RBCIX vs. MCSMX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RBCIX (RBC China Equity Fund) and MCSMX (Matthews China Small Companies Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 3 years, RBCIX returned 12.73%/yr vs 10.82%/yr for MCSMX. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RBCIX charges 1.05%/yr vs 1.41%/yr for MCSMX.

Performance

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RBCIX achieves a -0.81% return, which is significantly lower than MCSMX's 20.37% return.

RBCIX

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: 2.77%
• 6M: -7.68%
• YTD: -0.81%
• 1Y: 24.14%
• 3Y*: 12.73%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.80%

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%

*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
RBCIX RBC China Equity Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
RBCIX RBC China Equity Fund	-0.81%	50.92%	6.24%	-9.64%	-7.64%
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	20.37%	28.85%	2.82%	-17.50%	-12.66%

Correlation

The correlation between RBCIX and MCSMX is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2022	0.79

The correlation between RBCIX and MCSMX shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.79 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RBCIX vs. MCSMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

RBCIX

RBCIX Risk / Return Rank: 28
RBCIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
RBCIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
RBCIX Omega Ratio Rank: 27
RBCIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
RBCIX Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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

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.

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RBC China Equity Fund (RBCIX) and Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX). 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.

	RBCIX	MCSMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.98	1.09	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.44	1.59	-0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.21	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.57	1.29	+0.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.39	4.79	-1.40

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RBCIX Sharpe Ratio is 0.98, which is comparable to the MCSMX Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RBCIX and MCSMX, 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

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RBCIX drawdown since its inception was -32.45%, smaller than the maximum MCSMX drawdown of -55.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RBCIX and MCSMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	RBCIX	MCSMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.45%	-55.77%	+23.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.45%	-24.88%	+11.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.67%	-24.88%	-0.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-51.10%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-55.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.92%	-24.88%	+14.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.56%	-20.10%	+6.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.22%	6.59%	-0.37%

Volatility

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for RBC China Equity Fund (RBCIX) is 7.14%, while Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) has a volatility of 14.27%. This indicates that RBCIX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCSMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RBCIX	MCSMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.14%	14.27%	-7.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.45%	26.46%	-10.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.60%	29.46%	-7.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.96%	25.54%	+0.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.96%	23.15%	+2.81%

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

RBCIX has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is lower than MCSMX's 1.41% expense ratio.

Dividends

RBCIX vs. MCSMX - Dividend Comparison

RBCIX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.69%, more than MCSMX's 1.85% 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%
RBCIX RBC China Equity Fund	3.69%	3.66%	2.01%	1.20%	1.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RBCIX and MCSMX in my portfolio?

RBCIX and MCSMX have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RBCIX or MCSMX?

MCSMX has higher volatility (14.27%) compared to RBCIX (7.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RBCIX dropped -32.45% vs MCSMX's -55.77%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCSMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.09 vs 0.98), 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.