KBA vs. CNYA
Compare and contrast key facts about KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA).
KBA and CNYA are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. KBA is a passively managed fund by CICC that tracks the performance of the MSCI China A Index. It was launched on Mar 5, 2014. CNYA is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. It was launched on Jun 13, 2016. Both KBA and CNYA are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: KBA or CNYA.
Key characteristics
| KBA | CNYA | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 21.39% | 15.33% |
| 1Y Return | 17.97% | 12.93% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -8.26% | -9.15% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 2.84% | 2.29% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.72 | 0.48 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.23 | 0.91 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.18 | 1.14 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.39 | 0.30 |
| Martin Ratio | 2.63 | 1.69 |
| Ulcer Index | 7.37% | 8.71% |
| Daily Std Dev | 27.09% | 30.40% |
| Max Drawdown | -53.24% | -49.49% |
| Current Drawdown | -33.06% | -34.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between KBA and CNYA is 0.93, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
KBA vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 21.39% return, which is significantly higher than CNYA's 15.33% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
KBA vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both KBA and CNYA have an expense ratio of 0.60%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
KBA vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.
Dividends
KBA vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison
KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.93%, less than CNYA's 3.73% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 1.93% | 2.34% | 26.65% | 9.07% | 0.65% | 1.53% | 3.77% | 0.99% | 4.90% | 29.08% | 0.11% |
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 3.73% | 4.23% | 2.69% | 1.11% | 1.06% | 1.21% | 3.92% | 0.97% | 1.38% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
KBA vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, which is greater than CNYA's maximum drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and CNYA. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
KBA vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) is 16.31%, while iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a volatility of 21.22%. This indicates that KBA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.