KBA vs. KEMX
KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and KEMX (KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KBA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Index, while KEMX is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KBA returned 6.46%/yr vs 13.52%/yr for KEMX. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for KEMX.
Performance
KBA vs. KEMX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 12.62% return, which is significantly lower than KEMX's 42.26% 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%
KEMX
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- 13.02%
- YTD
- 42.26%
- 6M
- 47.92%
- 1Y
- 79.97%
- 3Y*
- 29.66%
- 5Y*
- 13.52%
- 10Y*
- —
KBA vs. KEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 12.62% | 33.88% | 15.73% | -16.77% | -3.49% | 3.17% | 41.62% | -1.38% |
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF | 42.26% | 38.28% | 0.36% | 20.57% | -19.35% | 10.55% | 12.84% | 7.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between KBA and KEMX is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2019 | 0.48 |
KBA vs. KEMX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KBA
KEMX
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
KBA
KEMX
Financial Services
KBA
KEMX
Industrials
KBA
KEMX
Basic Materials
KBA
KEMX
Consumer Defensive
KBA
KEMX
Consumer Cyclical
KBA
KEMX
Healthcare
KBA
KEMX
Energy
KBA
KEMX
Utilities
KBA
KEMX
Communication Services
KBA
KEMX
Real Estate
KBA
KEMX
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. KEMX — Risk / Return Rank
KBA
KEMX
KBA vs. KEMX - 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 MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX). 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.
| KBA | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.80 | 3.59 | -0.79 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.80 | 4.31 | -0.51 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.62 | -0.12 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.45 | 5.24 | +1.21 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.29 | 20.86 | -3.57 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| KBA | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.80 | 3.59 | -0.79 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.24 | 0.75 | -0.51 |
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 | 0.68 | -0.33 |
Drawdowns
KBA vs. KEMX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, which is greater than KEMX's maximum drawdown of -38.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and KEMX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KBA | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.24% | -38.80% | -14.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.65% | -15.36% | +7.71% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.23% | -19.62% | -11.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.95% | -30.85% | -9.10% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.32% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.25% | -1.31% | +0.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.81% | -8.86% | -16.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.85% | 3.85% | -1.00% |
Volatility
KBA vs. KEMX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) is 7.29%, while KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) has a volatility of 9.86%. This indicates that KBA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KEMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KBA | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.29% | 9.86% | -2.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.44% | 19.90% | -7.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.65% | 22.40% | -4.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.20% | 18.21% | +8.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.32% | 20.94% | +4.38% |
KBA vs. KEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison
KBA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than KEMX's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
KBA vs. KEMX - Dividend Comparison
KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, less than KEMX's 2.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF | 2.31% | 3.28% | 3.39% | 2.00% | 4.10% | 4.79% | 1.69% | 2.77% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KBA and KEMX have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KEMX has higher volatility (9.86%) compared to KBA (7.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs KEMX's -38.80%.
On 5-year performance, KEMX leads with 13.52% vs 6.46% for KBA. On fees, KEMX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. 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, KEMX has performed better with a 13.52% return vs 6.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KEMX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for KBA.
KEMX has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 1.39% for KBA.
KBA is categorized as China Equities, while KEMX is Foreign Large Cap Equities. KBA tracks MSCI China A Index, while KEMX tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KBA and 0.25% for KEMX.
KEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.59 vs 2.80), 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 KEMX
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