KCAI vs. KBUF
KCAI (KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF) and KBUF (KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KCAI is a China Equities fund tracking the Qi China Alpha Index, while KBUF is a Options Trading fund actively managed by KraneShares. KCAI is passively managed, while KBUF is actively managed. Over the past year, KCAI returned 54.64% vs -5.81% for KBUF. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KCAI charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for KBUF.
Performance
KCAI vs. KBUF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KCAI achieves a 5.79% return, which is significantly higher than KBUF's -12.71% return.
KCAI
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- -1.56%
- YTD
- 5.79%
- 6M
- 9.23%
- 1Y
- 54.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KBUF
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- -6.73%
- YTD
- -12.71%
- 6M
- -13.32%
- 1Y
- -5.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KCAI vs. KBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF | 5.79% | 53.29% | 11.12% |
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF | -12.71% | 18.04% | 11.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between KCAI and KBUF is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 29, 2024 | 0.50 |
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
KCAI vs. KBUF — Risk / Return Rank
KCAI
KBUF
KCAI vs. KBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) and KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF). 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 | KBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +4.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +6.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.73 | 0.94 | +0.80 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 13.00 | -0.33 | +13.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 38.98 | -0.76 | +39.74 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| KCAI | KBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.12 | -0.44 | +4.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.88 | 0.58 | +1.31 |
Drawdowns
KCAI vs. KBUF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KCAI drawdown since its inception was -25.48%, which is greater than KBUF's maximum drawdown of -17.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KCAI and KBUF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KCAI | KBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.48% | -17.87% | -7.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.23% | -17.87% | +13.64% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.02% | -17.87% | +14.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.15% | -4.20% | -2.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.41% | 7.66% | -6.25% |
Volatility
KCAI vs. KBUF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) is 4.23%, while KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) has a volatility of 5.69%. This indicates that KCAI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KCAI | KBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.23% | 5.69% | -1.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.44% | 10.62% | -2.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.32% | 13.16% | +0.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.17% | 14.36% | +6.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.17% | 14.36% | +6.81% |
KCAI vs. KBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison
KCAI has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than KBUF's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
KCAI vs. KBUF - Dividend Comparison
KCAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 33.48%, more than KBUF's 8.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF | 8.61% | 7.51% | 3.53% |
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF | 33.48% | 35.42% | 2.19% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KCAI and KBUF have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KBUF has higher volatility (5.69%) compared to KCAI (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KCAI dropped -25.48% vs KBUF's -17.87%.
On 1-year performance, KCAI leads with 54.64% vs -5.81% for KBUF. On fees, KCAI is cheaper at 0.79% 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.
Over the 1-year period, KCAI has performed better with a 54.64% return vs -5.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KCAI is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KBUF.
KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 33.48%, compared with 8.61% for KBUF.
KCAI is categorized as China Equities, while KBUF is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KCAI and 0.95% for KBUF.
KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.12 vs -0.44), 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 KCAI and KBUF
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