MCHFX vs. CQQQ
Compare and contrast key facts about Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ).
MCHFX is managed by Matthews. It was launched on Feb 18, 1998. CQQQ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the AlphaShares China Technology Index. It was launched on Dec 8, 2009.
Performance
MCHFX vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
MCHFX vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MCHFX Matthews China Fund | -7.84% | 29.82% | 17.84% | -19.21% | -24.38% | -19.41% | 43.07% | 34.57% | -21.17% | 59.08% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | -11.77% | 34.96% | 9.84% | -16.71% | -30.09% | -24.54% | 57.33% | 33.57% | -34.77% | 74.31% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCHFX achieves a -7.84% return, which is significantly higher than CQQQ's -11.77% return. Over the past 10 years, MCHFX has outperformed CQQQ with an annualized return of 5.96%, while CQQQ has yielded a comparatively lower 3.73% annualized return.
MCHFX
- 1D
- 1.80%
- 1M
- -7.63%
- YTD
- -7.84%
- 6M
- -13.46%
- 1Y
- 8.06%
- 3Y*
- 4.29%
- 5Y*
- -7.85%
- 10Y*
- 5.96%
CQQQ
- 1D
- -0.30%
- 1M
- -10.16%
- YTD
- -11.77%
- 6M
- -21.47%
- 1Y
- 5.59%
- 3Y*
- 0.49%
- 5Y*
- -10.79%
- 10Y*
- 3.73%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
MCHFX vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCHFX has a 1.12% expense ratio, which is higher than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
MCHFX vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
MCHFX
CQQQ
MCHFX vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). 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.
| MCHFX | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.39 | 0.18 | +0.21 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.67 | 0.48 | +0.19 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.06 | +0.03 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.09 | 0.24 | -0.15 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.28 | 0.64 | -0.36 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MCHFX | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 | 0.18 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.27 | -0.29 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 | 0.11 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.30 | 0.16 | +0.15 |
Correlation
The correlation between MCHFX and CQQQ is 0.84, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
MCHFX vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
MCHFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than CQQQ's 2.45% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MCHFX Matthews China Fund | 1.47% | 1.36% | 1.91% | 0.78% | 7.53% | 6.54% | 1.25% | 1.12% | 22.28% | 10.31% | 13.66% | 19.24% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.45% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
Drawdowns
MCHFX vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCHFX drawdown since its inception was -67.02%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHFX and CQQQ.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCHFX | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.02% | -73.99% | +6.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.32% | -24.41% | +8.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -60.35% | -67.04% | +6.69% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -64.75% | -73.99% | +9.24% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -43.16% | -56.24% | +13.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.00% | -28.05% | +6.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.15% | 9.10% | -2.95% |
Volatility
MCHFX vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) is 7.37%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 9.50%. This indicates that MCHFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| MCHFX | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.37% | 9.50% | -2.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.67% | 20.69% | -7.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.35% | 31.94% | -9.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.85% | 37.70% | -7.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.53% | 33.05% | -6.52% |