ASHS vs. KBA
ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) and KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) are both China Equities funds - ASHS tracks the CSI 500 Index while KBA tracks the MSCI China A Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHS returned 4.33%/yr vs 10.81%/yr for KBA. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ASHS charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for KBA.
Performance
ASHS vs. KBA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASHS achieves a 23.25% return, which is significantly higher than KBA's 14.56% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHS has underperformed KBA with an annualized return of 4.33%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively higher 10.81% annualized return.
ASHS
- 1D
- 2.15%
- 1M
- 4.69%
- YTD
- 23.25%
- 6M
- 27.23%
- 1Y
- 69.26%
- 3Y*
- 17.55%
- 5Y*
- 5.45%
- 10Y*
- 4.33%
KBA
- 1D
- 2.28%
- 1M
- 6.66%
- YTD
- 14.56%
- 6M
- 15.69%
- 1Y
- 51.44%
- 3Y*
- 17.71%
- 5Y*
- 7.65%
- 10Y*
- 10.81%
ASHS vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 23.25% | 39.48% | 2.68% | -10.03% | -24.78% | 17.66% | 28.22% | 24.53% | -35.91% | 7.90% |
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 14.56% | 33.88% | 15.73% | -16.77% | -3.49% | 3.17% | 41.62% | 35.44% | -26.28% | 30.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASHS and KBA is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2014 | 0.81 |
The correlation between ASHS and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.
ASHS vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHS
KBA
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Utilities
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
ASHS
KBA
Industrials
ASHS
KBA
Basic Materials
ASHS
KBA
Healthcare
ASHS
KBA
Consumer Cyclical
ASHS
KBA
Financial Services
ASHS
KBA
Utilities
ASHS
KBA
Energy
ASHS
KBA
Consumer Defensive
ASHS
KBA
Communication Services
ASHS
KBA
Real Estate
ASHS
KBA
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
ASHS vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank
ASHS
KBA
ASHS vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) 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.
| ASHS | KBA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.49 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.96 | 6.75 | -1.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.51 | 17.19 | -1.68 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASHS vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, which is greater than KBA's maximum drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and KBA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASHS | KBA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -69.90% | -53.24% | -16.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.03% | -7.65% | -6.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.13% | -31.23% | -2.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.81% | -39.76% | -8.05% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -47.81% | -45.32% | -2.49% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.86% | 0.00% | -28.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.49% | -25.72% | -22.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.48% | 3.00% | +1.48% |
Volatility
ASHS vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) have volatilities of 7.65% and 8.04%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASHS | KBA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.65% | 8.04% | -0.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.69% | 13.67% | +4.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.19% | 18.65% | +4.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.57% | 27.30% | -0.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.60% | 25.37% | +0.23% |
ASHS vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASHS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASHS vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison
ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.69% | 0.65% | 1.90% | 0.76% | 0.43% | 0.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 8.34% |
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 1.36% | 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
ASHS and KBA have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KBA has higher volatility (8.04%) compared to ASHS (7.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs KBA's -53.24%.
On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 10.81% vs 4.33% for ASHS. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, ASHS has been the lower-risk option at 7.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, KBA has performed better with a 10.81% return vs 4.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHS.
KBA has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.
ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index, while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.60% for KBA.
ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 2.78), 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.
Find the right allocation for ASHS and KBA
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