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

Performance

MCHS vs. KCAI - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 51.63% return, which is significantly higher than KCAI's 7.28% return.


MCHS

1D
-4.50%
1M
6.46%
YTD
51.63%
6M
50.45%
1Y
81.12%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

KCAI

1D
1.90%
1M
2.49%
YTD
7.28%
6M
8.32%
1Y
50.78%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCHS vs. KCAI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MCHS
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF
51.63%31.19%15.81%
KCAI
KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF
7.28%53.29%11.36%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and KCAI is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2024

0.54

The correlation between MCHS and KCAI shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.54 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MCHS vs. KCAI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MCHS
KCAI

Technology

49.7%
13.2%

Industrials

27.8%
23.6%

Basic Materials

8.1%
11.3%

Energy

6.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

4.5%
11.5%

Utilities

2.1%

-

Healthcare

2.1%
1.3%

Real Estate

1.6%

-

Communication Services

1.2%

-

Consumer Defensive

0.8%

-

Financial Services

-

39.0%

Technology

MCHS
49.7%
KCAI
13.2%

Industrials

MCHS
27.8%
KCAI
23.6%

Basic Materials

MCHS
8.1%
KCAI
11.3%

Energy

MCHS
6.3%
KCAI

-

Consumer Cyclical

MCHS
4.5%
KCAI
11.5%

Utilities

MCHS
2.1%
KCAI

-

Healthcare

MCHS
2.1%
KCAI
1.3%

Real Estate

MCHS
1.6%
KCAI

-

Communication Services

MCHS
1.2%
KCAI

-

Consumer Defensive

MCHS
0.8%
KCAI

-

Financial Services

MCHS

-

KCAI
39.0%

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. KCAI — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHS
MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

KCAI
KCAI Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
KCAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KCAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
KCAI Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
KCAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
KCAI Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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. KCAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI). 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.


MCHSKCAIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.55

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.67

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.71

12.08

-5.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.57

34.38

-14.81

MCHS vs. KCAI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is comparable to the KCAI Sharpe Ratio of 3.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS and KCAI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MCHS vs. KCAI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, smaller than the maximum KCAI drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and KCAI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MCHSKCAIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.75%

-25.48%

+1.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.15%

-4.23%

-7.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.50%

-1.65%

-2.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.53%

-7.02%

-0.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.16%

1.48%

+2.68%

Volatility

MCHS vs. KCAI - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a higher volatility of 13.48% compared to KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) at 4.13%. This indicates that MCHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KCAI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MCHSKCAIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.48%

4.13%

+9.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.61%

8.71%

+12.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.11%

13.47%

+11.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.95%

21.01%

+7.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.95%

21.01%

+7.94%

MCHS vs. KCAI - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than KCAI's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

MCHS vs. KCAI - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, less than KCAI's 33.02% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
KCAI
KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF
33.02%35.42%2.19%
MCHS
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF
2.35%3.56%5.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


MCHS and KCAI have a correlation of 0.42, 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 KCAI (4.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHS dropped -23.75% vs KCAI's -25.48%.

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 81.12% vs 50.78% for KCAI. On fees, KCAI is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, KCAI has been the lower-risk option at 4.13%. 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 50.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

KCAI is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 33.02%, compared with 2.35% for MCHS.

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.79% for KCAI.

KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.80 vs 3.25), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MCHS and KCAI

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