PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CNYA vs. KURE

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) and KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) are both China Equities funds - CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index while KURE tracks the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNYA returned -1.55%/yr vs -12.95%/yr for KURE. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CNYA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for KURE.

Performance

CNYA vs. KURE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE). 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 1.42% return, which is significantly higher than KURE's 0.26% return.

CNYA

1D
-0.48%
1M
-4.50%
6M
1.02%
YTD
1.42%
1Y
20.44%
3Y*
7.23%
5Y*
-1.55%
10Y*
5.24%
ALL TIME*
5.58%

KURE

1D
-1.13%
1M
3.83%
6M
-1.87%
YTD
0.26%
1Y
-8.42%
3Y*
-0.55%
5Y*
-12.95%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
-2.00%
*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
$1.46M$2.43M$4.11M

KURE

KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF
$464.90K$1.53M$860.94K

CNYA vs. KURE - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.42%26.48%10.78%-13.76%-26.51%3.53%41.54%35.95%-32.31%
KURE
KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF		0.26%24.87%-17.83%-17.70%-25.43%-16.01%68.97%34.30%-30.01%

Correlation

The correlation between CNYA and KURE is 0.47, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.47

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

0.63

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

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2018

0.68

Over the past year, the correlation between CNYA and KURE has dropped to 0.47 - well below their long-term average of 0.68, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CNYA vs. KURE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CNYA
KURE

Technology

37.3%

-

Financial Services

16.8%

-

Industrials

14.2%

-

Basic Materials

10.7%

-

Consumer Defensive

5.8%
0.7%

Consumer Cyclical

4.3%

-

Healthcare

3.8%
99.3%

Utilities

2.9%

-

Energy

2.6%

-

Communication Services

1.1%

-

Real Estate

0.5%

-

Technology

CNYA
37.3%
KURE

-

Financial Services

CNYA
16.8%
KURE

-

Industrials

CNYA
14.2%
KURE

-

Basic Materials

CNYA
10.7%
KURE

-

Consumer Defensive

CNYA
5.8%
KURE
0.7%

Consumer Cyclical

CNYA
4.3%
KURE

-

Healthcare

CNYA
3.8%
KURE
99.3%

Utilities

CNYA
2.9%
KURE

-

Energy

CNYA
2.6%
KURE

-

Communication Services

CNYA
1.1%
KURE

-

Real Estate

CNYA
0.5%
KURE

-

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 MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF

Often compared with CNYA:
CNYA vs. MCHICNYA vs. ASHRCNYA vs. ICHN.ASCNYA vs. KBACNYA vs. FLCHCNYA vs. ICGA.DECNYA vs. GXC
Often compared with KURE:
KURE vs. CHIQKURE vs. PILLKURE vs. IYHKURE vs. CQQQKURE vs. CUREKURE vs. VOOKURE vs. FXI

Return for Risk

CNYA vs. KURE — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
KURE
KURE Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
KURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
KURE Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
KURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
KURE Martin Ratio Rank: 77
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. KURE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) and KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE). 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.

CNYAKUREDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.02
-0.30

+1.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.49
-0.24

+1.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

0.97

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.98

-0.27

+2.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.71

-0.52

+6.24

CNYA vs. KURE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNYA Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is higher than the KURE Sharpe Ratio of -0.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNYA and KURE, 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. KURE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNYA drawdown since its inception was -49.49%, smaller than the maximum KURE drawdown of -68.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNYA and KURE.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CNYAKUREDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.49%

-68.53%

+19.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.37%

-30.88%

+20.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.35%

-34.05%

+0.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.65%

-63.73%

+19.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.49%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.65%

-56.34%

+36.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.61%

-38.44%

+17.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.58%

16.11%

-12.53%

Volatility

CNYA vs. KURE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) is 8.01%, while KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) has a volatility of 10.95%. This indicates that CNYA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KURE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CNYAKUREDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.01%

10.95%

-2.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.84%

20.76%

-4.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.22%

28.28%

-8.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.88%

31.44%

-7.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.63%

32.43%

-8.80%

CNYA vs. KURE - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNYA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than KURE's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNYA vs. KURE - Dividend Comparison

CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, less than KURE's 4.18% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.85%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%
KURE
KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF		4.18%4.19%1.29%0.65%0.05%14.12%0.00%0.25%0.21%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CNYA and KURE have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KURE has higher volatility (10.95%) compared to CNYA (8.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNYA dropped -49.49% vs KURE's -68.53%.

On 5-year performance, CNYA leads with -1.55% vs -12.95% for KURE. On fees, CNYA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, CNYA has been the lower-risk option at 8.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, CNYA has performed better with a -1.55% return vs -12.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CNYA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for KURE.

KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.18%, compared with 1.85% for CNYA.

CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CNYA and 0.65% for KURE.

CNYA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.02 vs -0.30), 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 KURE

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