MCH vs. ISVBF

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCH is actively managed, while ISVBF is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MCH returned 9.01%/yr vs 8.45%/yr for ISVBF. Their 0.41 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. MCH charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.

Performance

MCH vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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 higher than ISVBF's -6.75% 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%

ISVBF

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: 9.06%
• 6M: -8.63%
• YTD: -6.75%
• 1Y: -0.99%
• 3Y*: 8.45%
• 5Y*: -2.48%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -4.43%

*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)
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	$147.49K	$255.95K	$315.23K
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	$41.25K	$45.58K	$81.23K

MCH vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	0.60%	30.20%	17.32%	-19.91%	-3.57%
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	-6.75%	30.64%	18.96%	-9.28%	-15.63%

Correlation

The correlation between MCH and ISVBF is 0.63, 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.	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2022	0.41

Over the past year, MCH and ISVBF have become more correlated (0.63) than their long-term average of 0.41, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

MCH vs. ISVBF — 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

ISVBF

ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 10
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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	ISVBF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.56	-0.03	+0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.91	0.18	+0.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.02	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.81	-0.04	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.96	-0.09	+2.05

MCH vs. ISVBF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCH Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is higher than the ISVBF Sharpe Ratio of -0.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCH and ISVBF, 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. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCH drawdown since its inception was -40.53%, smaller than the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCH and ISVBF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCH	ISVBF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.53%	-53.78%	+13.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.05%	-24.14%	+9.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.57%	-24.14%	-6.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-46.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.55%	-24.42%	+17.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.99%	-32.57%	+14.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.21%	11.23%	-5.02%

Volatility

MCH vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) has a higher volatility of 7.61% compared to iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) at 6.46%. This indicates that MCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCH	ISVBF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.61%	6.46%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.63%	26.45%	-9.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.97%	31.60%	-9.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.39%	30.08%	-0.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.39%	30.06%	-0.67%

MCH vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCH vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison

MCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	1.75%	1.76%	1.31%	1.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCH and ISVBF in my portfolio?

MCH and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.63, 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 ISVBF?

MCH has higher volatility (7.61%) compared to ISVBF (6.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCH dropped -40.53% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.

Which ETF is better, MCH or ISVBF?

On 3-year performance, MCH leads with 9.01% vs 8.45% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 6.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCH or ISVBF?

Over the 3-year period, MCH has performed better with a 9.01% return vs 8.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCH or ISVBF?

ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MCH.

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

MCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

What is the main difference between MCH and ISVBF?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MCH and 0.40% for ISVBF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.56 vs -0.03), 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.