MCH vs. CNXT

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) and CNXT (VanEck ChiNext Innovators ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCH is actively managed, while CNXT is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MCH returned 9.01%/yr vs 19.72%/yr for CNXT. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MCH charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CNXT.

Performance

MCH vs. CNXT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and VanEck ChiNext Innovators ETF (CNXT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCH achieves a 0.60% return, which is significantly lower than CNXT's 13.85% return.

MCH

• 1D: 1.35%
• 1M: 1.55%
• 6M: -2.23%
• YTD: 0.60%
• 1Y: 12.16%
• 3Y*: 9.01%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.31%

CNXT

• 1D: 4.68%
• 1M: -12.09%
• 6M: 8.48%
• YTD: 13.85%
• 1Y: 59.95%
• 3Y*: 19.72%
• 5Y*: 0.30%
• 10Y*: 5.35%
• ALL TIME*: 6.80%

*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)
CNXT VanEck ChiNext Innovators ETF	$4.50M	$5.39M	$7.80M
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	$41.25K	$45.58K	$81.23K

MCH vs. CNXT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	0.60%	30.20%	17.32%	-19.91%	-3.57%
CNXT VanEck ChiNext Innovators ETF	13.85%	59.31%	12.42%	-21.47%	-17.60%

Correlation

The correlation between MCH and CNXT is 0.75, 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.	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2022	0.73

The correlation between MCH and CNXT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCH vs. CNXT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCH	CNXT
Financial Services	23.4%	4.1%
Consumer Cyclical	17.9%	0.7%
Technology	13.4%	53.5%
Communication Services	13.0%	0.9%
Industrials	9.5%	27.0%
Basic Materials	9.3%	4.5%
Healthcare	5.7%	5.0%
Real Estate	2.8%	-
Energy	0.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.6%	1.8%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MCH vs. CNXT — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCH

MCH Risk / Return Rank: 23
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 22
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 24

CNXT

CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 60
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 56
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

MCH vs. CNXT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and VanEck ChiNext Innovators ETF (CNXT). 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	CNXT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.56	1.63	-1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.91	2.23	-1.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.28	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.81	2.49	-1.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.96	8.85	-6.88

MCH vs. CNXT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCH Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is lower than the CNXT Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCH and CNXT, 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

MCH vs. CNXT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCH drawdown since its inception was -40.53%, smaller than the maximum CNXT drawdown of -68.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCH and CNXT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCH	CNXT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.53%	-68.98%	+28.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.05%	-24.23%	+9.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.57%	-48.60%	+18.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-61.21%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.55%	-20.16%	+13.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.99%	-42.49%	+24.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.21%	6.80%	-0.59%

Volatility

MCH vs. CNXT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) is 7.61%, while VanEck ChiNext Innovators ETF (CNXT) has a volatility of 16.98%. This indicates that MCH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNXT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCH	CNXT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.61%	16.98%	-9.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.63%	28.59%	-11.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.97%	37.03%	-15.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.39%	36.14%	-6.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.39%	32.27%	-2.88%

MCH vs. CNXT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CNXT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCH vs. CNXT - Dividend Comparison

MCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, more than CNXT's 0.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNXT VanEck ChiNext Innovators ETF	0.16%	0.18%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	9.22%	0.01%	0.45%	0.00%	0.19%
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	1.75%	1.76%	1.31%	1.62%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCH and CNXT in my portfolio?

MCH and CNXT have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MCH or CNXT?

CNXT has higher volatility (16.98%) compared to MCH (7.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCH dropped -40.53% vs CNXT's -68.98%.

Which ETF is better, MCH or CNXT?

On 3-year performance, CNXT leads with 19.72% vs 9.01% for MCH. On fees, CNXT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, MCH has been the lower-risk option at 7.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCH or CNXT?

Over the 3-year period, CNXT has performed better with a 19.72% return vs 9.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCH or CNXT?

CNXT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MCH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MCH or CNXT?

MCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.16% for CNXT.

What is the main difference between MCH and CNXT?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MCH and 0.65% for CNXT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 0.56), 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.