ISVBF vs. KWEB
ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds - ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index while KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ISVBF returned -2.48%/yr vs -6.82%/yr for KWEB. Their 0.31 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.
Performance
ISVBF vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -6.75% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -15.15% 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%
KWEB
- 1D
- 0.52%
- 1M
- 15.61%
- 6M
- -16.07%
- YTD
- -15.15%
- 1Y
- -13.07%
- 3Y*
- 1.79%
- 5Y*
- -6.82%
- 10Y*
- 0.21%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.75%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $147.49K | $255.95K | $315.23K | |
| $584.55M | $558.37M | $684.65M |
ISVBF vs. KWEB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.75% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | -15.15% | 23.55% | 12.01% | -9.06% | -17.24% | -46.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISVBF and KWEB is 0.62, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.62 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021 | 0.31 |
Over the past year, ISVBF and KWEB have become more correlated (0.62) than their long-term average of 0.31, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
ISVBF vs. KWEB — Risk / Return Rank
ISVBF
KWEB
ISVBF vs. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) 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.
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 | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 0.94 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | -0.32 | +0.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.09 | -0.59 | +0.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ISVBF vs. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and KWEB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISVBF | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.78% | -80.92% | +27.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.14% | -41.62% | +17.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.14% | -41.62% | +17.48% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -46.06% | -63.96% | +17.90% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -80.92% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.42% | -66.59% | +42.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.57% | -35.67% | +3.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.23% | 22.13% | -10.90% |
Volatility
ISVBF vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) is 6.46%, while KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a volatility of 7.47%. This indicates that ISVBF 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISVBF | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.46% | 7.47% | -1.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.45% | 20.57% | +5.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.60% | 27.70% | +3.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.08% | 46.96% | -16.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.06% | 40.05% | -9.99% |
ISVBF vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISVBF vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison
ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KWEB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.26%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A 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 | 7.26% | 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
ISVBF and KWEB have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KWEB has higher volatility (7.47%) compared to ISVBF (6.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs KWEB's -80.92%.
On 5-year performance, ISVBF leads with -2.48% vs -6.82% for KWEB. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 6.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ISVBF has performed better with a -2.48% return vs -6.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for KWEB.
KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 7.26%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.70% for KWEB.
ISVBF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.03 vs -0.48), 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 ISVBF and KWEB
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