MCHS vs. MAGC
MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and MAGC (Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF) are both China Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MCHS returned 75.68% vs -15.61% for MAGC. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for MAGC.
Performance
MCHS vs. MAGC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCHS achieves a 44.06% return, which is significantly higher than MAGC's -15.36% return.
MCHS
- 1D
- 1.99%
- 1M
- 8.90%
- YTD
- 44.06%
- 6M
- 45.71%
- 1Y
- 75.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MAGC
- 1D
- 4.10%
- 1M
- -2.34%
- YTD
- -15.36%
- 6M
- -17.67%
- 1Y
- -15.61%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MCHS vs. MAGC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 44.06% | 31.19% | -10.17% |
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF | -15.36% | 16.35% | -14.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCHS and MAGC 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 Oct 4, 2024 | 0.59 |
The correlation between MCHS and MAGC shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. MAGC — Risk / Return Rank
MCHS
MAGC
MCHS vs. MAGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC). 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 | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.35 | -0.59 | +3.93 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.16 | -0.73 | +4.89 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | 0.92 | +0.64 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.28 | -0.44 | +6.72 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.01 | -0.85 | +19.86 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MCHS | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.35 | -0.59 | +3.93 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.21 | -0.29 | +1.50 |
Drawdowns
MCHS vs. MAGC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCHS drawdown since its inception was -23.75%, smaller than the maximum MAGC drawdown of -32.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCHS and MAGC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCHS | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.75% | -32.86% | +9.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.15% | -32.86% | +20.71% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.29% | -28.88% | +25.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.62% | -15.12% | +7.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.01% | 16.98% | -12.97% |
Volatility
MCHS vs. MAGC - Volatility Comparison
Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) have volatilities of 10.79% and 10.63%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCHS | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.79% | 10.63% | +0.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.21% | 19.54% | -1.33% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.74% | 26.65% | -3.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.26% | 34.36% | -6.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.26% | 34.36% | -6.10% |
MCHS vs. MAGC - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than MAGC's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCHS vs. MAGC - Dividend Comparison
MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, less than MAGC's 4.85% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF | 4.85% | 4.10% | 1.02% |
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 2.47% | 3.56% | 5.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCHS and MAGC 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.
MCHS has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to MAGC (10.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCHS dropped -23.75% vs MAGC's -32.86%.
On 1-year performance, MCHS leads with 75.68% vs -15.61% for MAGC. On fees, MAGC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, MAGC has been the lower-risk option at 10.63%. 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 75.68% return vs -15.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MAGC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.
MAGC has the higher dividend yield at 4.85%, compared with 2.47% for MCHS.
They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.59% for MAGC.
MCHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.35 vs -0.59), 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 MAGC
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