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

Performance

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WCM China Quality Growth Fund (WCQGX) 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, WCQGX achieves a 16.46% return, which is significantly lower than MCSMX's 49.56% return.


WCQGX

1D
1.33%
1M
9.10%
YTD
16.46%
6M
14.93%
1Y
24.68%
3Y*
7.67%
5Y*
-6.91%
10Y*

MCSMX

1D
0.71%
1M
4.27%
YTD
49.56%
6M
48.27%
1Y
76.57%
3Y*
23.51%
5Y*
1.56%
10Y*
14.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
WCQGX
WCM China Quality Growth Fund
16.46%20.97%-3.03%-18.49%-26.70%4.03%64.08%
MCSMX
Matthews China Small Companies Fund
49.56%28.85%2.82%-17.50%-31.25%6.71%64.76%

Correlation

The correlation between WCQGX and MCSMX is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.73

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

0.80

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

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2020

0.82

The correlation between WCQGX and MCSMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.82 - 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

WCQGX vs. MCSMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

WCQGX
WCQGX Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
WCQGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WCQGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
WCQGX Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
WCQGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
WCQGX Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

MCSMX
MCSMX Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
MCSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WCM China Quality Growth Fund (WCQGX) 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.


WCQGXMCSMXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.55

-0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.66

6.42

-4.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.71

18.36

-14.64

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WCQGX Sharpe Ratio is 1.03, which is lower than the MCSMX Sharpe Ratio of 3.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WCQGX 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

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WCQGX drawdown since its inception was -59.28%, which is greater than MCSMX's maximum drawdown of -55.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WCQGX and MCSMX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WCQGXMCSMXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.28%

-55.77%

-3.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.91%

-12.32%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.20%

-26.50%

-1.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-57.82%

-53.98%

-3.84%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-55.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.90%

-3.71%

-29.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-34.30%

-20.14%

-14.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.63%

4.28%

+2.35%

Volatility

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WCM China Quality Growth Fund (WCQGX) is 11.65%, while Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) has a volatility of 13.19%. This indicates that WCQGX 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


WCQGXMCSMXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.65%

13.19%

-1.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.58%

21.24%

-1.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.30%

24.82%

-0.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.19%

24.95%

-0.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.18%

22.61%

+1.57%

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

WCQGX has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than MCSMX's 1.41% expense ratio.


Dividends

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Dividend Comparison

WCQGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.72%, more than MCSMX's 1.49% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MCSMX
Matthews China Small Companies Fund
1.49%2.23%1.35%2.36%1.78%26.38%16.98%1.03%2.25%5.66%4.79%8.88%
WCQGX
WCM China Quality Growth Fund
5.72%6.67%2.02%0.82%0.28%8.54%2.38%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


WCQGX and MCSMX have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCSMX has higher volatility (13.19%) compared to WCQGX (11.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WCQGX dropped -59.28% vs MCSMX's -55.77%.

MCSMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.20 vs 1.03), 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 WCQGX 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