KBA vs. QYLD

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KBA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Index, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, KBA returned 9.23%/yr vs 9.65%/yr for QYLD. Their 0.33 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

KBA vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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 lower than QYLD's 8.73% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with KBA having a 9.23% annualized return and QYLD not far ahead at 9.65%.

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%

QYLD

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: 0.00%
• 6M: 6.38%
• YTD: 8.73%
• 1Y: 21.85%
• 3Y*: 13.13%
• 5Y*: 7.94%
• 10Y*: 9.65%
• ALL TIME*: 8.64%

*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
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	$81.92M	$78.72M	$98.91M

KBA vs. QYLD - 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%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	8.73%	9.28%	19.35%	22.77%	-19.08%	10.41%	8.72%	22.69%	-3.07%	18.79%

Correlation

The correlation between KBA and QYLD is 0.46, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.29
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014	0.33

The correlation between KBA and QYLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.27 (3 years) to 0.46 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

KBA vs. QYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KBA	QYLD
Technology	37.5%	61.4%
Financial Services	16.9%	0.2%
Industrials	14.4%	4.4%
Basic Materials	10.1%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	6.7%
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	10.2%
Healthcare	4.0%	3.8%
Utilities	3.2%	1.3%
Energy	2.4%	0.5%
Communication Services	1.2%	12.5%
Real Estate	0.4%	0.1%

Return for Risk

KBA vs. QYLD — 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

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 87
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 88
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	1.95	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	2.78	-0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.40	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	3.80	+0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.40	17.57	-8.17

KBA vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBA Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBA and QYLD, 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. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBA drawdown since its inception was -53.24%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBA and QYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	KBA	QYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.24%	-24.75%	-28.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.33%	-5.78%	-2.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.23%	-19.06%	-12.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.76%	-24.61%	-15.15%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.32%	-24.75%	-20.57%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.29%	-2.00%	-5.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.53%	-3.81%	-21.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	1.25%	+2.26%

Volatility

KBA vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 7.91% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 5.17%. This indicates that KBA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KBA	QYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.91%	5.17%	+2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.42%	10.07%	+6.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.87%	11.26%	+9.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.34%	15.05%	+12.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.51%	15.64%	+9.87%

KBA vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both KBA and QYLD have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

KBA vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than QYLD's 11.78% 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%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	11.78%	11.55%	12.50%	11.78%	13.75%	12.85%	11.16%	9.84%	12.44%	7.69%	9.15%	9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KBA and QYLD in my portfolio?

KBA and QYLD have a correlation of 0.46, 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 QYLD?

KBA has higher volatility (7.91%) compared to QYLD (5.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBA dropped -53.24% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, KBA or QYLD?

On 10-year performance, QYLD leads with 9.65% vs 9.23% for KBA. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 5.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KBA or QYLD?

Over the 10-year period, QYLD has performed better with a 9.65% return vs 9.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KBA or QYLD?

KBA and QYLD have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

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

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.78%, compared with 1.47% for KBA.

What is the main difference between KBA and QYLD?

KBA is categorized as China Equities, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. KBA tracks MSCI China A Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. They also come from different issuers: CICC and Global X.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.59), 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.