KEMX vs. KURE
KEMX (KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF) and KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KEMX is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while KURE is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KEMX returned 13.52%/yr vs -16.33%/yr for KURE. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KEMX charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for KURE.
Performance
KEMX vs. KURE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KEMX achieves a 42.26% return, which is significantly higher than KURE's -10.68% return.
KEMX
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- 13.02%
- YTD
- 42.26%
- 6M
- 47.92%
- 1Y
- 79.97%
- 3Y*
- 29.66%
- 5Y*
- 13.52%
- 10Y*
- —
KURE
- 1D
- -2.87%
- 1M
- -12.23%
- YTD
- -10.68%
- 6M
- -15.54%
- 1Y
- -5.05%
- 3Y*
- -6.04%
- 5Y*
- -16.33%
- 10Y*
- —
KEMX vs. KURE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF | 42.26% | 38.28% | 0.36% | 20.57% | -19.35% | 10.55% | 12.84% | 7.93% |
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | -10.68% | 24.87% | -17.83% | -17.70% | -25.43% | -16.01% | 68.97% | -1.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between KEMX and KURE is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2019 | 0.38 |
KEMX vs. KURE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KEMX
KURE
Technology
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Energy
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
-
Healthcare
Real Estate
-
Technology
KEMX
KURE
-
Financial Services
KEMX
KURE
-
Industrials
KEMX
KURE
-
Basic Materials
KEMX
KURE
-
Consumer Cyclical
KEMX
KURE
-
Energy
KEMX
KURE
-
Communication Services
KEMX
KURE
-
Consumer Defensive
KEMX
KURE
Utilities
KEMX
KURE
-
Healthcare
KEMX
KURE
Real Estate
KEMX
KURE
-
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
KEMX vs. KURE — Risk / Return Rank
KEMX
KURE
KEMX vs. KURE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) and KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE). 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.
| KEMX | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.59 | -0.19 | +3.78 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.31 | -0.09 | +4.40 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.62 | 0.99 | +0.63 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.24 | -0.18 | +5.42 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.86 | -0.39 | +21.25 |
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
| KEMX | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.59 | -0.19 | +3.78 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 | -0.52 | +1.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.68 | -0.11 | +0.79 |
Drawdowns
KEMX vs. KURE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KEMX drawdown since its inception was -38.80%, smaller than the maximum KURE drawdown of -68.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KEMX and KURE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KEMX | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.80% | -68.53% | +29.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.36% | -27.53% | +12.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.62% | -34.05% | +14.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.85% | -67.94% | +37.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.31% | -61.11% | +59.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.86% | -38.07% | +29.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.85% | 13.13% | -9.28% |
Volatility
KEMX vs. KURE - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) has a higher volatility of 9.86% compared to KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) at 7.23%. This indicates that KEMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KURE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KEMX | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.86% | 7.23% | +2.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.90% | 17.67% | +2.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.40% | 26.49% | -4.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.21% | 31.86% | -13.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.94% | 32.39% | -11.45% |
KEMX vs. KURE - Expense Ratio Comparison
KEMX has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than KURE's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
KEMX vs. KURE - Dividend Comparison
KEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, less than KURE's 4.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF | 2.31% | 3.28% | 3.39% | 2.00% | 4.10% | 4.79% | 1.69% | 2.77% | 0.00% |
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | 4.70% | 4.19% | 1.29% | 0.65% | 0.05% | 14.12% | 0.00% | 0.25% | 0.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KEMX and KURE have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KEMX has higher volatility (9.86%) compared to KURE (7.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KEMX dropped -38.80% vs KURE's -68.53%.
On 5-year performance, KEMX leads with 13.52% vs -16.33% for KURE. On fees, KEMX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, KURE has been the lower-risk option at 7.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, KEMX has performed better with a 13.52% return vs -16.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KEMX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for KURE.
KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 2.31% for KEMX.
KEMX is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while KURE is China Equities. KEMX tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for KEMX and 0.65% for KURE.
KEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.59 vs -0.19), 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 KEMX and KURE
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