MCHS vs. DRGN
MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and DRGN (Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MCHS is a China Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while DRGN is a Technology Equities fund tracking the BITA China Generative AI Select Index. MCHS is actively managed, while DRGN is passively managed. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for DRGN.
Performance
MCHS vs. DRGN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 44.06% return, which is significantly higher than DRGN's 16.07% return.
MCHS
- 1D
- 1.99%
- 1M
- 8.90%
- YTD
- 44.06%
- 6M
- 45.71%
- 1Y
- 75.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DRGN
- 1D
- 3.59%
- 1M
- 4.57%
- YTD
- 16.07%
- 6M
- 17.38%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MCHS vs. DRGN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 44.06% | 10.17% |
DRGN Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF | 16.07% | 26.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCHS and DRGN is 0.66, 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 Jul 16, 2025 | 0.66 |
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. DRGN — Risk / Return Rank
MCHS
DRGN
MCHS vs. DRGN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF (DRGN). 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 | DRGN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.35 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.16 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.28 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn 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. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MCHS | DRGN | 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 | 1.56 | -0.35 |
Drawdowns
MCHS vs. DRGN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, which is greater than DRGN's maximum drawdown of -20.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and DRGN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCHS | DRGN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.75% | -20.86% | -2.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.15% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.29% | -7.44% | +4.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.62% | -7.94% | +0.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.01% | — | — |
Volatility
MCHS vs. DRGN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCHS | DRGN | 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% | 34.93% | -12.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.26% | 34.93% | -6.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.26% | 34.93% | -6.67% |
MCHS vs. DRGN - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than DRGN's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCHS vs. DRGN - Dividend Comparison
MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, more than DRGN's 1.05% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
DRGN Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF | 1.05% | 1.22% | 0.00% |
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 2.47% | 3.56% | 5.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCHS and DRGN have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, DRGN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
DRGN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.
MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 1.05% for DRGN.
MCHS is categorized as China Equities, while DRGN is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.39% for DRGN.
Find the right allocation for MCHS and DRGN
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