KBA vs. QYLD
Compare and contrast key facts about KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD).
KBA and QYLD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. KBA is a passively managed fund by CICC that tracks the performance of the MSCI China A Index. It was launched on Mar 5, 2014. QYLD is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. It was launched on Dec 12, 2013. Both KBA and QYLD are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: KBA or QYLD.
Performance
KBA vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KBA achieves a 18.20% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 16.23% return. Over the past 10 years, KBA has underperformed QYLD with an annualized return of 2.93%, while QYLD has yielded a comparatively higher 8.46% annualized return.
KBA
18.20%
-4.49%
8.90%
15.29%
2.89%
2.93%
QYLD
16.23%
0.51%
9.61%
19.69%
7.34%
8.46%
Key characteristics
| KBA | QYLD | |
|---|---|---|
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.49 | 1.92 |
| Sortino Ratio | 0.93 | 2.61 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.13 | 1.46 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.28 | 2.57 |
| Martin Ratio | 1.67 | 13.85 |
| Ulcer Index | 8.37% | 1.44% |
| Daily Std Dev | 28.37% | 10.35% |
| Max Drawdown | -53.24% | -24.75% |
| Current Drawdown | -34.82% | -1.61% |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
KBA vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both KBA and QYLD have an expense ratio of 0.60%.
Correlation
The correlation between KBA and QYLD is 0.33, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
KBA vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Performance 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.
Dividends
KBA vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison
KBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, less than QYLD's 11.65% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF | 1.98% | 2.34% | 26.65% | 9.06% | 0.65% | 1.53% | 3.77% | 1.00% | 4.90% | 29.08% | 0.11% |
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF | 11.65% | 11.78% | 13.75% | 12.85% | 11.16% | 9.84% | 12.44% | 7.69% | 9.15% | 9.42% | 10.74% |
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. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
KBA vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a higher volatility of 9.51% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 3.46%. 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.