MCHFX vs. GSAGX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MCHFX (Matthews China Fund) and GSAGX (Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, MCHFX returned 7.43%/yr vs 5.81%/yr for GSAGX. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCHFX charges 1.12%/yr vs 1.47%/yr for GSAGX.

Performance

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) and Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHFX achieves a 1.74% return, which is significantly lower than GSAGX's 5.20% return. Over the past 10 years, MCHFX has outperformed GSAGX with an annualized return of 7.43%, while GSAGX has yielded a comparatively lower 5.81% annualized return.

MCHFX

• 1D: -1.24%
• 1M: 3.30%
• YTD: 1.74%
• 6M: 1.26%
• 1Y: 22.17%
• 3Y*: 12.28%
• 5Y*: -6.40%
• 10Y*: 7.43%

GSAGX

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 0.75%
• YTD: 5.20%
• 6M: 5.28%
• 1Y: 21.88%
• 3Y*: 12.39%
• 5Y*: -5.97%
• 10Y*: 5.81%

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

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MCHFX Matthews China Fund	1.74%	29.82%	17.84%	-19.21%	-24.38%	-19.41%	43.07%	34.57%	-21.17%	59.08%
GSAGX Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund	5.20%	32.36%	13.00%	-18.78%	-30.71%	-14.26%	48.21%	26.22%	-18.45%	51.62%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHFX and GSAGX is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 1998	0.82

The correlation between MCHFX and GSAGX shifts across timeframes, from 0.82 (all time) to 0.94 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MCHFX vs. GSAGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHFX

MCHFX Risk / Return Rank: 19
MCHFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
MCHFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
MCHFX Omega Ratio Rank: 19
MCHFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
MCHFX Martin Ratio Rank: 16

GSAGX

GSAGX Risk / Return Rank: 23
GSAGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
GSAGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
GSAGX Omega Ratio Rank: 21
GSAGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
GSAGX Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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.

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) and Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX). 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	GSAGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	1.33	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.92	1.91	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.24	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	1.96	-0.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.39	5.28	-0.89
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHFX Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is comparable to the GSAGX Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHFX and GSAGX, 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

	MCHFX	GSAGX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.28	1.33	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.22	-0.24	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.28	0.26	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	0.15	+0.16

Drawdowns

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHFX drawdown since its inception was -67.02%, smaller than the maximum GSAGX drawdown of -70.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHFX and GSAGX.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHFX	GSAGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.02%	-70.73%	+3.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.58%	-12.15%	-3.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.77%	-25.08%	-2.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.96%	-58.97%	-0.99%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-64.75%	-63.98%	-0.77%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.25%	-36.83%	-0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.11%	-28.60%	+6.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.76%	4.48%	+1.28%

Volatility

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Fund (MCHFX) has a higher volatility of 7.67% compared to Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX) at 6.45%. This indicates that MCHFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSAGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHFX	GSAGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.67%	6.45%	+1.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.20%	13.00%	+2.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.05%	17.95%	+2.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.97%	25.44%	+4.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.64%	22.66%	+3.98%

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHFX has a 1.12% expense ratio, which is lower than GSAGX's 1.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCHFX vs. GSAGX - Dividend Comparison

MCHFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, more than GSAGX's 1.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GSAGX Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund	1.27%	1.34%	1.40%	0.89%	0.00%	6.78%	5.02%	0.57%	6.92%	1.35%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both MCHFX and GSAGX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, MCHFX and GSAGX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, MCHFX or GSAGX?

MCHFX has higher volatility (7.67%) compared to GSAGX (6.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHFX dropped -67.02% vs GSAGX's -70.73%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSAGX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.33 vs 1.28), 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.