PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
KBA vs. KEMQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

KBA vs. KEMQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 12.62% return, which is significantly higher than KEMQ's 6.99% return.


KBA

1D
0.14%
1M
4.32%
YTD
12.62%
6M
16.80%
1Y
49.12%
3Y*
16.22%
5Y*
6.46%
10Y*
10.15%

KEMQ

1D
-2.81%
1M
7.12%
YTD
6.99%
6M
8.35%
1Y
36.95%
3Y*
24.42%
5Y*
-2.87%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KBA vs. KEMQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
12.62%33.88%15.73%-16.77%-3.49%3.17%41.62%35.44%-26.28%2.16%
KEMQ
KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF
6.99%56.28%13.81%0.77%-38.09%-27.31%39.26%28.26%-25.52%1.88%

Correlation

The correlation between KBA and KEMQ is 0.54, 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

0.54

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.62

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2017

0.63

The correlation between KBA and KEMQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

KBA vs. KEMQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
KBA
KEMQ

Technology

29.8%
45.0%

Financial Services

18.5%

-

Industrials

15.8%

-

Basic Materials

10.9%

-

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
0.4%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
33.0%

Healthcare

4.1%
3.5%

Energy

3.2%

-

Utilities

3.2%

-

Communication Services

1.6%
15.5%

Real Estate

0.6%

-

Technology

KBA
29.8%
KEMQ
45.0%

Financial Services

KBA
18.5%
KEMQ

-

Industrials

KBA
15.8%
KEMQ

-

Basic Materials

KBA
10.9%
KEMQ

-

Consumer Defensive

KBA
6.8%
KEMQ
0.4%

Consumer Cyclical

KBA
5.7%
KEMQ
33.0%

Healthcare

KBA
4.1%
KEMQ
3.5%

Energy

KBA
3.2%
KEMQ

-

Utilities

KBA
3.2%
KEMQ

-

Communication Services

KBA
1.6%
KEMQ
15.5%

Real Estate

KBA
0.6%
KEMQ

-

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. KEMQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

KBA
KBA Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

KEMQ
KEMQ Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
KEMQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KEMQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
KEMQ Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
KEMQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
KEMQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

KBA vs. KEMQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ). 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.


KBAKEMQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.25

+0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.45

1.69

+4.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.29

4.52

+12.78

KBA vs. KEMQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBA Sharpe Ratio is 2.80, which is higher than the KEMQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBA and KEMQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


KBAKEMQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.80

1.42

+1.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

-0.09

+0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.35

0.06

+0.29

Drawdowns

KBA vs. KEMQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, smaller than the maximum KEMQ drawdown of -70.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and KEMQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


KBAKEMQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.24%

-70.72%

+17.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.65%

-21.94%

+14.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-31.23%

-21.94%

-9.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.95%

-66.02%

+26.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-28.14%

+26.89%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.81%

-35.69%

+9.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.85%

8.20%

-5.35%

Volatility

KBA vs. KEMQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) is 7.29%, while KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ) has a volatility of 10.09%. This indicates that KBA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KEMQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


KBAKEMQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.29%

10.09%

-2.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.44%

20.87%

-8.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.65%

26.14%

-8.49%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.20%

31.88%

-4.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.32%

29.58%

-4.26%

KBA vs. KEMQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both KBA and KEMQ have an expense ratio of 0.60%.


Dividends

KBA vs. KEMQ - Dividend Comparison

KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, less than KEMQ's 4.92% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
1.39%1.56%2.18%2.34%49.05%9.07%0.65%1.53%3.77%1.46%6.62%29.08%
KEMQ
KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF
4.92%5.27%0.73%0.29%0.00%0.28%2.28%1.76%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


KBA and KEMQ have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KEMQ has higher volatility (10.09%) compared to KBA (7.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs KEMQ's -70.72%.

On 5-year performance, KBA leads with 6.46% vs -2.87% for KEMQ. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, KBA has been the lower-risk option at 7.29%. 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 6.46% return vs -2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

KBA and KEMQ have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

KEMQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.92%, compared with 1.39% for KBA.

KBA is categorized as China Equities, while KEMQ is Emerging Markets Equities. KBA tracks MSCI China A Index, while KEMQ tracks Solactive Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index.

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.42), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for KBA and KEMQ

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