MCHS vs. IAK

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and IAK (iShares U.S. Insurance ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MCHS is a China Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while IAK is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Insurance Index. MCHS is actively managed, while IAK is passively managed. Over the past year, MCHS returned 36.95% vs 19.63% for IAK. Their -0.05 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for IAK.

Performance

MCHS vs. IAK - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 23.90% return, which is significantly higher than IAK's 10.07% return.

MCHS

• 1D: 1.71%
• 1M: -14.97%
• 6M: 11.94%
• YTD: 23.90%
• 1Y: 36.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 24.01%

IAK

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: -0.06%
• 6M: 12.67%
• YTD: 10.07%
• 1Y: 19.63%
• 3Y*: 19.72%
• 5Y*: 15.95%
• 10Y*: 13.45%
• ALL TIME*: 7.39%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	$14.76M	$20.90M	$11.89M
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	$339.44K	$914.40K	$775.38K

MCHS vs. IAK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	23.90%	31.19%	6.53%
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	10.07%	9.50%	26.30%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and IAK is -0.22, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	-0.05

The correlation between MCHS and IAK shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to -0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MCHS vs. IAK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCHS	IAK
Technology	49.5%	-
Industrials	29.1%	-
Basic Materials	8.7%	-
Energy	5.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	4.3%	-
Healthcare	2.1%	0.7%
Utilities	2.1%	-
Communication Services	1.2%	-
Real Estate	1.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	-
Financial Services	-	99.3%

Return for Risk

MCHS vs. IAK — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 46
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 50
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 46

IAK

IAK Risk / Return Rank: 53
IAK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
IAK Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
IAK Omega Ratio Rank: 45
IAK Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
IAK Martin Ratio Rank: 52

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MCHS vs. IAK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK). 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	IAK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	1.17	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.65	1.72	-0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.21	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.43	2.45	-1.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.25	5.96	-0.71

MCHS vs. IAK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is comparable to the IAK Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS and IAK, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MCHS vs. IAK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -24.83%, smaller than the maximum IAK drawdown of -77.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and IAK.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHS	IAK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.83%	-77.38%	+52.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.83%	-7.62%	-17.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.58%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-14.76%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.95%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.54%	-3.23%	-20.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.79%	-16.01%	+8.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.72%	3.13%	+3.59%

Volatility

MCHS vs. IAK - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a higher volatility of 15.69% compared to iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK) at 7.03%. This indicates that MCHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IAK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHS	IAK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.69%	7.03%	+8.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.18%	12.43%	+14.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.98%	16.00%	+13.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.25%	18.13%	+12.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.25%	20.92%	+9.33%

MCHS vs. IAK - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than IAK's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCHS vs. IAK - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.88%, more than IAK's 2.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	2.43%	1.69%	1.49%	1.44%	1.69%	2.26%	2.07%	1.84%	2.33%	1.62%	1.68%	1.62%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.88%	3.56%	5.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCHS and IAK in my portfolio?

MCHS and IAK have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MCHS or IAK?

MCHS has higher volatility (15.69%) compared to IAK (7.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHS dropped -24.83% vs IAK's -77.38%.

Which ETF is better, MCHS or IAK?

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 36.95% vs 19.63% for IAK. On fees, IAK is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, IAK has been the lower-risk option at 7.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCHS or IAK?

Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 36.95% return vs 19.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCHS or IAK?

IAK is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

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

MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.88%, compared with 2.43% for IAK.

What is the main difference between MCHS and IAK?

MCHS is categorized as China Equities, while IAK is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.38% for IAK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.18 vs 1.17), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.