PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MCH vs. MCHS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MCH vs. MCHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS). 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 3.54% return, which is significantly lower than MCHS's 51.63% return.


MCH

1D
-2.85%
1M
0.40%
YTD
3.54%
6M
2.21%
1Y
23.79%
3Y*
13.78%
5Y*
10Y*

MCHS

1D
-4.50%
1M
6.46%
YTD
51.63%
6M
50.45%
1Y
81.12%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCH vs. MCHS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MCH
Matthews China Active ETF
3.54%30.20%24.47%
MCHS
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF
51.63%31.19%6.53%

Correlation

The correlation between MCH and MCHS is 0.66, 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

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024

0.76

The correlation between MCH and MCHS shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MCH vs. MCHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MCH
MCHS

Financial Services

20.7%

-

Technology

17.5%
49.7%

Industrials

17.0%
27.8%

Consumer Cyclical

13.3%
4.5%

Communication Services

12.2%
1.2%

Basic Materials

7.0%
8.1%

Healthcare

4.4%
2.1%

Real Estate

2.9%
1.6%

Energy

0.8%
6.3%

Consumer Defensive

0.6%
0.8%

Utilities

-

2.1%

Financial Services

MCH
20.7%
MCHS

-

Technology

MCH
17.5%
MCHS
49.7%

Industrials

MCH
17.0%
MCHS
27.8%

Consumer Cyclical

MCH
13.3%
MCHS
4.5%

Communication Services

MCH
12.2%
MCHS
1.2%

Basic Materials

MCH
7.0%
MCHS
8.1%

Healthcare

MCH
4.4%
MCHS
2.1%

Real Estate

MCH
2.9%
MCHS
1.6%

Energy

MCH
0.8%
MCHS
6.3%

Consumer Defensive

MCH
0.6%
MCHS
0.8%

Utilities

MCH

-

MCHS
2.1%

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. MCHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCH
MCH Risk / Return Rank: 3333
Overall Rank
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

MCHS
MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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. MCHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) and Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS). 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.


MCHMCHSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.55

-0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.59

6.71

-5.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.20

19.57

-15.37

MCH vs. MCHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCH Sharpe Ratio is 1.14, which is lower than the MCHS Sharpe Ratio of 3.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCH and MCHS, 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...

Drawdowns

MCH vs. MCHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCH drawdown since its inception was -40.53%, which is greater than MCHS's maximum drawdown of -23.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCH and MCHS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MCHMCHSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.53%

-23.75%

-16.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.05%

-12.15%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.82%

-4.50%

+0.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.31%

-7.53%

-10.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.68%

4.16%

+1.52%

Volatility

MCH vs. MCHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) is 8.12%, while Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a volatility of 13.48%. This indicates that MCH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MCHMCHSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.12%

13.48%

-5.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.66%

21.61%

-5.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.89%

25.11%

-4.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.51%

28.95%

+0.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

29.51%

28.95%

+0.56%

MCH vs. MCHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than MCHS's 0.89% expense ratio.


Dividends

MCH vs. MCHS - Dividend Comparison

MCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, less than MCHS's 2.35% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
MCH
Matthews China Active ETF
1.70%1.76%1.31%1.62%
MCHS
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF
2.35%3.56%5.48%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MCH and MCHS have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCHS has higher volatility (13.48%) compared to MCH (8.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCH dropped -40.53% vs MCHS's -23.75%.

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 81.12% vs 23.79% for MCH. On fees, MCH is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, MCH has been the lower-risk option at 8.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 81.12% return vs 23.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MCH is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 1.70% for MCH.

Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MCH and 0.89% for MCHS.

MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.25 vs 1.14), 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 MCHS

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