KWEB vs. MCHS

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) and MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) are both China Equities funds. KWEB is passively managed, while MCHS is actively managed. Over the past year, KWEB returned -27.19% vs 84.27% for MCHS. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KWEB charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for MCHS.

Performance

KWEB vs. MCHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) 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, KWEB achieves a -30.60% return, which is significantly lower than MCHS's 57.13% return.

KWEB

• 1D: -2.76%
• 1M: -13.32%
• YTD: -30.60%
• 6M: -31.53%
• 1Y: -27.19%
• 3Y*: -0.64%
• 5Y*: -16.73%
• 10Y*: -0.63%

MCHS

• 1D: 3.62%
• 1M: 7.32%
• YTD: 57.13%
• 6M: 55.73%
• 1Y: 84.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KWEB vs. MCHS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-30.60%	23.55%	20.49%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	57.13%	31.19%	6.53%

Correlation

The correlation between KWEB and MCHS is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between KWEB and MCHS has dropped to 0.46 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

KWEB vs. MCHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KWEB	MCHS
Consumer Cyclical	36.0%	4.5%
Communication Services	28.4%	1.2%
Technology	17.5%	49.7%
Healthcare	6.0%	2.1%
Real Estate	3.9%	1.6%
Industrials	3.3%	27.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.7%	0.8%
Financial Services	2.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	8.1%
Energy	-	6.3%
Utilities	-	2.1%

Return for Risk

KWEB vs. MCHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 2
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 2
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 2

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 94
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 93
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

KWEB vs. MCHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) 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.

	KWEB	MCHS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.01	3.36	-4.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.44	4.05	-5.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	1.57	-0.73
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.66	6.97	-7.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.43	20.28	-21.71

KWEB vs. MCHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KWEB Sharpe Ratio is -1.01, which is lower than the MCHS Sharpe Ratio of 3.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KWEB 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

KWEB vs. MCHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KWEB drawdown since its inception was -80.92%, which is greater than MCHS's maximum drawdown of -23.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KWEB and MCHS.

Drawdown Indicators

	KWEB	MCHS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.92%	-23.75%	-57.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.62%	-12.15%	-29.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-72.17%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-80.92%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-72.67%	-1.03%	-71.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.39%	-7.51%	-27.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.04%	4.17%	+14.87%

Volatility

KWEB vs. MCHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) is 8.14%, while Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a volatility of 13.46%. This indicates that KWEB 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

	KWEB	MCHS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.14%	13.46%	-5.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.56%	21.83%	-1.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.10%	25.22%	+1.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.70%	28.99%	+18.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.00%	28.99%	+11.01%

KWEB vs. MCHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

KWEB has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than MCHS's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

KWEB vs. MCHS - Dividend Comparison

KWEB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.87%, more than MCHS's 2.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	8.87%	6.16%	3.51%	1.71%	0.00%	7.07%	0.29%	0.08%	3.40%	0.58%	1.19%	0.46%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.27%	3.56%	5.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KWEB and MCHS in my portfolio?

KWEB and MCHS have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KWEB or MCHS?

MCHS has higher volatility (13.46%) compared to KWEB (8.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KWEB dropped -80.92% vs MCHS's -23.75%.

Which ETF is better, KWEB or MCHS?

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 84.27% vs -27.19% for KWEB. On fees, KWEB is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, KWEB has been the lower-risk option at 8.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KWEB or MCHS?

Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 84.27% return vs -27.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KWEB or MCHS?

KWEB is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

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

KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 8.87%, compared with 2.27% for MCHS.

What is the main difference between KWEB and MCHS?

They also come from different issuers: KraneShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for KWEB and 0.89% for MCHS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.36 vs -1.01), 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.