MINV vs. DRLL

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

MINV (Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF) and DRLL (Strive U.S. Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MINV is a Asia Pacific Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while DRLL is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Bloomberg US Energy Select Index. MINV is actively managed, while DRLL is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MINV returned 27.91%/yr vs 11.02%/yr for DRLL. Their 0.14 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. MINV charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.41%/yr for DRLL.

Performance

MINV vs. DRLL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) and Strive U.S. Energy ETF (DRLL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MINV achieves a 40.01% return, which is significantly higher than DRLL's 29.95% return.

MINV

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: -10.04%
• 6M: 31.99%
• YTD: 40.01%
• 1Y: 54.59%
• 3Y*: 27.91%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.08%

DRLL

• 1D: -2.68%
• 1M: 8.84%
• 6M: 11.16%
• YTD: 29.95%
• 1Y: 37.23%
• 3Y*: 11.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.29%

*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)
DRLL Strive U.S. Energy ETF	$478.10K	$507.89K	$528.94K
MINV Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF	$532.24K	$415.17K	$749.83K

MINV vs. DRLL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MINV Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF	40.01%	30.85%	17.32%	-2.66%	-3.20%
DRLL Strive U.S. Energy ETF	29.95%	7.74%	0.02%	-1.84%	15.52%

Correlation

The correlation between MINV and DRLL is -0.17, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.17
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2022	0.14

The correlation between MINV and DRLL shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to 0.14 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MINV vs. DRLL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MINV	DRLL
Technology	38.0%	-
Industrials	15.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	0.9%
Communication Services	8.5%	-
Healthcare	5.2%	-
Real Estate	1.7%	-
Energy	1.5%	99.1%
Financial Services	1.3%	-
Basic Materials	0.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MINV vs. DRLL — Risk / Return Rank

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

MINV

MINV Risk / Return Rank: 61
MINV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
MINV Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
MINV Omega Ratio Rank: 64
MINV Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
MINV Martin Ratio Rank: 59

DRLL

DRLL Risk / Return Rank: 53
DRLL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
DRLL Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
DRLL Omega Ratio Rank: 52
DRLL Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
DRLL Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

MINV vs. DRLL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) and Strive U.S. Energy ETF (DRLL). 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.

	MINV	DRLL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	1.62	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.25	2.13	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.27	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.44	2.20	+0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.09	5.57	+2.52

MINV vs. DRLL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MINV Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the DRLL Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MINV and DRLL, 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

MINV vs. DRLL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MINV drawdown since its inception was -23.49%, roughly equal to the maximum DRLL drawdown of -23.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINV and DRLL.

Drawdown Indicators

	MINV	DRLL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.49%	-23.73%	+0.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.49%	-16.99%	-5.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.49%	-23.73%	+1.24%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.81%	-9.02%	-7.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.21%	-8.14%	-0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.77%	6.71%	+0.06%

Volatility

MINV vs. DRLL - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) has a higher volatility of 9.58% compared to Strive U.S. Energy ETF (DRLL) at 7.42%. This indicates that MINV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DRLL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MINV	DRLL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.58%	7.42%	+2.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.19%	18.67%	+9.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.46%	23.14%	+8.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.23%	23.82%	+1.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.23%	23.82%	+1.41%

MINV vs. DRLL - Expense Ratio Comparison

MINV has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than DRLL's 0.41% expense ratio.

Dividends

MINV vs. DRLL - Dividend Comparison

MINV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, less than DRLL's 2.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
DRLL Strive U.S. Energy ETF	2.34%	2.99%	3.00%	3.01%	1.18%
MINV Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF	1.08%	1.51%	0.25%	1.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MINV and DRLL in my portfolio?

MINV and DRLL have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MINV or DRLL?

MINV has higher volatility (9.58%) compared to DRLL (7.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MINV dropped -23.49% vs DRLL's -23.73%.

Which ETF is better, MINV or DRLL?

On 3-year performance, MINV leads with 27.91% vs 11.02% for DRLL. On fees, DRLL is cheaper at 0.41% per year. On volatility, DRLL has been the lower-risk option at 7.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MINV or DRLL?

Over the 3-year period, MINV has performed better with a 27.91% return vs 11.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MINV or DRLL?

DRLL is cheaper with a 0.41% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MINV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MINV or DRLL?

DRLL has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 1.08% for MINV.

What is the main difference between MINV and DRLL?

MINV is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while DRLL is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Strive. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MINV and 0.41% for DRLL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MINV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.62), 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.