MCHS vs. CNQQ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and CNQQ (Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCHS is actively managed, while CNQQ is passively managed. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CNQQ.

Performance

MCHS vs. CNQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 44.06% return, which is significantly higher than CNQQ's 12.03% return.

MCHS

• 1D: 1.99%
• 1M: 8.90%
• YTD: 44.06%
• 6M: 45.71%
• 1Y: 75.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CNQQ

• 1D: 3.82%
• 1M: 7.31%
• YTD: 12.03%
• 6M: 12.59%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MCHS vs. CNQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	44.06%	-1.41%
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF	12.03%	-5.96%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and CNQQ is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2025	0.68

Return for Risk

MCHS vs. CNQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 89
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 88
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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 vs. CNQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF (CNQQ). 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	CNQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.35	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.16	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.28	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	19.01	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MCHS	CNQQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.35	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.21	0.33	+0.89

Drawdowns

MCHS vs. CNQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, which is greater than CNQQ's maximum drawdown of -17.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and CNQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHS	CNQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.75%	-17.82%	-5.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.15%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.29%	-1.09%	-2.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.62%	-9.28%	+1.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.01%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MCHS	CNQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.79%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.21%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.74%	24.50%	-1.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.26%	24.50%	+3.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.26%	24.50%	+3.76%

MCHS vs. CNQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than CNQQ's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCHS vs. CNQQ - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, more than CNQQ's 0.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF	0.23%	0.09%	0.00%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.47%	3.56%	5.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCHS and CNQQ in my portfolio?

MCHS and CNQQ have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MCHS or CNQQ?

On fees, CNQQ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCHS or CNQQ?

CNQQ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MCHS or CNQQ?

MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.23% for CNQQ.

What is the main difference between MCHS and CNQQ?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Rayliant. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.75% for CNQQ.