AFTY vs. KGRN

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF (AFTY) and KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF (KGRN).

AFTY and KGRN are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. AFTY is a passively managed fund by Pacer that tracks the performance of the FTSE China A 50. It was launched on Mar 12, 2015. KGRN is a passively managed fund by CICC that tracks the performance of the MSCI China IMI Environment 10/40 Index. It was launched on Oct 13, 2017. Both AFTY and KGRN are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

AFTY vs. KGRN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF (AFTY) and KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF (KGRN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

AFTY vs. KGRN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AFTY Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF	0.00%	0.00%	20.48%	-12.80%	-22.47%	-7.37%	33.77%	44.23%	-24.26%	7.78%
KGRN KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF	6.02%	21.45%	-1.11%	-14.75%	-40.45%	5.91%	138.49%	12.12%	-29.32%	-0.37%

Returns By Period

AFTY

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KGRN

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: 4.51%
• YTD: 6.02%
• 6M: -9.29%
• 1Y: 12.37%
• 3Y*: 1.07%
• 5Y*: -6.33%
• 10Y*: —

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

AFTY vs. KGRN - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFTY has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KGRN's 0.79% expense ratio.

KGRN

KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF

AFTY

Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF

Return for Risk

AFTY vs. KGRN — Risk / Return Rank

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

KGRN

KGRN Risk / Return Rank: 27
KGRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
KGRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
KGRN Omega Ratio Rank: 27
KGRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
KGRN Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

AFTY vs. KGRN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF (AFTY) and KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF (KGRN). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AFTY	KGRN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.45	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.18	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	0.09	—

Correlation

The correlation between AFTY and KGRN is 0.53, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

AFTY vs. KGRN - Dividend Comparison

AFTY has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KGRN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.81%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AFTY Pacer CSOP FTSE China A50 ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.23%	2.08%	1.84%	1.48%	7.96%	1.85%	6.62%	1.19%	16.76%
KGRN KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF	0.81%	0.85%	1.49%	0.74%	1.98%	0.41%	0.01%	5.88%	2.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	AFTY	KGRN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-66.24%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-17.26%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-63.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-44.48%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-33.73%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	9.17%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AFTY	KGRN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	7.77%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	17.67%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	27.60%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	34.85%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	33.06%	—