MCHS vs. ISVBF
MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCHS is actively managed, while ISVBF is passively managed. Over the past year, MCHS returned 81.12% vs -0.84% for ISVBF. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
MCHS vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 51.63% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -12.61% return.
MCHS
- 1D
- -4.50%
- 1M
- 6.46%
- YTD
- 51.63%
- 6M
- 50.45%
- 1Y
- 81.12%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ISVBF
- 1D
- -1.91%
- 1M
- -3.63%
- YTD
- -12.61%
- 6M
- -13.33%
- 1Y
- -0.84%
- 3Y*
- 8.82%
- 5Y*
- -6.16%
- 10Y*
- —
MCHS vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 51.63% | 31.19% | 6.53% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -12.61% | 30.64% | 21.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCHS and ISVBF is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024 | 0.42 |
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. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
MCHS
ISVBF
MCHS vs. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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 | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +3.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.02 | +0.53 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.71 | -0.04 | +6.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.57 | -0.09 | +19.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MCHS vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, smaller than the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCHS | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.75% | -53.78% | +30.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.15% | -20.64% | +8.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -52.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.50% | -29.16% | +24.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.53% | -32.68% | +25.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.16% | 9.17% | -5.01% |
Volatility
MCHS vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a higher volatility of 13.48% compared to iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) at 8.35%. This indicates that MCHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCHS | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.48% | 8.35% | +5.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.61% | 27.04% | -5.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.11% | 30.91% | -5.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.95% | 30.31% | -1.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.95% | 30.15% | -1.20% |
MCHS vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCHS vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 2.35% | 3.56% | 5.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCHS and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MCHS has higher volatility (13.48%) compared to ISVBF (8.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHS dropped -23.75% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 81.12% vs -0.84% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 8.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 81.12% return vs -0.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.
MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
They also come from different issuers: Matthews and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.40% for ISVBF.
MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.25 vs -0.03), 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.
Find the right allocation for MCHS and ISVBF
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