KCAI vs. PGJ

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

KCAI (KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF) and PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) are both China Equities funds - KCAI tracks the Qi China Alpha Index while PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, KCAI returned 55.20% vs -10.62% for PGJ. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KCAI charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for PGJ.

Performance

KCAI vs. PGJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KCAI achieves a 7.68% return, which is significantly higher than PGJ's -15.09% return.

KCAI

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: 0.71%
• YTD: 7.68%
• 6M: 11.12%
• 1Y: 55.20%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PGJ

• 1D: 0.64%
• 1M: -7.40%
• YTD: -15.09%
• 6M: -17.45%
• 1Y: -10.62%
• 3Y*: -0.77%
• 5Y*: -14.28%
• 10Y*: 0.47%

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

KCAI vs. PGJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	7.68%	53.29%	11.36%
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	-15.09%	13.66%	21.33%

Correlation

The correlation between KCAI and PGJ is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2024	0.51

The correlation between KCAI and PGJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.42 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

KCAI vs. PGJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KCAI	PGJ
Financial Services	39.0%	3.9%
Industrials	23.6%	6.6%
Technology	13.2%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	11.5%	44.3%
Basic Materials	11.3%	-
Healthcare	1.3%	0.7%
Communication Services	-	14.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.6%
Energy	-	2.1%
Real Estate	-	3.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

KCAI vs. PGJ — 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

PGJ

PGJ Risk / Return Rank: 5
PGJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
PGJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
PGJ Omega Ratio Rank: 5
PGJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
PGJ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. PGJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ). 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.

	KCAI	PGJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.11	-0.54	+4.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.80	-0.64	+6.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.73	0.93	+0.80
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	12.91	-0.47	+13.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	37.57	-0.93	+38.50

KCAI vs. PGJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KCAI Sharpe Ratio is 4.11, which is higher than the PGJ Sharpe Ratio of -0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KCAI and PGJ, 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

KCAI vs. PGJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KCAI drawdown since its inception was -25.48%, smaller than the maximum PGJ drawdown of -78.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KCAI and PGJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	KCAI	PGJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.48%	-78.37%	+52.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.23%	-28.21%	+23.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-30.82%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-70.00%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-78.37%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.29%	-67.63%	+66.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.08%	-31.78%	+24.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.45%	14.16%	-12.71%

Volatility

KCAI vs. PGJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF (KCAI) is 3.87%, while Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) has a volatility of 6.95%. This indicates that KCAI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PGJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KCAI	PGJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.87%	6.95%	-3.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.44%	17.47%	-9.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.33%	24.55%	-11.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.04%	43.73%	-22.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.04%	36.69%	-15.65%

KCAI vs. PGJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

KCAI has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than PGJ's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

KCAI vs. PGJ - Dividend Comparison

KCAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 32.90%, more than PGJ's 3.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KCAI KraneShares China Alpha Index ETF	32.90%	35.42%	2.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	3.73%	3.38%	4.70%	2.50%	0.84%	0.00%	0.30%	0.17%	0.31%	2.05%	1.94%	0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KCAI and PGJ in my portfolio?

KCAI and PGJ have a correlation of 0.42, 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 PGJ?

PGJ has higher volatility (6.95%) compared to KCAI (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KCAI dropped -25.48% vs PGJ's -78.37%.

Which ETF is better, KCAI or PGJ?

On 1-year performance, KCAI leads with 55.20% vs -10.62% for PGJ. On fees, PGJ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, KCAI has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KCAI or PGJ?

Over the 1-year period, KCAI has performed better with a 55.20% return vs -10.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KCAI or PGJ?

PGJ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KCAI.

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

KCAI has the higher dividend yield at 32.90%, compared with 3.73% for PGJ.

What is the main difference between KCAI and PGJ?

KCAI tracks Qi China Alpha Index, while PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index. They also come from different issuers: KraneShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KCAI and 0.70% for PGJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KCAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.11 vs -0.54), 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.