MCHS vs. ISVBF

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF).

MCHS and ISVBF 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. ISVBF is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. It was launched on Apr 8, 2015.

Performance

MCHS vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison

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

MCHS vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	13.36%	31.19%	6.53%
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	-6.48%	30.64%	21.01%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 13.36% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -6.48% return.

MCHS

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

ISVBF

• 1D: 0.60%
• 1M: -4.98%
• YTD: -6.48%
• 6M: -13.49%
• 1Y: 6.38%
• 3Y*: 8.03%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MCHS vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.

MCHS

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF

ISVBF

iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF

Return for Risk

MCHS vs. ISVBF — 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

ISVBF

ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 17
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 18
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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. 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.

	MCHS	ISVBF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	0.20	+1.17
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.94	0.49	+1.46
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.07	+0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.23	0.33	+1.90
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.17	0.98	+7.18
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. ISVBF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is higher than the ISVBF Sharpe Ratio of 0.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS and ISVBF, 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	ISVBF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37	0.20	+1.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	-0.16	+0.99

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and ISVBF is 0.42, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

MCHS vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.14%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	3.14%	3.56%	5.48%
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHS	ISVBF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.75%	-53.78%	+30.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.89%	-19.18%	+3.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.45%	-24.20%	+14.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.98%	-33.12%	+25.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.34%	6.49%	-2.15%

Volatility

MCHS vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) is 7.12%, while iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a volatility of 17.49%. This indicates that MCHS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHS	ISVBF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.12%	17.49%	-10.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.31%	24.96%	-9.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.73%	31.35%	-5.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.87%	30.03%	-2.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.87%	30.03%	-2.16%