CGRO vs. KCAI

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) and KCAI (KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF) are both China Equities funds. CGRO is actively managed, while KCAI is passively managed. Over the past year, CGRO returned -22.42% vs 46.02% for KCAI. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGRO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KCAI.

Performance

CGRO vs. KCAI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -25.74% return, which is significantly lower than KCAI's 5.48% return.

CGRO

• 1D: -2.38%
• 1M: -14.29%
• YTD: -25.74%
• 6M: -26.27%
• 1Y: -22.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KCAI

• 1D: 1.05%
• 1M: -0.88%
• YTD: 5.48%
• 6M: 6.37%
• 1Y: 46.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGRO vs. KCAI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	-25.74%	20.23%	23.26%
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	5.48%	53.29%	11.36%

Correlation

The correlation between CGRO and KCAI is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2024	0.57

The correlation between CGRO and KCAI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGRO vs. KCAI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGRO	KCAI
Consumer Cyclical	44.1%	11.5%
Industrials	16.0%	23.6%
Technology	14.5%	13.2%
Communication Services	13.7%	-
Healthcare	5.8%	1.3%
Financial Services	2.7%	39.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	-
Real Estate	1.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	11.3%
Energy	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CGRO vs. KCAI — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGRO

CGRO Risk / Return Rank: 3
CGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
CGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
CGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 2
CGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
CGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 3

KCAI

KCAI Risk / Return Rank: 96
KCAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
KCAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
KCAI Omega Ratio Rank: 94
KCAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
KCAI Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

CGRO vs. KCAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI). 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.

	CGRO	KCAI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.01	3.39	-4.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.39	4.82	-6.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.59	-0.75
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.62	10.72	-11.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.36	30.17	-31.53

CGRO vs. KCAI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGRO Sharpe Ratio is -1.01, which is lower than the KCAI Sharpe Ratio of 3.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGRO and KCAI, 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

CGRO vs. KCAI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -36.53%, which is greater than KCAI's maximum drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and KCAI.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGRO	KCAI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.53%	-25.48%	-11.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.53%	-4.32%	-32.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.53%	-3.31%	-33.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.69%	-7.00%	-3.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.49%	1.53%	+14.96%

Volatility

CGRO vs. KCAI - Volatility Comparison

CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) has a higher volatility of 6.33% compared to KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) at 4.42%. This indicates that CGRO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KCAI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGRO	KCAI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.33%	4.42%	+1.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.12%	8.93%	+7.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.30%	13.63%	+8.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.86%	21.02%	+7.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.86%	21.02%	+7.84%

CGRO vs. KCAI - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGRO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than KCAI's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGRO vs. KCAI - Dividend Comparison

CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.77%, less than KCAI's 33.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	3.77%	2.48%	2.47%	0.21%
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	33.58%	35.42%	2.19%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGRO and KCAI in my portfolio?

CGRO and KCAI have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGRO or KCAI?

CGRO has higher volatility (6.33%) compared to KCAI (4.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGRO dropped -36.53% vs KCAI's -25.48%.

Which ETF is better, CGRO or KCAI?

On 1-year performance, KCAI leads with 46.02% vs -22.42% for CGRO. On fees, CGRO is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, KCAI has been the lower-risk option at 4.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGRO or KCAI?

Over the 1-year period, KCAI has performed better with a 46.02% return vs -22.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGRO or KCAI?

CGRO is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KCAI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGRO or KCAI?

KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 33.58%, compared with 3.77% for CGRO.

What is the main difference between CGRO and KCAI?

They also come from different issuers: CoreValues Alpha and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CGRO and 0.79% for KCAI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.39 vs -1.01), 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.