CNYA vs. KBA

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

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 5 years, CNYA returned -0.82%/yr vs 6.65%/yr for KBA. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. 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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNYA achieves a 9.25% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 12.46% return.

CNYA

• 1D: 2.38%
• 1M: 1.83%
• YTD: 9.25%
• 6M: 13.58%
• 1Y: 39.08%
• 3Y*: 10.99%
• 5Y*: -0.82%
• 10Y*: —

KBA

• 1D: 3.09%
• 1M: 3.55%
• YTD: 12.46%
• 6M: 16.87%
• 1Y: 50.17%
• 3Y*: 16.17%
• 5Y*: 6.65%
• 10Y*: 10.14%

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

CNYA vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF	9.25%	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	12.46%	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 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2016	0.93

The correlation between CNYA and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNYA vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNYA	KBA
Technology	30.0%	29.8%
Industrials	18.3%	15.8%
Financial Services	17.0%	18.5%
Basic Materials	10.6%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	6.8%
Consumer Cyclical	5.7%	5.7%
Healthcare	3.8%	4.1%
Energy	3.2%	3.2%
Utilities	3.2%	3.2%
Real Estate	0.7%	0.6%
Communication Services	0.6%	1.6%

Return for Risk

CNYA vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNYA

CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 73
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 67
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 78

KBA

KBA Risk / Return Rank: 86
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 84
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

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.

	CNYA	KBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.27	2.86	-0.59
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.10	3.86	-0.76
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.51	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.18	6.57	-1.39
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.37	17.67	-2.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNYA vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYA Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is comparable to the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.86. 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNYA	KBA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.27	2.86	-0.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.03	0.25	-0.28
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	0.35	-0.08

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNYA	KBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.49%	-53.24%	+3.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.59%	-7.65%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.35%	-31.23%	-2.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.70%	-39.95%	-4.75%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.45%	-1.39%	-12.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.69%	-25.82%	+5.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.56%	2.85%	-0.29%

Volatility

CNYA vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) is 6.44%, while KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a volatility of 7.34%. This indicates that CNYA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNYA	KBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.44%	7.34%	-0.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.32%	12.45%	-0.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.32%	17.65%	-0.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.81%	27.21%	-3.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.56%	25.32%	-1.76%

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 1.75%, more than KBA's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF	1.75%	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	1.39%	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

Can I hold both CNYA and KBA in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, 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.

Which is riskier, CNYA or KBA?

KBA has higher volatility (7.34%) compared to CNYA (6.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs KBA's -53.24%.

Which ETF is better, CNYA or KBA?

On 5-year performance, KBA leads with 6.65% vs -0.82% for CNYA. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, CNYA has been the lower-risk option at 6.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNYA or KBA?

Over the 5-year period, KBA has performed better with a 6.65% return vs -0.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNYA or KBA?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CNYA or KBA?

CNYA has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 1.39% for KBA.

What is the main difference between CNYA and KBA?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 2.27), 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.