MCHS vs. KLIP

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both China Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MCHS returned 36.95% vs -3.45% for KLIP. Their 0.53 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for KLIP.

Performance

MCHS vs. KLIP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). 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 KLIP's -7.10% return.

MCHS

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

KLIP

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 6.50%
• 6M: -11.47%
• YTD: -7.10%
• 1Y: -3.45%
• 3Y*: 6.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.43%

*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)
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	$623.83K	$609.30K	$993.79K
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	$339.44K	$914.40K	$775.38K

MCHS vs. KLIP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	23.90%	31.19%	6.53%
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	-7.10%	16.92%	7.33%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and KLIP is 0.30, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.53

Over the past year, the correlation between MCHS and KLIP has dropped to 0.30 - well below their long-term average of 0.53, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MCHS vs. KLIP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCHS	KLIP
Technology	49.5%	4.2%
Industrials	29.1%	-
Basic Materials	8.7%	-
Energy	5.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	4.3%	34.2%
Healthcare	2.1%	6.0%
Utilities	2.1%	-
Communication Services	1.2%	45.8%
Real Estate	1.2%	3.9%
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	4.0%
Financial Services	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

MCHS vs. KLIP — 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

KLIP

KLIP Risk / Return Rank: 7
KLIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
KLIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
KLIP Omega Ratio Rank: 7
KLIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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. KLIP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). 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	KLIP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	-0.26	+1.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.65	-0.25	+1.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	0.97	+0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.43	-0.20	+1.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.25	-0.46	+5.72

MCHS vs. KLIP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is higher than the KLIP Sharpe Ratio of -0.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS and KLIP, 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. KLIP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -24.83%, which is greater than KLIP's maximum drawdown of -21.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and KLIP.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHS	KLIP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.83%	-21.48%	-3.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.83%	-21.48%	-3.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.48%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.54%	-12.44%	-11.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.79%	-4.32%	-3.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.72%	9.19%	-2.47%

Volatility

MCHS vs. KLIP - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a higher volatility of 15.69% compared to KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) at 2.40%. This indicates that MCHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KLIP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHS	KLIP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.69%	2.40%	+13.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.18%	13.02%	+14.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.98%	16.59%	+13.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.25%	17.99%	+12.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.25%	17.99%	+12.26%

MCHS vs. KLIP - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is lower than KLIP's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCHS vs. KLIP - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.88%, less than KLIP's 27.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	27.63%	25.14%	54.26%	61.22%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.88%	3.56%	5.48%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCHS and KLIP in my portfolio?

MCHS and KLIP have a correlation of 0.30, 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 KLIP?

MCHS has higher volatility (15.69%) compared to KLIP (2.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHS dropped -24.83% vs KLIP's -21.48%.

Which ETF is better, MCHS or KLIP?

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 36.95% vs -3.45% for KLIP. On fees, MCHS is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, KLIP has been the lower-risk option at 2.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCHS or KLIP?

Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 36.95% return vs -3.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCHS or KLIP?

MCHS is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.

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

KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 27.63%, compared with 2.88% for MCHS.

What is the main difference between MCHS and KLIP?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.95% for KLIP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.18 vs -0.26), 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.