PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MCH vs. ECNS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MCH vs. ECNS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) and ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MCH is a China Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while ECNS is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI China Small Cap Index. MCH is actively managed, while ECNS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MCH returned 13.10%/yr vs 7.43%/yr for ECNS. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCH charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ECNS.

Performance

MCH vs. ECNS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCH achieves a 3.98% return, which is significantly higher than ECNS's -4.50% return.

MCH

1D
-1.27%
1M
4.48%
YTD
3.98%
6M
3.57%
1Y
28.39%
3Y*
13.10%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

ECNS

1D
-2.25%
1M
-6.37%
YTD
-4.50%
6M
-7.48%
1Y
13.77%
3Y*
7.43%
5Y*
-6.97%
10Y*
1.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCH vs. ECNS - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
MCH
Matthews China Active ETF		3.98%30.20%17.32%-19.91%-3.12%
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		-4.50%36.49%5.64%-23.05%-4.32%

Correlation

The correlation between MCH and ECNS is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.73

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2022

0.84

The correlation between MCH and ECNS shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.84 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MCH vs. ECNS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MCH
ECNS

Financial Services

25.5%
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

16.2%
8.8%

Technology

15.0%
16.9%

Communication Services

13.2%
4.5%

Industrials

12.4%
16.2%

Basic Materials

9.5%
7.8%

Healthcare

5.5%
19.8%

Real Estate

2.7%
8.8%

Energy

1.0%
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

0.6%
4.0%

Utilities

-

2.6%

Financial Services

MCH
25.5%
ECNS
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

MCH
16.2%
ECNS
8.8%

Technology

MCH
15.0%
ECNS
16.9%

Communication Services

MCH
13.2%
ECNS
4.5%

Industrials

MCH
12.4%
ECNS
16.2%

Basic Materials

MCH
9.5%
ECNS
7.8%

Healthcare

MCH
5.5%
ECNS
19.8%

Real Estate

MCH
2.7%
ECNS
8.8%

Energy

MCH
1.0%
ECNS
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

MCH
0.6%
ECNS
4.0%

Utilities

MCH

-

ECNS
2.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Matthews China Active ETF

iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF

Often compared with MCH:
MCH vs. MCHIMCH vs. MCHSMCH vs. KWEBMCH vs. ASHRMCH vs. FXIMCH vs. FLCHMCH vs. CNYA
Often compared with ECNS:
ECNS vs. ASHSECNS vs. MCHIECNS vs. CNXTECNS vs. DFAEECNS vs. CQQQECNS vs. FLCHECNS vs. EWT

Return for Risk

MCH vs. ECNS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MCH
MCH Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank
ECNS
ECNS Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
ECNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECNS Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
ECNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECNS Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MCH vs. ECNS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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.

MCHECNSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.41
0.66

+0.75

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.03
1.00

+1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.13

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.90

0.76

+1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.10

1.51

+3.59

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MCH vs. ECNS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCH Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is higher than the ECNS Sharpe Ratio of 0.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCH and ECNS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

MCHECNSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.41

0.66

+0.75

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

—

-0.24

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.07

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.19

0.02

+0.16

Drawdowns

MCH vs. ECNS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCH drawdown since its inception was -40.53%, smaller than the maximum ECNS drawdown of -63.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCH and ECNS.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MCHECNSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.53%

-63.43%

+22.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.05%

-18.08%

+3.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.57%

-31.72%

+1.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-59.61%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-63.43%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.41%

-38.52%

+35.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.50%

-29.39%

+10.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.58%

9.14%

-3.56%

Volatility

MCH vs. ECNS - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) has a higher volatility of 6.72% compared to iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) at 5.64%. This indicates that MCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECNS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MCHECNSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.72%

5.64%

+1.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.45%

12.87%

+1.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.18%

20.92%

-0.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.53%

29.44%

+0.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

29.53%

25.90%

+3.63%

MCH vs. ECNS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than ECNS's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCH vs. ECNS - Dividend Comparison

MCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, less than ECNS's 6.49% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		6.49%6.20%5.98%4.89%3.54%4.87%3.59%3.23%6.16%3.18%4.29%3.58%
MCH
Matthews China Active ETF		1.69%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 ECNS have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCH has higher volatility (6.72%) compared to ECNS (5.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCH dropped -40.53% vs ECNS's -63.43%.

On 3-year performance, MCH leads with 13.10% vs 7.43% for ECNS. On fees, ECNS is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ECNS has been the lower-risk option at 5.64%. 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 13.10% return vs 7.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ECNS is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MCH.

ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.49%, compared with 1.69% for MCH.

MCH is categorized as China Equities, while ECNS is Asia Pacific Equities. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MCH and 0.59% for ECNS.

MCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 0.66), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MCH and ECNS

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