MCSMX vs. TRCLX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

MCSMX (Matthews China Small Companies Fund) and TRCLX (T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, MCSMX returned -1.67%/yr vs 2.02%/yr for TRCLX. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction. MCSMX charges 1.41%/yr vs 1.04%/yr for TRCLX.

Performance

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) and T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund (TRCLX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCSMX achieves a 20.37% return, which is significantly higher than TRCLX's 18.94% return.

MCSMX

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: -17.35%
• 6M: 8.68%
• YTD: 20.37%
• 1Y: 33.61%
• 3Y*: 10.82%
• 5Y*: -1.67%
• 10Y*: 11.64%
• ALL TIME*: 7.53%

TRCLX

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -11.88%
• 6M: 8.51%
• YTD: 18.94%
• 1Y: 42.58%
• 3Y*: 15.02%
• 5Y*: 2.02%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.17%

*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)
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
TRCLX T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	20.37%	28.85%	2.82%	-17.50%	-31.25%	6.71%	82.73%	3.78%
TRCLX T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund	18.94%	36.23%	10.95%	-15.51%	-26.24%	6.28%	59.73%	6.20%

Correlation

The correlation between MCSMX and TRCLX is 0.86, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2019	0.88

The correlation between MCSMX and TRCLX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MCSMX vs. TRCLX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MCSMX

MCSMX Risk / Return Rank: 34
MCSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
MCSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
MCSMX Omega Ratio Rank: 37
MCSMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
MCSMX Martin Ratio Rank: 33

TRCLX

TRCLX Risk / Return Rank: 69
TRCLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
TRCLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
TRCLX Omega Ratio Rank: 68
TRCLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
TRCLX Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) and T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund (TRCLX). 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.

	MCSMX	TRCLX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	1.72	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.59	2.25	-0.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.30	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.29	2.30	-1.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.79	8.66	-3.87

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCSMX Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the TRCLX Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCSMX and TRCLX, 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

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCSMX drawdown since its inception was -55.77%, which is greater than TRCLX's maximum drawdown of -50.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCSMX and TRCLX.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCSMX	TRCLX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.77%	-50.67%	-5.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.88%	-17.36%	-7.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.88%	-23.94%	-0.94%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.10%	-47.71%	-3.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-55.77%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.88%	-16.27%	-8.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.10%	-22.36%	+2.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.59%	4.61%	+1.98%

Volatility

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Volatility Comparison

Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) has a higher volatility of 14.27% compared to T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund (TRCLX) at 11.25%. This indicates that MCSMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TRCLX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCSMX	TRCLX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.27%	11.25%	+3.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.46%	19.96%	+6.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.46%	23.19%	+6.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.54%	23.68%	+1.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.15%	23.85%	-0.70%

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCSMX has a 1.41% expense ratio, which is higher than TRCLX's 1.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCSMX vs. TRCLX - Dividend Comparison

MCSMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, more than TRCLX's 1.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	1.85%	2.23%	1.35%	2.36%	1.78%	26.38%	16.98%	1.03%	2.25%	5.66%	4.79%	8.88%
TRCLX T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund	1.37%	1.64%	1.78%	2.56%	2.76%	8.23%	1.50%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCSMX and TRCLX in my portfolio?

MCSMX and TRCLX have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MCSMX or TRCLX?

MCSMX has higher volatility (14.27%) compared to TRCLX (11.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCSMX dropped -55.77% vs TRCLX's -50.67%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TRCLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.72 vs 1.09), 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.