KBA vs. KLIP

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both China Equities funds. KBA is passively managed, while KLIP is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, KBA returned 12.04%/yr vs 6.33%/yr for KLIP. Their 0.58 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for KLIP.

Performance

KBA vs. KLIP - 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 China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). 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 higher than KLIP's -6.77% 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%

KLIP

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: 6.88%
• 6M: -11.18%
• YTD: -6.77%
• 1Y: -3.11%
• 3Y*: 6.33%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.52%

*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)
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	$823.16K	$863.47K	$2.10M
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	$647.66K	$581.47K	$1.00M

KBA vs. KLIP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	6.21%	33.88%	15.73%	-22.88%
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	-6.77%	16.92%	3.37%	11.11%

Correlation

The correlation between KBA and KLIP is 0.43, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2023	0.58

The correlation between KBA and KLIP shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.58 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

KBA vs. KLIP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KBA	KLIP
Technology	37.5%	4.2%
Financial Services	16.9%	2.0%
Industrials	14.4%	-
Basic Materials	10.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	4.0%
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	34.2%
Healthcare	4.0%	6.0%
Utilities	3.2%	-
Energy	2.4%	-
Communication Services	1.2%	45.8%
Real Estate	0.4%	3.9%

Return for Risk

KBA vs. KLIP — 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

KLIP

KLIP Risk / Return Rank: 8
KLIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Omega Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
KLIP Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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. KLIP - 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 China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). 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	KLIP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	-0.19	+1.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	-0.15	+2.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	0.98	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	-0.15	+4.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.40	-0.34	+9.74

KBA vs. KLIP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBA Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is higher than the KLIP Sharpe Ratio of -0.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBA and KLIP, 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. KLIP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, which is greater than KLIP's maximum drawdown of -21.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and KLIP.

Drawdown Indicators

	KBA	KLIP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.24%	-21.48%	-31.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.33%	-21.48%	+13.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.23%	-21.48%	-9.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.32%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.29%	-12.12%	+4.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.53%	-4.33%	-21.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	9.22%	-5.71%

Volatility

KBA vs. KLIP - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 7.91% compared to KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) at 2.37%. This indicates that KBA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KLIP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KBA	KLIP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.91%	2.37%	+5.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.42%	12.99%	+3.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.87%	16.60%	+4.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.34%	17.98%	+9.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.51%	17.98%	+7.53%

KBA vs. KLIP - Expense Ratio Comparison

KBA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than KLIP's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

KBA vs. KLIP - Dividend Comparison

KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than KLIP's 27.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	27.54%	25.14%	54.26%	61.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KBA and KLIP in my portfolio?

KBA and KLIP have a correlation of 0.43, 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 KLIP?

KBA has higher volatility (7.91%) compared to KLIP (2.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs KLIP's -21.48%.

Which ETF is better, KBA or KLIP?

On 3-year performance, KBA leads with 12.04% vs 6.33% for KLIP. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KLIP has been the lower-risk option at 2.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KBA or KLIP?

Over the 3-year period, KBA has performed better with a 12.04% return vs 6.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KBA or KLIP?

KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.

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

KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 27.54%, compared with 1.47% for KBA.

What is the main difference between KBA and KLIP?

They also come from different issuers: CICC and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KBA and 0.95% for KLIP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs -0.19), 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.