KBA vs. KWEB

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds - KBA tracks the MSCI China A Index while KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, KBA returned 9.23%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for KWEB. Their 0.58 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.

Performance

KBA vs. KWEB - 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 CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). 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 KWEB's -15.59% return. Over the past 10 years, KBA has outperformed KWEB with an annualized return of 9.23%, while KWEB has yielded a comparatively lower 0.16% annualized 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%

KWEB

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 15.01%
• 6M: -18.05%
• YTD: -15.59%
• 1Y: -11.62%
• 3Y*: 1.61%
• 5Y*: -7.36%
• 10Y*: 0.16%
• ALL TIME*: 2.71%

*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
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	$576.11M	$564.88M	$703.17M

KBA vs. KWEB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	6.21%	33.88%	15.73%	-16.77%	-3.49%	3.17%	41.62%	35.44%	-26.28%	30.69%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-15.59%	23.55%	12.01%	-9.06%	-17.24%	-49.01%	58.23%	29.92%	-33.80%	69.73%

Correlation

The correlation between KBA and KWEB is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.62
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014	0.58

The correlation between KBA and KWEB shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.62 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

KBA vs. KWEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KBA	KWEB
Technology	37.5%	11.8%
Financial Services	16.9%	1.8%
Industrials	14.4%	4.5%
Basic Materials	10.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	3.0%
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	36.4%
Healthcare	4.0%	6.0%
Utilities	3.2%	-
Energy	2.4%	-
Communication Services	1.2%	32.4%
Real Estate	0.4%	4.0%

Return for Risk

KBA vs. KWEB — 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

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 7
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 6
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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. KWEB - 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 CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). 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	KWEB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	-0.42	+2.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	-0.44	+2.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	0.95	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	-0.28	+4.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.40	-0.53	+9.93

KBA vs. KWEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBA Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is higher than the KWEB Sharpe Ratio of -0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBA and KWEB, 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. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and KWEB.

Drawdown Indicators

	KBA	KWEB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.24%	-80.92%	+27.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.33%	-41.62%	+33.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.23%	-41.62%	+10.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.76%	-63.96%	+24.20%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.32%	-80.92%	+35.60%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.29%	-66.76%	+59.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.53%	-35.66%	+10.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	22.06%	-18.55%

Volatility

KBA vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) have volatilities of 7.91% and 7.68%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KBA	KWEB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.91%	7.68%	+0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.42%	20.57%	-4.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.87%	27.75%	-6.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.34%	46.96%	-19.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.51%	40.06%	-14.55%

KBA vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

KBA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

KBA vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison

KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than KWEB's 7.29% 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%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	7.29%	6.16%	3.51%	1.71%	0.00%	7.07%	0.29%	0.08%	3.40%	0.58%	1.19%	0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KBA and KWEB in my portfolio?

KBA and KWEB 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.

Which is riskier, KBA or KWEB?

KBA has higher volatility (7.91%) compared to KWEB (7.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs KWEB's -80.92%.

Which ETF is better, KBA or KWEB?

On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 9.23% vs 0.16% for KWEB. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KWEB has been the lower-risk option at 7.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KBA or KWEB?

Over the 10-year period, KBA has performed better with a 9.23% return vs 0.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KBA or KWEB?

KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for KWEB.

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

KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 7.29%, compared with 1.47% for KBA.

What is the main difference between KBA and KWEB?

KBA tracks MSCI China A Index, while KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KBA and 0.70% for KWEB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs -0.42), 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.