AIA vs. KBA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) and KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia 50 Index, while KBA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AIA returned 13.37%/yr vs 9.42%/yr for KBA. Their 0.61 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. AIA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for KBA.

Performance

AIA vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIA achieves a 37.37% return, which is significantly higher than KBA's 7.15% return. Over the past 10 years, AIA has outperformed KBA with an annualized return of 13.37%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively lower 9.42% annualized return.

AIA

• 1D: 1.38%
• 1M: -0.63%
• 6M: 22.48%
• YTD: 37.37%
• 1Y: 66.32%
• 3Y*: 32.09%
• 5Y*: 12.22%
• 10Y*: 13.37%
• ALL TIME*: 7.82%

KBA

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 1.13%
• 6M: 7.50%
• YTD: 7.15%
• 1Y: 34.07%
• 3Y*: 12.68%
• 5Y*: 7.04%
• 10Y*: 9.42%
• ALL TIME*: 9.52%

*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)
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	$72.11M	$68.43M	$74.19M
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	$842.71K	$977.36K	$2.09M

AIA vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	37.37%	47.79%	20.26%	4.32%	-24.08%	-10.91%	33.73%	22.21%	-14.22%	45.00%
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	7.15%	33.88%	15.73%	-16.77%	-3.49%	3.17%	41.62%	35.44%	-26.28%	30.69%

Correlation

The correlation between AIA and KBA is 0.59, 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.	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.63
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014	0.61

The correlation between AIA and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIA vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AIA	KBA
Technology	57.5%	37.5%
Financial Services	20.6%	16.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	4.1%
Communication Services	7.2%	1.2%
Industrials	2.0%	14.4%
Healthcare	0.9%	4.0%
Energy	0.6%	2.4%
Real Estate	0.5%	0.4%
Basic Materials	0.5%	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.8%
Utilities	-	3.2%

Return for Risk

AIA vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

AIA

AIA Risk / Return Rank: 84
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 83
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 85

KBA

KBA Risk / Return Rank: 76
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

AIA vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). 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.

	AIA	KBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	1.63	+0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	2.27	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.29	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.81	4.08	-0.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.04	9.76	+2.28

AIA vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIA Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIA and KBA, 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

AIA vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIA drawdown since its inception was -60.89%, which is greater than KBA's maximum drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIA and KBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIA	KBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.89%	-53.24%	-7.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.83%	-8.33%	-8.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.64%	-31.23%	+9.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.99%	-39.76%	-6.23%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.64%	-45.32%	-9.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.13%	-6.47%	-4.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.61%	-25.53%	+8.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.32%	3.48%	+1.84%

Volatility

AIA vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 11.50% compared to KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) at 8.55%. This indicates that AIA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIA	KBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.50%	8.55%	+2.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.26%	16.45%	+11.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.64%	20.87%	+10.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.69%	27.33%	-0.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.17%	25.49%	-1.32%

AIA vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIA vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

AIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, more than KBA's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	1.60%	2.50%	2.78%	2.07%	2.59%	1.54%	1.11%	2.24%	2.49%	1.45%	2.29%	2.88%
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	1.46%	1.56%	2.18%	2.34%	49.05%	9.07%	0.65%	1.53%	3.77%	1.46%	6.62%	29.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIA and KBA in my portfolio?

AIA and KBA have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AIA or KBA?

AIA has higher volatility (11.50%) compared to KBA (8.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs KBA's -53.24%.

Which ETF is better, AIA or KBA?

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 13.37% vs 9.42% for KBA. On fees, AIA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, KBA has been the lower-risk option at 8.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIA or KBA?

Over the 10-year period, AIA has performed better with a 13.37% return vs 9.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIA or KBA?

AIA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for KBA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIA or KBA?

AIA has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 1.46% for KBA.

What is the main difference between AIA and KBA?

AIA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while KBA is China Equities. AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index, while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AIA and 0.60% for KBA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.63), 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.