KBA vs. CHIQ
KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and CHIQ (Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF) are both China Equities funds - KBA tracks the MSCI China A Index while CHIQ tracks the MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, KBA returned 9.32%/yr vs 6.23%/yr for CHIQ. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CHIQ.
Performance
KBA vs. CHIQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 7.54% return, which is significantly higher than CHIQ's -14.96% return. Over the past 10 years, KBA has outperformed CHIQ with an annualized return of 9.32%, while CHIQ has yielded a comparatively lower 6.23% annualized return.
KBA
- 1D
- -2.09%
- 1M
- -2.95%
- 6M
- 5.54%
- YTD
- 7.54%
- 1Y
- 36.56%
- 3Y*
- 14.01%
- 5Y*
- 6.17%
- 10Y*
- 9.32%
CHIQ
- 1D
- 1.90%
- 1M
- 3.33%
- 6M
- -16.24%
- YTD
- -14.96%
- 1Y
- -14.75%
- 3Y*
- -0.07%
- 5Y*
- -9.85%
- 10Y*
- 6.23%
KBA vs. CHIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 7.54% | 33.88% | 15.73% | -16.77% | -3.49% | 3.17% | 41.62% | 35.44% | -26.28% | 30.69% |
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | -14.96% | 13.69% | 10.74% | -10.70% | -22.01% | -27.07% | 92.61% | 44.19% | -28.65% | 67.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between KBA and CHIQ is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014 | 0.66 |
The correlation between KBA and CHIQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.69 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
KBA vs. CHIQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KBA
CHIQ
Technology
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Communication Services
-
Real Estate
Technology
KBA
CHIQ
Financial Services
KBA
CHIQ
-
Industrials
KBA
CHIQ
Basic Materials
KBA
CHIQ
-
Consumer Defensive
KBA
CHIQ
Consumer Cyclical
KBA
CHIQ
Healthcare
KBA
CHIQ
-
Utilities
KBA
CHIQ
-
Energy
KBA
CHIQ
-
Communication Services
KBA
CHIQ
-
Real Estate
KBA
CHIQ
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
KBA vs. CHIQ — Risk / Return Rank
KBA
CHIQ
KBA vs. CHIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ). 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.
| KBA | CHIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.29 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 0.91 | +0.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.80 | -0.42 | +5.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.18 | -0.93 | +12.11 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
KBA vs. CHIQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, smaller than the maximum CHIQ drawdown of -67.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and CHIQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KBA | CHIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.24% | -67.04% | +13.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.65% | -35.53% | +27.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.23% | -35.53% | +4.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.76% | -56.55% | +16.79% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.32% | -67.04% | +21.72% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.13% | -55.39% | +49.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.60% | -30.79% | +5.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.28% | 15.82% | -12.54% |
Volatility
KBA vs. CHIQ - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 9.30% compared to Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ) at 7.90%. This indicates that KBA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CHIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KBA | CHIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.30% | 7.90% | +1.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.80% | 16.36% | -0.56% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.29% | 22.87% | -2.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.47% | 37.73% | -10.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.46% | 32.44% | -6.98% |
KBA vs. CHIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
KBA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than CHIQ's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
KBA vs. CHIQ - Dividend Comparison
KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, less than CHIQ's 1.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | 1.59% | 1.48% | 2.65% | 2.26% | 0.38% | 0.00% | 0.11% | 1.05% | 2.71% | 0.62% | 1.51% | 4.86% |
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 1.45% | 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
KBA and CHIQ have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KBA has higher volatility (9.30%) compared to CHIQ (7.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs CHIQ's -67.04%.
On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 9.32% vs 6.23% for CHIQ. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, CHIQ has been the lower-risk option at 7.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, KBA has performed better with a 9.32% return vs 6.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CHIQ.
CHIQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.59%, compared with 1.45% for KBA.
KBA tracks MSCI China A Index, while CHIQ tracks MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KBA and 0.65% for CHIQ.
KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs -0.65), 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 KBA and CHIQ
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