.43%
• 5Y*: -2.88%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -0.96%

MCHS

• 1D: 1.71%
• 1M: -14.97%
• 6M: 11.94%
• YTD: 23.90%
• 1Y: 36.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 24.01%

*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)
KSTR KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF	$27.29M	$25.28M	$18.73M
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	$339.44K	$914.40K	$775.38K

KSTR vs. MCHS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KSTR KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF	26.49%	42.82%	17.07%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	23.90%	31.19%	6.53%

Correlation

The correlation between KSTR and MCHS is 0.68, 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.	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.67

The correlation between KSTR and MCHS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

KSTR vs. MCHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KSTR	MCHS
Technology	82.1%	49.5%
Healthcare	3.7%	2.1%
Industrials	3.3%	29.1%
Basic Materials	1.7%	8.7%
Energy	0.9%	5.2%
Consumer Cyclical	0.7%	4.3%
Communication Services	-	1.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.8%
Financial Services	-	-
Real Estate	-	1.2%
Utilities	-	2.1%

Return for Risk

KSTR vs. MCHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

KSTR

KSTR Risk / Return Rank: 64
KSTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
KSTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
KSTR Omega Ratio Rank: 64
KSTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
KSTR Martin Ratio Rank: 61

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 46
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 50
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

KSTR vs. MCHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR) 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.

	KSTR	MCHS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.48	1.18	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.10	1.65	+0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.23	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	1.43	+0.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.25	5.25	+1.99

KSTR vs. MCHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KSTR Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is comparable to the MCHS Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KSTR 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

KSTR vs. MCHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KSTR drawdown since its inception was -66.46%, which is greater than MCHS's maximum drawdown of -24.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KSTR and MCHS.

Drawdown Indicators

	KSTR	MCHS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.46%	-24.83%	-41.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.23%	-24.83%	-2.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.55%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-65.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.23%	-23.54%	-3.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-37.98%	-7.79%	-30.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.93%	6.72%	+2.21%

Volatility

KSTR vs. MCHS - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR) has a higher volatility of 21.43% compared to Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) at 15.69%. This indicates that KSTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MCHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KSTR	MCHS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.43%	15.69%	+5.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.10%	27.18%	+8.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.94%	29.98%	+13.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	39.83%	30.25%	+9.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	38.86%	30.25%	+8.61%

KSTR vs. MCHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both KSTR and MCHS have an expense ratio of 0.89%.

Dividends

KSTR vs. MCHS - Dividend Comparison

KSTR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.88%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
KSTR KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.88%	3.56%	5.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KSTR and MCHS in my portfolio?

KSTR and MCHS have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KSTR or MCHS?

KSTR has higher volatility (21.43%) compared to MCHS (15.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KSTR dropped -66.46% vs MCHS's -24.83%.

Which ETF is better, KSTR or MCHS?

On 1-year performance, KSTR leads with 66.48% vs 36.95% for MCHS. Both ETFs have the same 0.89% expense ratio. On volatility, MCHS has been the lower-risk option at 15.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KSTR or MCHS?

Over the 1-year period, KSTR has performed better with a 66.48% return vs 36.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KSTR or MCHS?

KSTR and MCHS have the same expense ratio: 0.89% per year.

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

MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.88%, compared with 0.00% for KSTR.

What is the main difference between KSTR and MCHS?

They also come from different issuers: KraneShares and Matthews.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KSTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs 1.18), 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.