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

Performance

FCA vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) 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, FCA achieves a 11.53% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 12.46% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FCA having a 9.89% annualized return and KBA not far ahead at 10.14%.


FCA

1D
2.01%
1M
-4.08%
YTD
11.53%
6M
9.85%
1Y
44.90%
3Y*
20.06%
5Y*
5.02%
10Y*
9.89%

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)

FCA vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
11.53%45.20%14.07%-8.28%-17.61%-0.65%11.80%18.72%-18.30%60.26%
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 FCA and KBA is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.53

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

0.60

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

0.59

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

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2014

0.57

The correlation between FCA and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

FCA vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FCA
KBA

Industrials

25.2%
15.8%

Financial Services

19.7%
18.5%

Basic Materials

19.1%
10.9%

Energy

14.8%
3.2%

Technology

10.3%
29.8%

Healthcare

3.0%
4.1%

Communication Services

2.9%
1.6%

Utilities

2.4%
3.2%

Real Estate

1.1%
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

1.1%
5.7%

Consumer Defensive

0.5%
6.8%

Industrials

FCA
25.2%
KBA
15.8%

Financial Services

FCA
19.7%
KBA
18.5%

Basic Materials

FCA
19.1%
KBA
10.9%

Energy

FCA
14.8%
KBA
3.2%

Technology

FCA
10.3%
KBA
29.8%

Healthcare

FCA
3.0%
KBA
4.1%

Communication Services

FCA
2.9%
KBA
1.6%

Utilities

FCA
2.4%
KBA
3.2%

Real Estate

FCA
1.1%
KBA
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FCA
1.1%
KBA
5.7%

Consumer Defensive

FCA
0.5%
KBA
6.8%

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

FCA vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCA
FCA Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
FCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCA Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
FCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCA Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

KBA
KBA Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

FCA vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) 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.


FCAKBADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.02

2.86

-0.83

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.58

3.86

-1.28

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.51

-0.17

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.19

6.57

-2.38

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.06

17.67

-5.61

FCA vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCA Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is comparable to the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCA 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


FCAKBADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.02

2.86

-0.83

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

0.25

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

0.40

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.13

0.35

-0.22

Drawdowns

FCA vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCA drawdown since its inception was -45.56%, smaller than the maximum KBA drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCA and KBA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCAKBADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.56%

-53.24%

+7.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.13%

-7.65%

-3.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.13%

-31.23%

+5.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.47%

-39.95%

-2.52%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.47%

-45.32%

+2.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.87%

-1.39%

-7.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.62%

-25.82%

+4.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.87%

2.85%

+1.02%

Volatility

FCA vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) has a higher volatility of 8.36% compared to KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) at 7.34%. This indicates that FCA'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


FCAKBADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.36%

7.34%

+1.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.57%

12.45%

+4.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.31%

17.65%

+4.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.59%

27.21%

+0.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.63%

25.32%

+1.31%

FCA vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCA has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCA vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

FCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, more than KBA's 1.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
2.31%2.67%5.17%5.70%6.00%4.91%4.12%3.73%3.10%2.30%2.51%4.13%
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


FCA and KBA have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCA has higher volatility (8.36%) compared to KBA (7.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCA dropped -45.56% vs KBA's -53.24%.

On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 10.14% vs 9.89% for FCA. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KBA has been the lower-risk option at 7.34%. 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 10.14% return vs 9.89%. 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 0.80% for FCA.

FCA has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 1.39% for KBA.

FCA tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX China Index, while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FCA and 0.60% for KBA.

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 2.02), 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 FCA 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