MCHS vs. CNQQ
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. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CNQQ.
Performance
MCHS vs. CNQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 23.90% return, which is significantly higher than CNQQ's 1.50% return.
MCHS
- 1D
- 1.71%
- 1M
- -14.97%
- 6M
- 11.94%
- YTD
- 23.90%
- 1Y
- 36.95%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 24.01%
CNQQ
- 1D
- 0.73%
- 1M
- -4.81%
- 6M
- -0.44%
- YTD
- 1.50%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $685.05K | $467.08K | $508.55K | |
| $339.44K | $914.40K | $775.38K |
MCHS vs. CNQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 23.90% | -2.41% |
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 1.50% | -5.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCHS and CNQQ is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2025 | 0.74 |
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 vs. CNQQ — Risk / Return Rank
MCHS
CNQQ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
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.
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.
| MCHS | CNQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.43 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.25 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MCHS vs. CNQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -24.83%, 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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCHS | CNQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.83% | -17.82% | -7.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.83% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.54% | -12.07% | -11.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.79% | -8.56% | +0.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.72% | — | — |
Volatility
MCHS vs. CNQQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCHS | CNQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.69% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 27.18% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.98% | 27.77% | +2.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.25% | 27.77% | +2.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.25% | 27.77% | +2.48% |
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 2.88%, more than CNQQ's 0.39% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CNQQ Rayliant-ChinaAMC Transformative China Tech ETF | 0.39% | 0.09% | 0.00% |
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 2.88% | 3.56% | 5.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCHS and CNQQ have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
CNQQ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.
MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.88%, compared with 0.39% for CNQQ.
They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Rayliant. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.75% for CNQQ.
Find the right allocation for MCHS and CNQQ
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