PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNXT vs. KBA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CNXT vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNXT achieves a 33.52% return, which is significantly higher than KBA's 12.62% return. Over the past 10 years, CNXT has underperformed KBA with an annualized return of 6.63%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively higher 10.15% annualized return.


CNXT

1D
0.88%
1M
10.51%
YTD
33.52%
6M
41.38%
1Y
119.62%
3Y*
26.28%
5Y*
4.09%
10Y*
6.63%

KBA

1D
0.14%
1M
4.32%
YTD
12.62%
6M
16.80%
1Y
49.12%
3Y*
16.22%
5Y*
6.46%
10Y*
10.15%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNXT vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNXT
VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF
33.52%59.31%12.42%-21.47%-35.58%8.78%63.30%42.66%-39.48%20.19%
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
12.62%33.88%15.73%-16.77%-3.49%3.17%41.62%35.44%-26.28%30.69%

Correlation

The correlation between CNXT and KBA is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.82

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2014

0.83

The correlation between CNXT and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNXT vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CNXT
KBA

Technology

43.8%
29.8%

Industrials

33.2%
15.8%

Healthcare

7.0%
4.1%

Financial Services

5.6%
18.5%

Basic Materials

4.1%
10.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
6.8%

Communication Services

2.5%
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

1.2%
5.7%

Energy

-

3.2%

Real Estate

-

0.6%

Utilities

-

3.2%

Technology

CNXT
43.8%
KBA
29.8%

Industrials

CNXT
33.2%
KBA
15.8%

Healthcare

CNXT
7.0%
KBA
4.1%

Financial Services

CNXT
5.6%
KBA
18.5%

Basic Materials

CNXT
4.1%
KBA
10.9%

Consumer Defensive

CNXT
2.6%
KBA
6.8%

Communication Services

CNXT
2.5%
KBA
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

CNXT
1.2%
KBA
5.7%

Energy

CNXT

-

KBA
3.2%

Real Estate

CNXT

-

KBA
0.6%

Utilities

CNXT

-

KBA
3.2%

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

CNXT vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNXT
CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

KBA
KBA Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CNXT vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) 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.


CNXTKBADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.50

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

9.85

6.45

+3.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

30.18

17.29

+12.89

CNXT vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNXT Sharpe Ratio is 3.92, which is higher than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNXT 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CNXTKBADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.92

2.80

+1.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

0.24

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.21

0.40

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.22

0.35

-0.13

Drawdowns

CNXT vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNXT drawdown since its inception was -68.98%, which is greater than KBA's maximum drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNXT and KBA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNXTKBADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-68.98%

-53.24%

-15.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.21%

-7.65%

-4.56%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-48.60%

-31.23%

-17.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.21%

-39.95%

-21.26%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.30%

-45.32%

-17.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.15%

-1.25%

-0.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-42.94%

-25.81%

-17.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.98%

2.85%

+1.13%

Volatility

CNXT vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) has a higher volatility of 10.24% compared to KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) at 7.29%. This indicates that CNXT'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNXTKBADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.24%

7.29%

+2.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.98%

12.44%

+7.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

30.74%

17.65%

+13.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

35.27%

27.20%

+8.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.64%

25.32%

+6.32%

CNXT vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNXT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNXT vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

CNXT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than KBA's 1.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNXT
VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF
0.13%0.18%0.15%0.00%0.00%9.22%0.01%0.45%0.00%0.19%0.00%0.00%
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
1.39%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


CNXT and KBA 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.

CNXT has higher volatility (10.24%) compared to KBA (7.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNXT dropped -68.98% vs KBA's -53.24%.

On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 10.15% vs 6.63% for CNXT. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KBA has been the lower-risk option at 7.29%. 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 10.15% return vs 6.63%. 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 CNXT.

KBA has the higher dividend yield at 1.39%, compared with 0.13% for CNXT.

CNXT tracks SME-ChiNext 100 Index, while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CNXT and 0.60% for KBA.

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.92 vs 2.80), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CNXT 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