MCSMX vs. FHKAX
Compare and contrast key facts about Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX).
MCSMX is managed by Matthews. It was launched on May 30, 2011. FHKAX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on May 9, 2008.
Performance
MCSMX vs. FHKAX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
MCSMX vs. FHKAX - 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% |
FHKAX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A | 5.42% | 42.19% | 22.84% | -0.60% | -24.09% | -13.95% | 47.37% | 34.71% | -17.67% | 51.46% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCSMX achieves a 10.66% return, which is significantly higher than FHKAX's 5.42% return. Over the past 10 years, MCSMX has underperformed FHKAX with an annualized return of 11.23%, while FHKAX has yielded a comparatively higher 11.83% 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%
FHKAX
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- -9.06%
- YTD
- 5.42%
- 6M
- 6.13%
- 1Y
- 43.43%
- 3Y*
- 19.54%
- 5Y*
- 2.51%
- 10Y*
- 11.83%
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. FHKAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCSMX has a 1.41% expense ratio, which is higher than FHKAX's 1.21% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
MCSMX vs. FHKAX — Risk / Return Rank
MCSMX
FHKAX
MCSMX vs. FHKAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) and Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX). 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 | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.48 | 1.85 | -0.37 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.94 | 2.39 | -0.45 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.34 | -0.06 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.32 | 2.48 | -1.17 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.46 | 9.62 | -5.16 |
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 | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.48 | 1.85 | -0.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.11 | 0.11 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 | 0.54 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 0.31 | +0.03 |
Correlation
The correlation between MCSMX and FHKAX is 0.79, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
MCSMX vs. FHKAX - Dividend Comparison
MCSMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.01%, more than FHKAX's 1.51% 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% |
FHKAX Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A | 1.51% | 1.59% | 1.22% | 1.58% | 0.59% | 10.80% | 4.71% | 0.38% | 0.39% | 0.21% | 0.99% | 15.33% |
Drawdowns
MCSMX vs. FHKAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCSMX drawdown since its inception was -55.77%, roughly equal to the maximum FHKAX drawdown of -58.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCSMX and FHKAX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCSMX | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.77% | -58.62% | +2.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.69% | -15.97% | +0.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.98% | -54.04% | +0.06% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -55.77% | -58.62% | +2.85% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.92% | -10.83% | -14.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.31% | -19.15% | -1.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.63% | 4.12% | +1.51% |
Volatility
MCSMX vs. FHKAX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) is 8.13%, while Fidelity Advisor China Region Fund Class A (FHKAX) has a volatility of 9.26%. This indicates that MCSMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FHKAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| MCSMX | FHKAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.13% | 9.26% | -1.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.70% | 16.44% | -1.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.12% | 23.16% | -1.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.01% | 23.95% | +0.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.99% | 22.09% | -0.10% |