KBUF vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KBUF (KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, KBUF returned -3.13% vs 1.88% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. KBUF charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

KBUF vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KBUF achieves a -11.47% return, which is significantly lower than CAOS's 0.82% return.

KBUF

• 1D: -2.36%
• 1M: -3.27%
• YTD: -11.47%
• 6M: -11.63%
• 1Y: -3.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -0.09%
• YTD: 0.82%
• 6M: 0.69%
• 1Y: 1.88%
• 3Y*: 4.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KBUF vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF	-11.47%	18.04%	16.58%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.82%	2.55%	4.83%

Correlation

The correlation between KBUF and CAOS is -0.26, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2024	-0.12

The correlation between KBUF and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.26 (1 year) to -0.12 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

KBUF vs. CAOS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KBUF	CAOS
Communication Services	40.1%	10.4%
Consumer Cyclical	38.4%	10.0%
Healthcare	6.9%	9.6%
Real Estate	4.8%	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	5.4%
Technology	3.6%	33.1%
Financial Services	2.0%	12.4%
Basic Materials	-	1.9%
Energy	-	4.1%
Industrials	-	8.5%
Utilities	-	2.6%

Return for Risk

KBUF vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

KBUF

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

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 40
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 39

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

KBUF vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	KBUF	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.24	1.24	-1.48
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.25	1.98	-2.23
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.26	-0.29
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.18	2.49	-2.68
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.42	6.22	-6.64
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KBUF vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KBUF Sharpe Ratio is -0.24, which is lower than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KBUF and CAOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KBUF	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.24	1.24	-1.48
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.62	1.21	-0.58

Drawdowns

KBUF vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KBUF drawdown since its inception was -17.01%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KBUF and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	KBUF	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.01%	-3.60%	-13.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.01%	-0.76%	-16.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.70%	-1.07%	-15.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.16%	-0.90%	-3.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.50%	0.30%	+7.20%

Volatility

KBUF vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) has a higher volatility of 6.22% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.26%. This indicates that KBUF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KBUF	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.22%	0.26%	+5.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.53%	1.03%	+9.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.10%	1.52%	+11.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.35%	4.26%	+10.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.35%	4.26%	+10.09%

KBUF vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

KBUF has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

KBUF vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

KBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.49%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF	8.49%	7.51%	3.53%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KBUF and CAOS in my portfolio?

KBUF and CAOS have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KBUF or CAOS?

KBUF has higher volatility (6.22%) compared to CAOS (0.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KBUF dropped -17.01% vs CAOS's -3.60%.

Which ETF is better, KBUF or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, CAOS leads with 1.88% vs -3.13% for KBUF. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KBUF or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, CAOS has performed better with a 1.88% return vs -3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KBUF or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KBUF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KBUF or CAOS?

KBUF has the higher dividend yield at 8.49%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between KBUF and CAOS?

They also come from different issuers: KraneShares and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for KBUF and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs -0.24), 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.