PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TRCLX vs. MCSMX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TRCLX achieves a 38.45% return, which is significantly lower than MCSMX's 53.58% return.


TRCLX

1D
1.40%
1M
6.99%
YTD
38.45%
6M
38.94%
1Y
75.78%
3Y*
22.29%
5Y*
4.66%
10Y*

MCSMX

1D
3.72%
1M
9.06%
YTD
53.58%
6M
52.25%
1Y
85.81%
3Y*
22.20%
5Y*
3.08%
10Y*
15.01%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
TRCLX
T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund
38.45%36.23%10.95%-15.51%-26.24%6.28%59.73%6.20%
MCSMX
Matthews China Small Companies Fund
53.58%28.85%2.82%-17.50%-31.25%6.71%82.73%3.78%

Correlation

The correlation between TRCLX and MCSMX is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.82

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.87

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2019

0.87

The correlation between TRCLX and MCSMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

TRCLX vs. MCSMX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

TRCLX
TRCLX Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
TRCLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TRCLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
TRCLX Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
TRCLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
TRCLX Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank

MCSMX
MCSMX Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
MCSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCSMX Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
MCSMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCSMX Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


TRCLXMCSMXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.63

1.60

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.04

6.95

+0.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

24.80

19.94

+4.86

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TRCLX Sharpe Ratio is 3.75, which is comparable to the MCSMX Sharpe Ratio of 3.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TRCLX 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Drawdown Comparison

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


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TRCLXMCSMXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.67%

-55.77%

+5.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.47%

-12.32%

+1.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.49%

-26.50%

+1.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-49.44%

-53.98%

+4.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-55.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.60%

-20.16%

-2.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.97%

4.26%

-1.29%

Volatility

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for T. Rowe Price China Evolution Equity Fund (TRCLX) is 9.43%, while Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) has a volatility of 13.03%. This indicates that TRCLX 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TRCLXMCSMXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.43%

13.03%

-3.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.70%

20.76%

-5.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.67%

24.46%

-4.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.41%

24.88%

-1.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.54%

22.57%

+0.97%

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

TRCLX vs. MCSMX - Dividend Comparison

TRCLX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, less than MCSMX's 1.45% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MCSMX
Matthews China Small Companies Fund
1.45%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
1.18%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


TRCLX and MCSMX have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCSMX has higher volatility (13.03%) compared to TRCLX (9.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TRCLX dropped -50.67% vs MCSMX's -55.77%.

TRCLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.75 vs 3.50), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TRCLX and MCSMX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer