KBA vs. IAK

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and IAK (iShares U.S. Insurance ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KBA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Index, while IAK is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Insurance Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, KBA returned 9.23%/yr vs 13.18%/yr for IAK. Their 0.20 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for IAK.

Performance

KBA vs. IAK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 6.21% return, which is significantly lower than IAK's 10.11% return. Over the past 10 years, KBA has underperformed IAK with an annualized return of 9.23%, while IAK has yielded a comparatively higher 13.18% annualized return.

KBA

• 1D: -0.88%
• 1M: 0.24%
• 6M: 7.78%
• YTD: 6.21%
• 1Y: 32.90%
• 3Y*: 12.04%
• 5Y*: 6.35%
• 10Y*: 9.23%
• ALL TIME*: 9.44%

IAK

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: -0.03%
• 6M: 12.56%
• YTD: 10.11%
• 1Y: 19.67%
• 3Y*: 19.67%
• 5Y*: 15.99%
• 10Y*: 13.18%
• ALL TIME*: 7.39%

*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)
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	$15.27M	$20.59M	$12.29M
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	$823.16K	$863.47K	$2.10M

KBA vs. IAK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	6.21%	33.88%	15.73%	-16.77%	-3.49%	3.17%	41.62%	35.44%	-26.28%	30.69%
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	10.11%	9.50%	28.25%	11.28%	11.33%	26.84%	-2.86%	25.94%	-11.48%	14.18%

Correlation

The correlation between KBA and IAK is -0.18, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.18
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	-0.04
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.07
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014	0.20

The correlation between KBA and IAK shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to 0.20 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

KBA vs. IAK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KBA	IAK
Technology	37.5%	-
Financial Services	16.9%	99.3%
Industrials	14.4%	-
Basic Materials	10.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	-
Healthcare	4.0%	0.7%
Utilities	3.2%	-
Energy	2.4%	-
Communication Services	1.2%	-
Real Estate	0.4%	-

Return for Risk

KBA vs. IAK — Risk / Return Rank

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

KBA

KBA Risk / Return Rank: 71
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 64
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 73

IAK

IAK Risk / Return Rank: 54
IAK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IAK Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
IAK Omega Ratio Rank: 47
IAK Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
IAK Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

KBA vs. IAK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK). 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	IAK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	1.24	+0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	1.81	+0.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.22	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	2.59	+1.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.40	6.29	+3.10

KBA vs. IAK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBA Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the IAK Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBA and IAK, 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

KBA vs. IAK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, smaller than the maximum IAK drawdown of -77.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and IAK.

Drawdown Indicators

	KBA	IAK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.24%	-77.38%	+24.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.33%	-7.62%	-0.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.23%	-11.58%	-19.65%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.76%	-14.76%	-25.00%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.32%	-44.95%	-0.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.29%	-3.20%	-4.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.53%	-16.01%	-9.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	3.13%	+0.38%

Volatility

KBA vs. IAK - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 7.91% compared to iShares U.S. Insurance ETF (IAK) at 6.56%. This indicates that KBA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IAK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KBA	IAK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.91%	6.56%	+1.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.42%	12.42%	+4.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.87%	15.99%	+4.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.34%	18.13%	+9.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.51%	20.92%	+4.59%

KBA vs. IAK - Expense Ratio Comparison

KBA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IAK's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

KBA vs. IAK - Dividend Comparison

KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than IAK's 2.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IAK iShares U.S. Insurance ETF	2.42%	1.69%	1.49%	1.44%	1.69%	2.26%	2.07%	1.84%	2.33%	1.62%	1.68%	1.62%
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	1.47%	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

Can I hold both KBA and IAK in my portfolio?

KBA and IAK have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KBA or IAK?

KBA has higher volatility (7.91%) compared to IAK (6.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs IAK's -77.38%.

Which ETF is better, KBA or IAK?

On 10-year performance, IAK leads with 13.18% vs 9.23% for KBA. On fees, IAK is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, IAK has been the lower-risk option at 6.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KBA or IAK?

Over the 10-year period, IAK has performed better with a 13.18% return vs 9.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KBA or IAK?

IAK is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for KBA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KBA or IAK?

IAK has the higher dividend yield at 2.42%, compared with 1.47% for KBA.

What is the main difference between KBA and IAK?

KBA is categorized as China Equities, while IAK is Financials Equities. KBA tracks MSCI China A Index, while IAK tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Insurance Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KBA and 0.38% for IAK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs 1.24), 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.