MCHI vs. MCH

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

MCHI (iShares MSCI China ETF) and MCH (Matthews China Active ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCHI is passively managed, while MCH is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MCHI returned 7.30%/yr vs 13.56%/yr for MCH. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. MCHI charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for MCH.

Performance

MCHI vs. MCH - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHI achieves a -14.90% return, which is significantly lower than MCH's 3.27% return.

MCHI

• 1D: -1.26%
• 1M: -8.88%
• YTD: -14.90%
• 6M: -15.66%
• 1Y: -6.82%
• 3Y*: 7.30%
• 5Y*: -7.48%
• 10Y*: 4.19%

MCH

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: -0.92%
• YTD: 3.27%
• 6M: 1.83%
• 1Y: 19.28%
• 3Y*: 13.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MCHI vs. MCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MCHI iShares MSCI China ETF	-14.90%	31.04%	17.73%	-11.94%	-8.24%
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	3.27%	30.20%	17.32%	-19.91%	-3.57%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHI and MCH is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2022	0.95

The correlation between MCHI and MCH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCHI vs. MCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCHI	MCH
Consumer Cyclical	24.9%	13.3%
Financial Services	18.8%	20.7%
Communication Services	18.1%	12.2%
Technology	12.1%	17.5%
Basic Materials	5.5%	7.0%
Industrials	5.3%	17.0%
Healthcare	5.1%	4.4%
Energy	3.7%	0.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	0.6%
Utilities	1.8%	-
Real Estate	1.6%	2.9%

Return for Risk

MCHI vs. MCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHI

MCHI Risk / Return Rank: 6
MCHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
MCHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
MCHI Omega Ratio Rank: 6
MCHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
MCHI Martin Ratio Rank: 6

MCH

MCH Risk / Return Rank: 27
MCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
MCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
MCH Omega Ratio Rank: 26
MCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
MCH Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

MCHI vs. MCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	MCHI	MCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.34	0.94	-1.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.35	1.41	-1.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.17	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.30	1.29	-1.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.72	3.40	-4.12

MCHI vs. MCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHI Sharpe Ratio is -0.34, which is lower than the MCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHI and MCH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MCHI vs. MCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHI drawdown since its inception was -62.95%, which is greater than MCH's maximum drawdown of -40.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHI and MCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHI	MCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.95%	-40.53%	-22.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.76%	-15.05%	-7.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.85%	-30.57%	+4.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-56.98%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-62.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.97%	-4.07%	-37.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.57%	-18.28%	-6.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.49%	5.70%	+3.79%

Volatility

MCHI vs. MCH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China ETF (MCHI) is 6.05%, while Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) has a volatility of 8.06%. This indicates that MCHI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHI	MCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.05%	8.06%	-2.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.90%	15.64%	-0.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.15%	20.72%	-0.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.74%	29.48%	+1.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.34%	29.48%	-2.14%

MCHI vs. MCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHI has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than MCH's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCHI vs. MCH - Dividend Comparison

MCHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.16%, more than MCH's 1.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MCH Matthews China Active ETF	1.70%	1.76%	1.31%	1.62%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MCHI iShares MSCI China ETF	2.16%	2.12%	2.31%	2.66%	1.78%	1.04%	1.04%	1.45%	1.60%	1.56%	1.66%	2.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCHI and MCH in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, MCHI and MCH 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, MCHI or MCH?

MCH has higher volatility (8.06%) compared to MCHI (6.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHI dropped -62.95% vs MCH's -40.53%.

Which ETF is better, MCHI or MCH?

On 3-year performance, MCH leads with 13.56% vs 7.30% for MCHI. On fees, MCHI is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, MCHI has been the lower-risk option at 6.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCHI or MCH?

Over the 3-year period, MCH has performed better with a 13.56% return vs 7.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCHI or MCH?

MCHI is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MCH.

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

MCHI has the higher dividend yield at 2.16%, compared with 1.70% for MCH.

What is the main difference between MCHI and MCH?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for MCHI and 0.79% for MCH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.94 vs -0.34), 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.