PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CNYA vs. KBA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CNYA vs. KBA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) and KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) are both China Equities funds - CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index while KBA tracks the MSCI China A Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNYA returned 5.37%/yr vs 9.42%/yr for KBA. Their correlation of 0.93 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

CNYA vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) 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, CNYA achieves a 1.92% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 7.15% return. Over the past 10 years, CNYA has underperformed KBA with an annualized return of 5.37%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively higher 9.42% annualized return.

CNYA

1D
0.03%
1M
-4.04%
6M
0.38%
YTD
1.92%
1Y
21.02%
3Y*
7.65%
5Y*
-0.99%
10Y*
5.37%
ALL TIME*
5.64%

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

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

CNYA

iShares MSCI China A ETF
$1.58M$2.45M$4.18M

KBA

KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
$842.71K$977.36K$2.09M

CNYA vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.92%26.48%10.78%-13.76%-26.51%3.53%41.54%35.95%-26.56%30.99%
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 CNYA and KBA is 0.92, 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.

0.92

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.94

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.95

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016

0.93

The correlation between CNYA and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNYA vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CNYA
KBA

Technology

37.3%
37.5%

Financial Services

16.8%
16.9%

Industrials

14.2%
14.4%

Basic Materials

10.7%
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

5.8%
5.8%

Consumer Cyclical

4.3%
4.1%

Healthcare

3.8%
4.0%

Utilities

2.9%
3.2%

Energy

2.6%
2.4%

Communication Services

1.1%
1.2%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.4%

Technology

CNYA
37.3%
KBA
37.5%

Financial Services

CNYA
16.8%
KBA
16.9%

Industrials

CNYA
14.2%
KBA
14.4%

Basic Materials

CNYA
10.7%
KBA
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

CNYA
5.8%
KBA
5.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CNYA
4.3%
KBA
4.1%

Healthcare

CNYA
3.8%
KBA
4.0%

Utilities

CNYA
2.9%
KBA
3.2%

Energy

CNYA
2.6%
KBA
2.4%

Communication Services

CNYA
1.1%
KBA
1.2%

Real Estate

CNYA
0.5%
KBA
0.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI China A ETF

KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF

Often compared with CNYA:
CNYA vs. MCHICNYA vs. ASHRCNYA vs. ICHN.ASCNYA vs. FLCHCNYA vs. ICGA.DECNYA vs. GXCCNYA vs. CHIQ
Often compared with KBA:
KBA vs. ASHRKBA vs. KGRNKBA vs. EWTKBA vs. MCHIKBA vs. HEZUKBA vs. ASHSKBA vs. JEPI

Return for Risk

CNYA vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
KBA
KBA Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CNYA vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) 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.

CNYAKBADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.03
1.63

-0.60

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.51
2.27

-0.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.29

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.00

4.08

-2.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.87

9.76

-3.89

CNYA vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYA Sharpe Ratio is 1.03, which is lower than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNYA 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...

Drawdowns

CNYA vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNYA drawdown since its inception was -49.49%, smaller than the maximum KBA drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA and KBA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNYAKBADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.49%

-53.24%

+3.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.37%

-8.33%

-2.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.35%

-31.23%

-2.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.65%

-39.76%

-4.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.49%

-45.32%

-4.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.26%

-6.47%

-12.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.61%

-25.53%

+4.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.53%

3.48%

+0.05%

Volatility

CNYA vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) have volatilities of 8.72% and 8.55%, 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

CNYAKBADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.72%

8.55%

+0.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.98%

16.45%

-0.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.27%

20.87%

-0.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.87%

27.33%

-3.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.62%

25.49%

-1.87%

CNYA vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CNYA and KBA have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

CNYA vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than KBA's 1.46% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.84%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%0.00%
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

With a correlation of 0.92, CNYA and KBA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

CNYA has higher volatility (8.72%) compared to KBA (8.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs KBA's -53.24%.

On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 9.42% vs 5.37% for CNYA. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. 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.

Over the 10-year period, KBA has performed better with a 9.42% return vs 5.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CNYA and KBA have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

CNYA has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 1.46% for KBA.

CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and CICC.

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 1.03), 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 CNYA 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