MCH vs. ASHR
MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) and ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCH is actively managed, while ASHR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MCH returned 14.88%/yr vs 12.76%/yr for ASHR. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCH charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHR.
Performance
MCH vs. ASHR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCH achieves a 6.57% return, which is significantly lower than ASHR's 9.77% return.
MCH
- 1D
- 1.78%
- 1M
- 3.34%
- YTD
- 6.57%
- 6M
- 5.27%
- 1Y
- 28.39%
- 3Y*
- 14.88%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ASHR
- 1D
- -3.32%
- 1M
- 2.01%
- YTD
- 9.77%
- 6M
- 10.21%
- 1Y
- 37.51%
- 3Y*
- 12.76%
- 5Y*
- -0.54%
- 10Y*
- 5.96%
MCH vs. ASHR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MCH Matthews China Active ETF | 6.57% | 30.20% | 17.32% | -19.91% | -3.57% |
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 9.77% | 27.02% | 11.95% | -12.52% | -12.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCH and ASHR is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2022 | 0.82 |
The correlation between MCH and ASHR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.
MCH vs. ASHR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MCH
ASHR
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Real Estate
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
-
Financial Services
MCH
ASHR
Technology
MCH
ASHR
Industrials
MCH
ASHR
Consumer Cyclical
MCH
ASHR
Communication Services
MCH
ASHR
Basic Materials
MCH
ASHR
Healthcare
MCH
ASHR
Real Estate
MCH
ASHR
Energy
MCH
ASHR
Consumer Defensive
MCH
ASHR
Utilities
MCH
-
ASHR
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
MCH vs. ASHR — Risk / Return Rank
MCH
ASHR
MCH vs. ASHR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR). 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.
| MCH | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.73 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.91 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.37 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.90 | 4.90 | -3.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.01 | 14.20 | -9.19 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MCH vs. ASHR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCH drawdown since its inception was -40.53%, smaller than the maximum ASHR drawdown of -51.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCH and ASHR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCH | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.53% | -51.30% | +10.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.05% | -7.69% | -7.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.57% | -33.12% | +2.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -44.59% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -51.30% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.00% | -15.89% | +14.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.32% | -29.13% | +10.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.68% | 2.65% | +3.03% |
Volatility
MCH vs. ASHR - Volatility Comparison
Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) have volatilities of 7.54% and 7.31%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCH | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.54% | 7.31% | +0.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.40% | 12.95% | +2.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.72% | 17.88% | +2.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.49% | 24.01% | +5.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.49% | 24.09% | +5.40% |
MCH vs. ASHR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than ASHR's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCH vs. ASHR - Dividend Comparison
MCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.65%, less than ASHR's 2.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 2.10% | 2.31% | 1.13% | 2.48% | 1.13% | 0.88% | 0.81% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 0.84% | 0.73% | 30.13% |
MCH Matthews China Active ETF | 1.65% | 1.76% | 1.31% | 1.62% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCH and ASHR have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MCH has higher volatility (7.54%) compared to ASHR (7.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCH dropped -40.53% vs ASHR's -51.30%.
On 3-year performance, MCH leads with 14.88% vs 12.76% for ASHR. On fees, ASHR is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHR has been the lower-risk option at 7.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MCH has performed better with a 14.88% return vs 12.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ASHR is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MCH.
ASHR has the higher dividend yield at 2.10%, compared with 1.65% for MCH.
They also come from different issuers: Matthews and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MCH and 0.65% for ASHR.
ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.38), 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 MCH and ASHR
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