KBA vs. KLIP
KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KBA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Index, while KLIP is a Options Trading fund managed by CICC. Over the past 3 years, KBA returned 16.25%/yr vs 5.41%/yr for KLIP. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for KLIP.
Performance
KBA vs. KLIP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 10.36% return, which is significantly higher than KLIP's -14.26% 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%
KLIP
- 1D
- -1.86%
- 1M
- -5.74%
- YTD
- -14.26%
- 6M
- -15.76%
- 1Y
- -8.35%
- 3Y*
- 5.41%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KBA vs. KLIP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 10.36% | 33.88% | 15.73% | -22.88% |
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF | -14.26% | 16.92% | 3.37% | 11.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between KBA and KLIP is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2023 | 0.60 |
The correlation between KBA and KLIP shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.60 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. KLIP — Risk / Return Rank
KBA
KLIP
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.83 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 0.92 | +0.50 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.97 | -0.44 | +6.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.15 | -1.10 | +16.25 |
Loading charts...
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 -19.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and KLIP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KBA | KLIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.24% | -19.18% | -34.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.65% | -19.18% | +11.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.23% | -19.18% | -12.05% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.32% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.67% | -19.18% | +15.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.71% | -3.96% | -21.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.01% | 7.58% | -4.57% |
Volatility
KBA vs. KLIP - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 8.89% compared to KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) at 5.89%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KBA | KLIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.89% | 5.89% | +3.00% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.20% | 13.18% | +1.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.00% | 16.19% | +2.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.35% | 18.12% | +9.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.39% | 18.12% | +7.27% |
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 1.42%, less than KLIP's 30.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF | 30.25% | 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
KBA and KLIP have a correlation of 0.49, 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 KLIP (5.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs KLIP's -19.18%.
On 3-year performance, KBA leads with 16.25% vs 5.41% for KLIP. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KLIP has been the lower-risk option at 5.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, KBA has performed better with a 16.25% return vs 5.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.
KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 30.25%, compared with 1.42% for KBA.
KBA is categorized as China Equities, while KLIP is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KBA and 0.95% for KLIP.
KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs -0.52), 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 KLIP
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