PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MCHS.L vs. AH50.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

MCHS.L is traded in GBp, while AH50.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the AH50.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS.L achieves a -1.18% return, which is significantly lower than AH50.L's 12.87% return.


MCHS.L

1D
-0.42%
1M
0.14%
YTD
-1.18%
6M
-1.60%
1Y
15.62%
3Y*
8.02%
5Y*
-2.86%
10Y*

AH50.L

1D
-0.30%
1M
2.69%
YTD
12.87%
6M
16.90%
1Y
35.59%
3Y*
13.16%
5Y*
1.28%
10Y*
8.54%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
MCHS.L
Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc
-1.18%19.38%18.84%-17.54%-14.53%-17.01%
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D
12.87%17.73%19.83%-17.39%-11.62%-8.59%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS.L and AH50.L is 0.77, 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

0.77

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.82

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2021

0.83

The correlation between MCHS.L and AH50.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MCHS.L
AH50.L

Technology

19.9%
27.6%

Financial Services

18.4%
11.4%

Consumer Cyclical

17.1%
7.5%

Communication Services

11.4%
1.8%

Industrials

9.5%
20.4%

Basic Materials

7.7%
14.3%

Consumer Defensive

4.5%
5.3%

Healthcare

4.5%
6.1%

Energy

3.4%
2.6%

Utilities

2.4%
2.4%

Real Estate

1.2%
0.7%

Technology

MCHS.L
19.9%
AH50.L
27.6%

Financial Services

MCHS.L
18.4%
AH50.L
11.4%

Consumer Cyclical

MCHS.L
17.1%
AH50.L
7.5%

Communication Services

MCHS.L
11.4%
AH50.L
1.8%

Industrials

MCHS.L
9.5%
AH50.L
20.4%

Basic Materials

MCHS.L
7.7%
AH50.L
14.3%

Consumer Defensive

MCHS.L
4.5%
AH50.L
5.3%

Healthcare

MCHS.L
4.5%
AH50.L
6.1%

Energy

MCHS.L
3.4%
AH50.L
2.6%

Utilities

MCHS.L
2.4%
AH50.L
2.4%

Real Estate

MCHS.L
1.2%
AH50.L
0.7%

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

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHS.L
MCHS.L Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
MCHS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCHS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCHS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
MCHS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCHS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

AH50.L
AH50.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
AH50.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AH50.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
AH50.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
AH50.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
AH50.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L). 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.


MCHS.LAH50.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.36

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.29

4.56

-3.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.08

13.84

-10.76

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the AH50.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS.L and AH50.L, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MCHS.LAH50.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.97

2.01

-1.04

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.09

0.05

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.12

0.36

-0.48

Drawdowns

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS.L drawdown since its inception was -47.34%, roughly equal to the maximum AH50.L drawdown of -45.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS.L and AH50.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MCHS.LAH50.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.34%

-45.94%

-1.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.03%

-7.76%

-4.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.97%

-23.87%

-1.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.71%

-38.86%

-6.85%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.01%

-5.75%

-12.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.06%

-17.41%

-8.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.06%

2.56%

+2.50%

Volatility

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCHS.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L) have volatilities of 5.64% and 5.89%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MCHS.LAH50.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.64%

5.89%

-0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.93%

12.72%

-1.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.12%

17.63%

-1.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.74%

23.39%

+8.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.27%

23.17%

+8.10%

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than AH50.L's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

MCHS.L vs. AH50.L - Dividend Comparison

MCHS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AH50.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D
2.08%2.79%2.37%2.72%3.00%1.78%1.57%
MCHS.L
Invesco MSCI China All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MCHS.L and AH50.L have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MCHS.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MCHS.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AH50.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MCHS.L and 0.65% for AH50.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MCHS.L and AH50.L

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