WCQGX vs. MCSMX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

WCQGX (WCM China Quality Growth Fund) and MCSMX (Matthews China Small Companies Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, WCQGX returned -7.23%/yr vs 1.54%/yr for MCSMX. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. WCQGX charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.41%/yr for MCSMX.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WCQGX achieves a 8.38% return, which is significantly lower than MCSMX's 42.66% return.

WCQGX

• 1D: 3.72%
• 1M: 5.26%
• YTD: 8.38%
• 6M: 8.88%
• 1Y: 20.10%
• 3Y*: 4.46%
• 5Y*: -7.23%
• 10Y*: —

MCSMX

• 1D: 1.94%
• 1M: 10.79%
• YTD: 42.66%
• 6M: 44.25%
• 1Y: 73.85%
• 3Y*: 21.20%
• 5Y*: 1.54%
• 10Y*: 13.83%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
WCQGX WCM China Quality Growth Fund	8.38%	20.97%	-3.03%	-18.49%	-26.70%	4.03%	64.08%
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	42.66%	28.85%	2.82%	-17.50%	-31.25%	6.71%	65.34%

Correlation

The correlation between WCQGX and MCSMX is 0.71, 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	0.71
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 Apr 1, 2020	0.82

The correlation between WCQGX and MCSMX shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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: 13
WCQGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
WCQGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
WCQGX Omega Ratio Rank: 13
WCQGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
WCQGX Martin Ratio Rank: 10

MCSMX

MCSMX Risk / Return Rank: 92
MCSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
MCSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
MCSMX Omega Ratio Rank: 87
MCSMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
MCSMX Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

	WCQGX	MCSMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.94	3.55	-2.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.42	4.53	-3.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.60	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.39	6.34	-4.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.13	18.74	-15.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WCQGX Sharpe Ratio is 0.94, which is lower than the MCSMX Sharpe Ratio of 3.55. 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	WCQGX	MCSMX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94	3.55	-2.61
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.30	0.06	-0.37
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.62	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.18	0.42	-0.24

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	WCQGX	MCSMX	Difference
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	-28.53%	-26.50%	-2.03%
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	-37.55%	-3.21%	-34.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.30%	-20.21%	-14.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.59%	4.11%	+2.48%

Volatility

WCQGX vs. MCSMX - Volatility Comparison

WCM China Quality Growth Fund (WCQGX) and Matthews China Small Companies Fund (MCSMX) have volatilities of 9.42% and 9.07%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WCQGX	MCSMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.42%	9.07%	+0.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.61%	17.91%	-1.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.03%	22.02%	+0.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.85%	24.45%	-0.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.92%	22.32%	+1.60%

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 6.15%, more than MCSMX's 1.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MCSMX Matthews China Small Companies Fund	1.56%	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	6.15%	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

Can I hold both WCQGX and MCSMX in my portfolio?

WCQGX and MCSMX have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WCQGX or MCSMX?

WCQGX has higher volatility (9.42%) compared to MCSMX (9.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WCQGX dropped -59.28% vs MCSMX's -55.77%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCSMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.55 vs 0.94), 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.