KBA vs. ISVBF
KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - KBA tracks the MSCI China A Index while ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KBA returned 6.66%/yr vs -6.16%/yr for ISVBF. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
KBA vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 10.36% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -12.61% return.
KBA
- 1D
- -3.67%
- 1M
- 2.74%
- YTD
- 10.36%
- 6M
- 10.50%
- 1Y
- 45.45%
- 3Y*
- 16.25%
- 5Y*
- 6.66%
- 10Y*
- 10.40%
ISVBF
- 1D
- -1.91%
- 1M
- -3.63%
- YTD
- -12.61%
- 6M
- -13.33%
- 1Y
- -0.84%
- 3Y*
- 8.82%
- 5Y*
- -6.16%
- 10Y*
- —
KBA vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 10.36% | 33.88% | 15.73% | -16.77% | -3.49% | 4.97% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -12.61% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between KBA and ISVBF is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021 | 0.25 |
Over the past year, KBA and ISVBF have become more correlated (0.51) than their long-term average of 0.25, 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
KBA vs. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
KBA
ISVBF
KBA vs. ISVBF - 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 MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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 | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.43 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.02 | +0.40 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.97 | -0.04 | +6.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.15 | -0.09 | +15.24 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
KBA vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, roughly equal to the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KBA | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.24% | -53.78% | +0.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.65% | -20.64% | +12.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.23% | -23.77% | -7.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.76% | -52.51% | +12.75% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.32% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.67% | -29.16% | +25.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.71% | -32.68% | +6.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.01% | 9.17% | -6.16% |
Volatility
KBA vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 8.89% compared to iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) at 8.35%. This indicates that KBA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KBA | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.89% | 8.35% | +0.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.20% | 27.04% | -12.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.00% | 30.91% | -11.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.35% | 30.31% | -2.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.39% | 30.15% | -4.76% |
KBA vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
KBA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
KBA vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| 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% |
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 1.42% | 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 ISVBF have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KBA has higher volatility (8.89%) compared to ISVBF (8.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 5-year performance, KBA leads with 6.66% vs -6.16% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 8.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, KBA has performed better with a 6.66% return vs -6.16%. 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 0.60% for KBA.
KBA has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
KBA tracks MSCI China A Index, while ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KBA and 0.40% for ISVBF.
KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 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.
Find the right allocation for KBA and ISVBF
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