MCH vs. KBA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) and KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCH is actively managed, while KBA is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MCH returned 13.10%/yr vs 16.22%/yr for KBA. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCH charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for KBA.

Performance

MCH vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCH achieves a 3.98% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 12.62% return.

MCH

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

KBA

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 4.32%
• YTD: 12.62%
• 6M: 16.80%
• 1Y: 49.12%
• 3Y*: 16.22%
• 5Y*: 6.46%
• 10Y*: 10.15%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCH vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	3.98%	30.20%	17.32%	-19.91%	-3.12%
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	12.62%	33.88%	15.73%	-16.77%	14.49%

Correlation

The correlation between MCH and KBA is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2022	0.81

The correlation between MCH and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCH vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCH	KBA
Financial Services	25.5%	18.5%
Consumer Cyclical	16.2%	5.7%
Technology	15.0%	29.8%
Communication Services	13.2%	1.6%
Industrials	12.4%	15.8%
Basic Materials	9.5%	10.9%
Healthcare	5.5%	4.1%
Real Estate	2.7%	0.6%
Energy	1.0%	3.2%
Consumer Defensive	0.6%	6.8%
Utilities	-	3.2%

Return for Risk

MCH vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MCH

MCH Risk / Return Rank: 38
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 38
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 33

KBA

KBA Risk / Return Rank: 85
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 83
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). 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.

	MCH	KBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	2.80	-1.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	3.80	-1.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.50	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.90	6.45	-4.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.10	17.29	-12.19
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. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCH Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is lower than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCH and KBA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MCH	KBA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.41	2.80	-1.39
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.24	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.19	0.35	-0.17

Drawdowns

MCH vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCH drawdown since its inception was -40.53%, smaller than the maximum KBA drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCH and KBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCH	KBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.53%	-53.24%	+12.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.05%	-7.65%	-7.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.57%	-31.23%	+0.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.95%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.41%	-1.25%	-2.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.50%	-25.81%	+7.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.58%	2.85%	+2.73%

Volatility

MCH vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) is 6.72%, while KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a volatility of 7.29%. This indicates that MCH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCH	KBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.72%	7.29%	-0.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.45%	12.44%	+2.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.18%	17.65%	+2.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.53%	27.20%	+2.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.53%	25.32%	+4.21%

MCH vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCH vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

MCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, more than KBA's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	1.39%	1.56%	2.18%	2.34%	49.05%	9.07%	0.65%	1.53%	3.77%	1.46%	6.62%	29.08%
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

Can I hold both MCH and KBA in my portfolio?

MCH and KBA have a correlation of 0.78, 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 KBA?

KBA has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to MCH (6.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCH dropped -40.53% vs KBA's -53.24%.

Which ETF is better, MCH or KBA?

On 3-year performance, KBA leads with 16.22% vs 13.10% for MCH. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, MCH has been the lower-risk option at 6.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCH or KBA?

Over the 3-year period, KBA has performed better with a 16.22% return vs 13.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCH or KBA?

KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MCH.

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

MCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.69%, compared with 1.39% for KBA.

What is the main difference between MCH and KBA?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MCH and 0.60% for KBA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.41), 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.