CGRO vs. KLIP

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) and KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both China Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CGRO returned -12.21% vs -3.80% for KLIP. Their correlation of 0.84 means they have usually moved in the same direction. CGRO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for KLIP.

Performance

CGRO vs. KLIP - 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 Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -12.97% return, which is significantly lower than KLIP's -6.43% return.

CGRO

• 1D: 0.75%
• 1M: 12.95%
• 6M: -10.76%
• YTD: -12.97%
• 1Y: -12.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.45%

KLIP

• 1D: 0.37%
• 1M: 7.28%
• 6M: -9.42%
• YTD: -6.43%
• 1Y: -3.80%
• 3Y*: 6.46%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.63%

*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)
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	$6.01K	$9.52K	$35.25K
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	$648.17K	$565.25K	$989.65K

CGRO vs. KLIP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	-12.97%	20.23%	14.75%	1.84%
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	-6.43%	16.92%	3.37%	4.40%

Correlation

The correlation between CGRO and KLIP is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2023	0.84

The correlation between CGRO and KLIP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGRO vs. KLIP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGRO	KLIP
Consumer Cyclical	42.4%	34.2%
Industrials	16.4%	-
Communication Services	15.0%	45.8%
Technology	12.8%	4.2%
Healthcare	7.4%	6.0%
Financial Services	2.9%	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.0%	4.0%
Real Estate	1.1%	3.9%
Basic Materials	-	-
Energy	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CGRO vs. KLIP — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGRO

CGRO Risk / Return Rank: 5
CGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
CGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 6

KLIP

KLIP Risk / Return Rank: 7
KLIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
KLIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
KLIP Omega Ratio Rank: 7
KLIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

CGRO vs. KLIP - 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 Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). 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	KLIP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.53	-0.23	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.63	-0.21	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	0.97	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.34	-0.18	-0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.63	-0.41	-0.22

CGRO vs. KLIP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGRO Sharpe Ratio is -0.53, which is lower than the KLIP Sharpe Ratio of -0.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGRO and KLIP, 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. KLIP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -36.53%, which is greater than KLIP's maximum drawdown of -21.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and KLIP.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGRO	KLIP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.53%	-21.48%	-15.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.53%	-21.48%	-15.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.48%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.62%	-11.80%	-13.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.47%	-4.34%	-7.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.35%	9.25%	+10.10%

Volatility

CGRO vs. KLIP - Volatility Comparison

CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) has a higher volatility of 6.15% compared to KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) at 2.03%. This indicates that CGRO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KLIP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGRO	KLIP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.15%	2.03%	+4.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.63%	13.00%	+3.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.09%	16.57%	+6.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.67%	17.97%	+10.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.67%	17.97%	+10.70%

CGRO vs. KLIP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGRO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than KLIP's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGRO vs. KLIP - Dividend Comparison

CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.22%, less than KLIP's 27.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	3.22%	2.48%	2.47%	0.21%
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	27.43%	25.14%	54.26%	61.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGRO and KLIP in my portfolio?

CGRO and KLIP have a correlation of 0.81, 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 KLIP?

CGRO has higher volatility (6.15%) compared to KLIP (2.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGRO dropped -36.53% vs KLIP's -21.48%.

Which ETF is better, CGRO or KLIP?

On 1-year performance, KLIP leads with -3.80% vs -12.21% for CGRO. On fees, CGRO is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, KLIP has been the lower-risk option at 2.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGRO or KLIP?

Over the 1-year period, KLIP has performed better with a -3.80% return vs -12.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGRO or KLIP?

CGRO is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.

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

KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 27.43%, compared with 3.22% for CGRO.

What is the main difference between CGRO and KLIP?

They also come from different issuers: CoreValues and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CGRO and 0.95% for KLIP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KLIP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.23 vs -0.53), 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.