MCHS vs. KWEB

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCHS is actively managed, while KWEB is passively managed. Over the past year, MCHS returned 84.27% vs -27.19% for KWEB. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.

Performance

MCHS vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 57.13% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -30.60% return.

MCHS

• 1D: 3.62%
• 1M: 7.32%
• YTD: 57.13%
• 6M: 55.73%
• 1Y: 84.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KWEB

• 1D: -2.76%
• 1M: -13.32%
• YTD: -30.60%
• 6M: -31.53%
• 1Y: -27.19%
• 3Y*: -0.64%
• 5Y*: -16.73%
• 10Y*: -0.63%

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

MCHS vs. KWEB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	57.13%	31.19%	6.53%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-30.60%	23.55%	20.49%

Correlation

The correlation between MCHS and KWEB is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between MCHS and KWEB has dropped to 0.46 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MCHS vs. KWEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCHS	KWEB
Technology	49.7%	17.5%
Industrials	27.8%	3.3%
Basic Materials	8.1%	-
Energy	6.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	4.5%	36.0%
Utilities	2.1%	-
Healthcare	2.1%	6.0%
Real Estate	1.6%	3.9%
Communication Services	1.2%	28.4%
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	2.7%
Financial Services	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

MCHS vs. KWEB — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCHS

MCHS Risk / Return Rank: 94
MCHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
MCHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
MCHS Omega Ratio Rank: 93
MCHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
MCHS Martin Ratio Rank: 92

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 2
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 2
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). 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	KWEB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.36	-1.01	+4.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.05	-1.44	+5.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	0.84	+0.73
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.97	-0.66	+7.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.28	-1.43	+21.71

MCHS vs. KWEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCHS Sharpe Ratio is 3.36, which is higher than the KWEB Sharpe Ratio of -1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCHS and KWEB, 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. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and KWEB.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCHS	KWEB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.75%	-80.92%	+57.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.15%	-41.62%	+29.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-41.62%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-72.17%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-80.92%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.03%	-72.67%	+71.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.51%	-35.39%	+27.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.17%	19.04%	-14.87%

Volatility

MCHS vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) has a higher volatility of 13.46% compared to KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) at 8.14%. This indicates that MCHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KWEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCHS	KWEB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.46%	8.14%	+5.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.83%	20.56%	+1.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.22%	27.10%	-1.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.99%	47.70%	-18.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.99%	40.00%	-11.01%

MCHS vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than KWEB's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCHS vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison

MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, less than KWEB's 8.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	8.87%	6.16%	3.51%	1.71%	0.00%	7.07%	0.29%	0.08%	3.40%	0.58%	1.19%	0.46%
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF	2.27%	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 KWEB in my portfolio?

MCHS and KWEB have a correlation of 0.46, 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 KWEB?

MCHS has higher volatility (13.46%) compared to KWEB (8.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHS dropped -23.75% vs KWEB's -80.92%.

Which ETF is better, MCHS or KWEB?

On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 84.27% vs -27.19% for KWEB. On fees, KWEB is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, KWEB has been the lower-risk option at 8.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCHS or KWEB?

Over the 1-year period, MCHS has performed better with a 84.27% return vs -27.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCHS or KWEB?

KWEB is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.

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

KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 8.87%, compared with 2.27% for MCHS.

What is the main difference between MCHS and KWEB?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.70% for KWEB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.36 vs -1.01), 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.