MCSMX vs. CAF
Compare and contrast key facts about Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) and Morgan Stanley China A Share Fund (CAF).
MCSMX is managed by Matthews. It was launched on May 30, 2011. CAF is an actively managed fund by Morgan Stanley. It was launched on Jul 6, 2006.
Performance
MCSMX vs. CAF - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
MCSMX vs. CAF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund | 10.66% | 28.85% | 2.82% | -17.50% | -31.25% | 6.71% | 82.73% | 35.41% | -17.65% | 53.71% |
CAF Morgan Stanley China A Share Fund | 0.81% | 41.51% | 0.34% | -9.39% | -30.41% | -1.77% | 12.74% | 23.50% | -14.26% | 44.94% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCSMX achieves a 10.66% return, which is significantly higher than CAF's 0.81% return. Over the past 10 years, MCSMX has outperformed CAF with an annualized return of 11.23%, while CAF has yielded a comparatively lower 4.78% annualized return.
MCSMX
- 1D
- -0.63%
- 1M
- -10.72%
- YTD
- 10.66%
- 6M
- 6.47%
- 1Y
- 31.98%
- 3Y*
- 6.45%
- 5Y*
- -2.56%
- 10Y*
- 11.23%
CAF
- 1D
- 3.67%
- 1M
- -4.11%
- YTD
- 0.81%
- 6M
- 6.75%
- 1Y
- 35.89%
- 3Y*
- 8.65%
- 5Y*
- -3.03%
- 10Y*
- 4.78%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
MCSMX vs. CAF - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCSMX has a 1.41% expense ratio, which is lower than CAF's 1.67% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
MCSMX vs. CAF — Risk / Return Rank
MCSMX
CAF
MCSMX vs. CAF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) and Morgan Stanley China A Share Fund (CAF). 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.
| MCSMX | CAF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.48 | 1.83 | -0.34 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.94 | 2.50 | -0.56 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.35 | -0.06 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.32 | 3.02 | -1.70 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.46 | 10.31 | -5.85 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MCSMX | CAF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.48 | 1.83 | -0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.11 | -0.14 | +0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 | 0.22 | +0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 0.26 | +0.08 |
Correlation
The correlation between MCSMX and CAF is 0.58, 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
MCSMX vs. CAF - Dividend Comparison
MCSMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.01%, more than CAF's 1.50% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund | 2.01% | 2.23% | 1.35% | 2.36% | 1.78% | 26.38% | 16.98% | 1.03% | 2.25% | 5.66% | 4.79% | 8.88% |
CAF Morgan Stanley China A Share Fund | 1.50% | 1.51% | 2.63% | 0.96% | 0.02% | 6.57% | 10.40% | 3.78% | 9.48% | 5.20% | 4.69% | 67.03% |
Drawdowns
MCSMX vs. CAF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCSMX drawdown since its inception was -55.77%, smaller than the maximum CAF drawdown of -65.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCSMX and CAF.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCSMX | CAF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.77% | -65.88% | +10.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.69% | -11.45% | -4.24% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.98% | -49.01% | -4.97% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -55.77% | -49.01% | -6.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.92% | -17.42% | -7.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.31% | -26.05% | +5.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.63% | 3.49% | +2.14% |
Volatility
MCSMX vs. CAF - Volatility Comparison
Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) has a higher volatility of 8.13% compared to Morgan Stanley China A Share Fund (CAF) at 6.54%. This indicates that MCSMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| MCSMX | CAF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.13% | 6.54% | +1.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.70% | 13.91% | +0.79% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.12% | 19.73% | +2.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.01% | 21.20% | +2.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.99% | 21.90% | +0.09% |