HCM vs. KBA

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

HCM (HUTCHMED (China) Limited) is a stock, while KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) is China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Index. Over the past 10 years, HCM returned -1.54%/yr vs 10.15%/yr for KBA. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

HCM vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) 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, HCM achieves a -13.58% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 12.62% return. Over the past 10 years, HCM has underperformed KBA with an annualized return of -1.54%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively higher 10.15% annualized return.

HCM

• 1D: 1.05%
• 1M: -13.38%
• YTD: -13.58%
• 6M: -19.21%
• 1Y: -15.29%
• 3Y*: -2.68%
• 5Y*: -17.59%
• 10Y*: -1.54%

KBA

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 4.32%
• YTD: 12.62%
• 6M: 16.80%
• 1Y: 49.12%
• 3Y*: 16.22%
• 5Y*: 6.46%
• 10Y*: 10.15%

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

HCM vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HCM HUTCHMED (China) Limited	-13.58%	-7.49%	-20.43%	22.53%	-57.87%	9.56%	27.72%	8.58%	-41.43%	190.49%
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	12.62%	33.88%	15.73%	-16.77%	-3.49%	3.17%	41.62%	35.44%	-26.28%	30.69%

Correlation

The correlation between HCM and KBA is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2016	0.31

Return for Risk

HCM vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

HCM

HCM Risk / Return Rank: 24
HCM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
HCM Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
HCM Omega Ratio Rank: 23
HCM Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
HCM Martin Ratio Rank: 26

KBA

KBA Risk / Return Rank: 85
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 83
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.

HCM vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) 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.

	HCM	KBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.40	2.80	-3.19
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.34	3.80	-4.14
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.50	-0.54
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.41	6.45	-6.86
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.76	17.29	-18.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HCM vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HCM Sharpe Ratio is -0.40, which is lower than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HCM 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

	HCM	KBA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.40	2.80	-3.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.27	0.24	-0.51
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.03	0.40	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.03	0.35	-0.38

Drawdowns

HCM vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HCM drawdown since its inception was -82.18%, which is greater than KBA's maximum drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HCM and KBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	HCM	KBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-82.18%	-53.24%	-28.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.54%	-7.65%	-33.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.44%	-31.23%	-17.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-82.18%	-39.95%	-42.23%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-82.18%	-45.32%	-36.86%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-73.17%	-1.25%	-71.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.14%	-25.81%	-14.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	22.48%	2.85%	+19.63%

Volatility

HCM vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) have volatilities of 7.61% and 7.29%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	HCM	KBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.61%	7.29%	+0.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.31%	12.44%	+9.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.78%	17.65%	+21.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	66.09%	27.20%	+38.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	59.37%	25.32%	+34.05%

Dividends

HCM vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

HCM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HCM HUTCHMED (China) Limited	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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 HCM and KBA in my portfolio?

HCM and KBA have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HCM or KBA?

HCM has higher volatility (7.61%) compared to KBA (7.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HCM dropped -82.18% vs KBA's -53.24%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs -0.40), 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.