MCHS vs. FLCH

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH).

MCHS and FLCH are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. MCHS is an actively managed fund by Matthews. It was launched on Jan 10, 2024. FLCH is a passively managed fund by Franklin Templeton that tracks the performance of the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. It was launched on Nov 2, 2017.

Performance

MCHS vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison

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

MCHS vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	13.36%	31.19%	6.53%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	-5.65%	32.55%	23.14%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 13.36% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -5.65% return.

MCHS

• 1D: 2.32%
• 1M: -9.45%
• YTD: 13.36%
• 6M: 9.20%
• 1Y: 35.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLCH

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: -4.32%
• YTD: -5.65%
• 6M: -12.56%
• 1Y: 7.43%
• 3Y*: 7.60%
• 5Y*: -4.85%
• 10Y*: —

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

MCHS vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.

MCHS

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF

FLCH

Franklin FTSE China ETF

Return for Risk

MCHS vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 73
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 73
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 71

FLCH

FLCH Risk / Return Rank: 21
FLCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
FLCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
FLCH Omega Ratio Rank: 21
FLCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FLCH Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	0.32	+1.05
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.94	0.59	+1.35
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.08	+0.21
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.23	0.45	+1.78
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.17	1.29	+6.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MCHS vs. FLCH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is higher than the FLCH Sharpe Ratio of 0.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS and FLCH, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MCHS	FLCH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37	0.32	+1.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	0.02	+0.81

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and FLCH is 0.76, 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. FLCH - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.14%, more than FLCH's 2.50% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	3.14%	3.56%	5.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF	2.50%	2.36%	2.87%	3.47%	2.69%	1.48%	0.91%	1.98%	1.92%	0.01%

Drawdowns

MCHS vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and FLCH.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHS	FLCH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.75%	-62.09%	+38.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.89%	-16.65%	+0.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-56.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.45%	-33.49%	+24.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.98%	-30.50%	+22.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.34%	6.02%	-1.68%

Volatility

MCHS vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a higher volatility of 7.12% compared to Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) at 6.44%. This indicates that MCHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHS	FLCH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.12%	6.44%	+0.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.31%	13.92%	+1.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.73%	23.03%	+2.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.87%	29.58%	-1.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.87%	28.06%	-0.19%