ISVBF vs. KCAI

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and KCAI (KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF) are both China Equities funds - ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index while KCAI tracks the Qi China Alpha Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ISVBF returned -0.99% vs 37.98% for KCAI. Their 0.39 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KCAI.

Performance

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -6.75% return, which is significantly lower than KCAI's 6.89% return.

ISVBF

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: 9.06%
• 6M: -8.63%
• YTD: -6.75%
• 1Y: -0.99%
• 3Y*: 8.45%
• 5Y*: -2.48%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -4.43%

KCAI

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 4.13%
• 6M: 7.47%
• YTD: 6.89%
• 1Y: 37.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 36.50%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	$147.49K	$255.95K	$315.23K
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	$40.34K	$24.89K	$160.72K

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	-6.75%	30.64%	14.61%
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	6.89%	53.29%	11.36%

Correlation

The correlation between ISVBF and KCAI is 0.41, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2024	0.39

Return for Risk

ISVBF vs. KCAI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ISVBF

ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 10
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 9

KCAI

KCAI Risk / Return Rank: 94
KCAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
KCAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
KCAI Omega Ratio Rank: 91
KCAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
KCAI Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) 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.

	ISVBF	KCAI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.03	2.69	-2.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.18	3.91	-3.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.47	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	6.47	-6.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.09	19.23	-19.31

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISVBF Sharpe Ratio is -0.03, which is lower than the KCAI Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISVBF and KCAI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, which is greater than KCAI's maximum drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and KCAI.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISVBF	KCAI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.78%	-25.48%	-28.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.14%	-5.90%	-18.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.14%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.42%	-2.01%	-22.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.57%	-6.81%	-25.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.23%	1.98%	+9.25%

Volatility

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a higher volatility of 6.46% compared to KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) at 4.61%. This indicates that ISVBF'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.

Volatility by Period

	ISVBF	KCAI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.46%	4.61%	+1.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.45%	9.79%	+16.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.60%	14.18%	+17.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.08%	20.76%	+9.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.06%	20.76%	+9.30%

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than KCAI's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISVBF vs. KCAI - Dividend Comparison

ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KCAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 33.14%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	33.14%	35.42%	2.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ISVBF and KCAI in my portfolio?

ISVBF and KCAI have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ISVBF or KCAI?

ISVBF has higher volatility (6.46%) compared to KCAI (4.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs KCAI's -25.48%.

Which ETF is better, ISVBF or KCAI?

On 1-year performance, KCAI leads with 37.98% vs -0.99% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, KCAI has been the lower-risk option at 4.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ISVBF or KCAI?

Over the 1-year period, KCAI has performed better with a 37.98% return vs -0.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ISVBF or KCAI?

ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KCAI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ISVBF or KCAI?

KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 33.14%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

What is the main difference between ISVBF and KCAI?

ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while KCAI tracks Qi China Alpha Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.79% for KCAI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs -0.03), 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.