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

Performance

MCHS vs. FCA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

MCHS vs. FCA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MCHS
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF
10.80%31.19%6.53%
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
10.86%45.20%16.81%

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with MCHS having a 10.80% return and FCA slightly higher at 10.86%.


MCHS

1D
-0.59%
1M
-10.87%
YTD
10.80%
6M
7.16%
1Y
32.41%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FCA

1D
-0.29%
1M
-7.82%
YTD
10.86%
6M
8.68%
1Y
53.93%
3Y*
17.99%
5Y*
5.95%
10Y*
9.40%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


MCHS vs. FCA - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than FCA's 0.80% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

MCHS vs. FCA — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHS
MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

FCA
FCA Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
FCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCA Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
FCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCA Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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 vs. FCA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA). 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.


MCHSFCADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.27

2.07

-0.80

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.83

2.56

-0.73

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.38

-0.11

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.03

3.34

-1.30

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

7.51

15.08

-7.57

MCHS vs. FCA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the FCA Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS and FCA, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MCHSFCADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.27

2.07

-0.80

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

0.13

+0.66

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and FCA is 0.72, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

MCHS vs. FCA - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.22%, more than FCA's 2.32% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MCHS
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF
3.22%3.56%5.48%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
2.32%2.67%5.17%5.70%6.00%4.91%4.12%3.73%3.10%2.30%2.51%4.13%

Drawdowns

MCHS vs. FCA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, smaller than the maximum FCA drawdown of -45.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and FCA.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


MCHSFCADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.75%

-45.56%

+21.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.89%

-15.81%

-0.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.50%

-8.75%

-2.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.98%

-21.81%

+13.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.30%

3.50%

+0.80%

Volatility

MCHS vs. FCA - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) have volatilities of 8.20% and 8.25%, 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 graphics...

Volatility by Period


MCHSFCADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.20%

8.25%

-0.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.15%

16.57%

-1.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.64%

26.19%

-0.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.86%

27.43%

+0.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.86%

26.57%

+1.29%