PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CNYA vs. KBA

Last updated Jun 24, 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 10 years, CNYA returned 6.50%/yr vs 10.40%/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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNYA achieves a 8.91% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 10.36% return. Over the past 10 years, CNYA has underperformed KBA with an annualized return of 6.50%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively higher 10.40% annualized return.

CNYA

1D
-2.87%
1M
1.73%
YTD
8.91%
6M
9.76%
1Y
36.56%
3Y*
12.14%
5Y*
-0.49%
10Y*
6.50%

KBA

1D
-3.67%
1M
2.74%
YTD
10.36%
6M
10.50%
1Y
45.45%
3Y*
16.25%
5Y*
6.66%
10Y*
10.40%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNYA vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		8.91%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		10.36%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, 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

0.92

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

0.94

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

0.95

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

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

31.7%
34.1%

Financial Services

17.6%
17.4%

Industrials

15.4%
15.4%

Basic Materials

11.2%
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

5.2%
5.4%

Healthcare

3.9%
3.7%

Utilities

3.3%
3.2%

Energy

3.1%
3.0%

Communication Services

1.3%
1.4%

Real Estate

0.6%
0.5%

Technology

CNYA
31.7%
KBA
34.1%

Financial Services

CNYA
17.6%
KBA
17.4%

Industrials

CNYA
15.4%
KBA
15.4%

Basic Materials

CNYA
11.2%
KBA
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

CNYA
6.8%
KBA
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CNYA
5.2%
KBA
5.4%

Healthcare

CNYA
3.9%
KBA
3.7%

Utilities

CNYA
3.3%
KBA
3.2%

Energy

CNYA
3.1%
KBA
3.0%

Communication Services

CNYA
1.3%
KBA
1.4%

Real Estate

CNYA
0.6%
KBA
0.5%

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 risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank
KBA
KBA Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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.

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
2.00
2.40

-0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.73
3.21

-0.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.42

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.84

5.97

-1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.30

15.15

-1.85

CNYA vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYA Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is comparable to the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. 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

-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

-44.65%

-39.76%

-4.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.49%

-45.32%

-4.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.73%

-3.67%

-10.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.65%

-25.71%

+5.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.76%

3.01%

-0.25%

Volatility

CNYA vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) is 7.35%, while KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a volatility of 8.89%. 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNYAKBADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.35%

8.89%

-1.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.56%

14.20%

-0.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.32%

19.00%

-0.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.91%

27.35%

-3.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.52%

25.39%

-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 1.73%, more than KBA's 1.42% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.73%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		1.42%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.

KBA has higher volatility (8.89%) compared to CNYA (7.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs KBA's -53.24%.

On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 10.40% vs 6.50% for CNYA. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, CNYA has been the lower-risk option at 7.35%. 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 10.40% return vs 6.50%. 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 1.73%, compared with 1.42% 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 (2.40 vs 2.00), 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