MAGC vs. MAGS
MAGC (Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF) and MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MAGC is a China Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MAGC returned -15.61% vs 33.10% for MAGS. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MAGC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for MAGS.
Performance
MAGC vs. MAGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MAGC achieves a -15.36% return, which is significantly lower than MAGS's 4.87% return.
MAGC
- 1D
- 4.10%
- 1M
- -2.34%
- YTD
- -15.36%
- 6M
- -17.67%
- 1Y
- -15.61%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MAGS
- 1D
- -0.99%
- 1M
- 3.44%
- YTD
- 4.87%
- 6M
- 4.75%
- 1Y
- 33.10%
- 3Y*
- 34.19%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MAGC vs. MAGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF | -15.36% | 16.35% | -14.54% |
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF | 4.87% | 22.99% | 17.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between MAGC and MAGS is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024 | 0.29 |
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
MAGC vs. MAGS — Risk / Return Rank
MAGC
MAGS
MAGC vs. MAGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS). 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.
| MAGC | MAGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.59 | 1.66 | -2.25 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.73 | 2.26 | -2.99 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.92 | 1.28 | -0.36 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.44 | 1.83 | -2.27 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.85 | 6.35 | -7.20 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MAGC | MAGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.59 | 1.66 | -2.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.29 | 1.57 | -1.86 |
Drawdowns
MAGC vs. MAGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MAGC drawdown since its inception was -32.86%, which is greater than MAGS's maximum drawdown of -29.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGC and MAGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MAGC | MAGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.86% | -29.91% | -2.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.86% | -18.62% | -14.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -29.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.88% | -2.50% | -26.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.12% | -4.70% | -10.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.98% | 5.37% | +11.61% |
Volatility
MAGC vs. MAGS - Volatility Comparison
Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) has a higher volatility of 10.63% compared to Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) at 4.63%. This indicates that MAGC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MAGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MAGC | MAGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.63% | 4.63% | +6.00% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.54% | 14.26% | +5.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.65% | 20.05% | +6.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.36% | 25.95% | +8.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.36% | 25.95% | +8.41% |
MAGC vs. MAGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
MAGC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than MAGS's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
MAGC vs. MAGS - Dividend Comparison
MAGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.85%, more than MAGS's 1.41% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF | 4.85% | 4.10% | 1.02% | 0.00% |
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF | 1.41% | 1.48% | 0.81% | 0.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MAGC and MAGS have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MAGC has higher volatility (10.63%) compared to MAGS (4.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGC dropped -32.86% vs MAGS's -29.91%.
On 1-year performance, MAGS leads with 33.10% vs -15.61% for MAGC. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 4.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MAGS has performed better with a 33.10% return vs -15.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for MAGC.
MAGC has the higher dividend yield at 4.85%, compared with 1.41% for MAGS.
MAGC is categorized as China Equities, while MAGS is Technology Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for MAGC and 0.29% for MAGS.
MAGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs -0.59), 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.
Find the right allocation for MAGC and MAGS
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