KCAI vs. KBA

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

KCAI (KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF) and KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) are both China Equities funds - KCAI tracks the Qi China Alpha Index while KBA tracks the MSCI China A Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, KCAI returned 54.64% vs 40.89% for KBA. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KCAI charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for KBA.

Performance

KCAI vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KCAI achieves a 5.79% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 7.35% return.

KCAI

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: -1.56%
• YTD: 5.79%
• 6M: 9.23%
• 1Y: 54.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KBA

• 1D: -3.60%
• 1M: -2.95%
• YTD: 7.35%
• 6M: 9.77%
• 1Y: 40.89%
• 3Y*: 14.82%
• 5Y*: 5.44%
• 10Y*: 9.62%

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

KCAI vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	5.79%	53.29%	11.12%
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	7.35%	33.88%	12.42%

Correlation

The correlation between KCAI and KBA is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 29, 2024	0.80

The correlation between KCAI and KBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

KCAI vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

KCAI

KCAI Risk / Return Rank: 97
KCAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
KCAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
KCAI Omega Ratio Rank: 96
KCAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
KCAI Martin Ratio Rank: 97

KBA

KBA Risk / Return Rank: 77
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 73
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

KCAI vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). 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.

	KCAI	KBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.12	2.27	+1.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.82	3.10	+2.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.73	1.41	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	13.00	5.37	+7.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	38.98	14.26	+24.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KCAI vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KCAI Sharpe Ratio is 4.12, which is higher than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KCAI and KBA, 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

	KCAI	KBA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.12	2.27	+1.85
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.20	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.38	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.88	0.34	+1.54

Drawdowns

KCAI vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KCAI drawdown since its inception was -25.48%, smaller than the maximum KBA drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KCAI and KBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	KCAI	KBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.48%	-53.24%	+27.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.23%	-7.65%	+3.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-31.23%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.94%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.02%	-5.87%	+2.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.15%	-25.80%	+18.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.41%	2.88%	-1.47%

Volatility

KCAI vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) is 4.23%, while KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) has a volatility of 8.09%. This indicates that KCAI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KCAI	KBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.23%	8.09%	-3.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.44%	13.05%	-4.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.32%	18.07%	-4.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.17%	27.24%	-6.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.17%	25.34%	-4.17%

KCAI vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

KCAI has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

KCAI vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

KCAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 33.48%, more than KBA's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	1.46%	1.56%	2.18%	2.34%	49.05%	9.07%	0.65%	1.53%	3.77%	1.46%	6.62%	29.08%
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	33.48%	35.42%	2.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KCAI and KBA in my portfolio?

KCAI and KBA have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KCAI or KBA?

KBA has higher volatility (8.09%) compared to KCAI (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KCAI dropped -25.48% vs KBA's -53.24%.

Which ETF is better, KCAI or KBA?

On 1-year performance, KCAI leads with 54.64% vs 40.89% for KBA. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KCAI has been the lower-risk option at 4.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KCAI or KBA?

Over the 1-year period, KCAI has performed better with a 54.64% return vs 40.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KCAI or KBA?

KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KCAI.

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

KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 33.48%, compared with 1.46% for KBA.

What is the main difference between KCAI and KBA?

KCAI tracks Qi China Alpha Index, while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: KraneShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KCAI and 0.60% for KBA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.12 vs 2.27), 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.