IPAC vs. KCAI
IPAC (iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF) and KCAI (KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IPAC is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while KCAI is a China Equities fund tracking the Qi China Alpha Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IPAC returned 27.10% vs 39.53% for KCAI. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IPAC charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KCAI.
Performance
IPAC vs. KCAI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IPAC achieves a 13.28% return, which is significantly higher than KCAI's 3.23% return.
IPAC
- 1D
- -1.50%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- 6M
- 8.51%
- YTD
- 13.28%
- 1Y
- 27.10%
- 3Y*
- 15.99%
- 5Y*
- 7.79%
- 10Y*
- 8.77%
KCAI
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- -4.13%
- 6M
- 2.63%
- YTD
- 3.23%
- 1Y
- 39.53%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IPAC vs. KCAI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF | 13.28% | 25.16% | -3.88% |
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF | 3.23% | 53.29% | 11.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between IPAC and KCAI is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2024 | 0.29 |
IPAC vs. KCAI - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IPAC
KCAI
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Real Estate
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
IPAC
KCAI
Industrials
IPAC
KCAI
Technology
IPAC
KCAI
Consumer Cyclical
IPAC
KCAI
Basic Materials
IPAC
KCAI
Healthcare
IPAC
KCAI
Real Estate
IPAC
KCAI
-
Communication Services
IPAC
KCAI
-
Consumer Defensive
IPAC
KCAI
-
Utilities
IPAC
KCAI
-
Energy
IPAC
KCAI
-
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
IPAC vs. KCAI — Risk / Return Rank
IPAC
KCAI
IPAC vs. KCAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI). 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.
| IPAC | KCAI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.94 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.50 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.37 | 6.74 | -4.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.37 | 21.56 | -13.18 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IPAC vs. KCAI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, which is greater than KCAI's maximum drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and KCAI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IPAC | KCAI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.99% | -25.48% | -5.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.49% | -5.90% | -5.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.45% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.64% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.99% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.53% | -5.37% | +2.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.43% | -6.95% | -0.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.24% | 1.84% | +1.40% |
Volatility
IPAC vs. KCAI - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) has a higher volatility of 5.94% compared to KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) at 4.63%. This indicates that IPAC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KCAI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IPAC | KCAI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.94% | 4.63% | +1.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.54% | 9.15% | +5.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.38% | 13.81% | +3.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.81% | 20.88% | -4.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.60% | 20.88% | -4.28% |
IPAC vs. KCAI - Expense Ratio Comparison
IPAC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than KCAI's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
IPAC vs. KCAI - Dividend Comparison
IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.90%, less than KCAI's 34.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF | 3.90% | 4.32% | 3.43% | 3.16% | 2.76% | 4.03% | 1.68% | 3.37% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 2.66% | 2.60% |
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF | 34.31% | 35.42% | 2.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IPAC and KCAI have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IPAC has higher volatility (5.94%) compared to KCAI (4.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAC dropped -30.99% vs KCAI's -25.48%.
On 1-year performance, KCAI leads with 39.53% vs 27.10% for IPAC. On fees, IPAC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, KCAI has been the lower-risk option at 4.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, KCAI has performed better with a 39.53% return vs 27.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IPAC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KCAI.
KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 34.31%, compared with 3.90% for IPAC.
IPAC is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while KCAI is China Equities. IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while KCAI tracks Qi China Alpha Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IPAC and 0.79% for KCAI.
KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.88 vs 1.57), 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.
Find the right allocation for IPAC and KCAI
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