KBA vs. KWEB
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 10.40%/yr vs -0.57%/yr for KWEB. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KBA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.
Performance
KBA vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 10.36% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -28.08% return. Over the past 10 years, KBA has outperformed KWEB with an annualized return of 10.40%, while KWEB has yielded a comparatively lower -0.57% annualized 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%
KWEB
- 1D
- -2.24%
- 1M
- -8.99%
- YTD
- -28.08%
- 6M
- -29.18%
- 1Y
- -22.79%
- 3Y*
- 0.71%
- 5Y*
- -15.81%
- 10Y*
- -0.57%
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 | 10.36% | 33.88% | 15.73% | -16.77% | -3.49% | 3.17% | 41.62% | 35.44% | -26.28% | 30.69% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | -28.08% | 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 0.56, 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 | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014 | 0.58 |
The correlation between KBA and KWEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.
KBA vs. KWEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KBA
KWEB
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
KBA
KWEB
Financial Services
KBA
KWEB
Industrials
KBA
KWEB
Basic Materials
KBA
KWEB
-
Consumer Defensive
KBA
KWEB
Consumer Cyclical
KBA
KWEB
Healthcare
KBA
KWEB
Utilities
KBA
KWEB
-
Energy
KBA
KWEB
-
Communication Services
KBA
KWEB
Real Estate
KBA
KWEB
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. KWEB — Risk / Return Rank
KBA
KWEB
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +3.25 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +4.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 0.87 | +0.55 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.97 | -0.58 | +6.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.15 | -1.22 | +16.37 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KBA | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.24% | -80.92% | +27.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.65% | -39.49% | +31.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.23% | -39.49% | +8.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.76% | -72.17% | +32.41% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.32% | -80.92% | +35.60% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.67% | -71.68% | +68.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.71% | -35.36% | +9.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.01% | 18.70% | -15.69% |
Volatility
KBA vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 8.89% compared to KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) at 8.34%. This indicates that KBA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KWEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KBA | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.89% | 8.34% | +0.55% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.20% | 20.47% | -6.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.00% | 27.17% | -8.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.35% | 47.70% | -20.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.39% | 40.00% | -14.61% |
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 1.42%, less than KWEB's 8.56% 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% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | 8.56% | 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
KBA and KWEB have a correlation of 0.56, 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 KWEB (8.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs KWEB's -80.92%.
On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 10.40% vs -0.57% for KWEB. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KWEB has been the lower-risk option at 8.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, KBA has performed better with a 10.40% return vs -0.57%. 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 0.70% for KWEB.
KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 8.56%, compared with 1.42% for KBA.
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.
KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs -0.84), 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 KWEB
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