MCHFX vs. EVCGX
MCHFX (Matthews China Fund) and EVCGX (Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, MCHFX returned 7.67%/yr vs 4.81%/yr for EVCGX. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCHFX charges 1.12%/yr vs 1.53%/yr for EVCGX.
Performance
MCHFX vs. EVCGX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCHFX achieves a 1.69% return, which is significantly higher than EVCGX's -9.92% return. Over the past 10 years, MCHFX has outperformed EVCGX with an annualized return of 7.67%, while EVCGX has yielded a comparatively lower 4.81% annualized return.
MCHFX
- 1D
- -3.21%
- 1M
- 2.04%
- YTD
- 1.69%
- 6M
- 0.69%
- 1Y
- 18.35%
- 3Y*
- 12.94%
- 5Y*
- -6.14%
- 10Y*
- 7.67%
EVCGX
- 1D
- -1.83%
- 1M
- -5.08%
- YTD
- -9.92%
- 6M
- -10.72%
- 1Y
- -3.65%
- 3Y*
- 5.10%
- 5Y*
- -7.16%
- 10Y*
- 4.81%
MCHFX vs. EVCGX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MCHFX Matthews China Fund | 1.69% | 29.82% | 17.84% | -19.21% | -24.38% | -19.41% | 43.07% | 34.57% | -21.17% | 59.08% |
EVCGX Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund | -9.92% | 26.06% | 9.30% | -17.33% | -22.53% | -9.61% | 25.22% | 23.32% | -9.90% | 49.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCHFX and EVCGX is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 1998 | 0.86 |
The correlation between MCHFX and EVCGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
MCHFX vs. EVCGX — Risk / Return Rank
MCHFX
EVCGX
MCHFX vs. EVCGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) and Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund (EVCGX). 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.
| MCHFX | EVCGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.00 | +0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.44 | -0.09 | +1.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.75 | -0.18 | +3.92 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MCHFX vs. EVCGX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCHFX drawdown since its inception was -67.02%, roughly equal to the maximum EVCGX drawdown of -68.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHFX and EVCGX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCHFX | EVCGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.02% | -68.37% | +1.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.58% | -17.61% | +2.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.77% | -27.32% | -0.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.96% | -53.13% | -6.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -64.75% | -56.84% | -7.91% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -37.29% | -36.96% | -0.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.13% | -28.07% | +5.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.91% | 8.54% | -2.63% |
Volatility
MCHFX vs. EVCGX - Volatility Comparison
Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) has a higher volatility of 8.30% compared to Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund (EVCGX) at 5.69%. This indicates that MCHFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EVCGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCHFX | EVCGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.30% | 5.69% | +2.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.32% | 13.89% | +2.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.83% | 18.71% | +2.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.08% | 25.75% | +4.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.68% | 22.14% | +4.54% |
MCHFX vs. EVCGX - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCHFX has a 1.12% expense ratio, which is lower than EVCGX's 1.53% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCHFX vs. EVCGX - Dividend Comparison
MCHFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, less than EVCGX's 1.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EVCGX Eaton Vance Greater China Growth Fund | 1.76% | 1.58% | 2.15% | 8.47% | 6.09% | 5.43% | 9.85% | 3.19% | 9.89% | 11.34% | 0.94% | 6.33% |
MCHFX Matthews China Fund | 1.33% | 1.36% | 1.91% | 0.78% | 7.53% | 6.54% | 1.25% | 1.12% | 22.28% | 10.31% | 13.66% | 19.24% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCHFX and EVCGX have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MCHFX has higher volatility (8.30%) compared to EVCGX (5.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHFX dropped -67.02% vs EVCGX's -68.37%.
MCHFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs -0.08), 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.
Find the right allocation for MCHFX and EVCGX
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