ICHN.AS vs. KWEB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ICHN.AS (iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds - ICHN.AS tracks the MSCI China NR USD while KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ICHN.AS returned -5.12%/yr vs -14.28%/yr for KWEB. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ICHN.AS charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.

Performance

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF (ICHN.AS) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICHN.AS achieves a -6.77% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -20.06% return.

ICHN.AS

• 1D: -2.47%
• 1M: -2.49%
• YTD: -6.77%
• 6M: -7.98%
• 1Y: 7.08%
• 3Y*: 10.39%
• 5Y*: -5.12%
• 10Y*: —

KWEB

• 1D: -3.92%
• 1M: -4.79%
• YTD: -20.06%
• 6M: -22.24%
• 1Y: -12.78%
• 3Y*: 4.05%
• 5Y*: -14.28%
• 10Y*: 0.02%

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

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ICHN.AS iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF	-6.77%	31.69%	18.56%	-11.72%	-22.52%	-22.05%	29.63%	10.95%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-20.06%	23.55%	12.01%	-9.06%	-17.24%	-49.01%	58.23%	15.42%

Correlation

The correlation between ICHN.AS and KWEB is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2019	0.78

The correlation between ICHN.AS and KWEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICHN.AS

ICHN.AS Risk / Return Rank: 13
ICHN.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
ICHN.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
ICHN.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 13
ICHN.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
ICHN.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 13

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 5
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF (ICHN.AS) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). 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.

	ICHN.AS	KWEB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.35	-0.47	+0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.64	-0.52	+1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	0.94	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.41	-0.38	+0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.86	-0.76	+1.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICHN.AS Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is higher than the KWEB Sharpe Ratio of -0.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICHN.AS and KWEB, 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

	ICHN.AS	KWEB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35	-0.47	+0.82
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.17	-0.30	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.00	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.06	0.06	0.00

Drawdowns

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICHN.AS drawdown since its inception was -62.67%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICHN.AS and KWEB.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICHN.AS	KWEB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.67%	-80.92%	+18.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.99%	-34.13%	+17.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.22%	-34.13%	+8.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-56.46%	-72.17%	+15.71%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-80.92%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-34.97%	-68.52%	+33.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.79%	-35.24%	+1.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.15%	16.85%	-8.70%

Volatility

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF (ICHN.AS) is 7.91%, while KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a volatility of 11.52%. This indicates that ICHN.AS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KWEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICHN.AS	KWEB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.91%	11.52%	-3.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.75%	20.11%	-5.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.04%	27.25%	-7.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.04%	47.67%	-18.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.76%	39.99%	-11.23%

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICHN.AS has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICHN.AS vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison

ICHN.AS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KWEB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.70%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICHN.AS iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	7.70%	6.16%	3.51%	1.71%	0.00%	7.07%	0.29%	0.08%	3.40%	0.58%	1.19%	0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICHN.AS and KWEB in my portfolio?

ICHN.AS and KWEB have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ICHN.AS or KWEB?

On fees, ICHN.AS is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICHN.AS or KWEB?

ICHN.AS is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for KWEB.

What is the main difference between ICHN.AS and KWEB?

ICHN.AS tracks MSCI China NR USD, while KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ICHN.AS and 0.70% for KWEB.