KGRN vs. CQQQ
KGRN (KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF) and CQQQ (Invesco China Technology ETF) are both China Equities funds - KGRN tracks the MSCI China IMI Environment 10/40 Index while CQQQ tracks the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KGRN returned -12.17%/yr vs -7.79%/yr for CQQQ. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KGRN charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for CQQQ.
Performance
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KGRN achieves a -13.26% return, which is significantly lower than CQQQ's 5.17% return.
KGRN
- 1D
- -1.22%
- 1M
- -13.67%
- YTD
- -13.26%
- 6M
- -13.39%
- 1Y
- -10.47%
- 3Y*
- -3.05%
- 5Y*
- -12.17%
- 10Y*
- —
CQQQ
- 1D
- 1.24%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 5.17%
- 6M
- 5.38%
- 1Y
- 27.33%
- 3Y*
- 12.35%
- 5Y*
- -7.79%
- 10Y*
- 6.28%
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KGRN KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF | -13.26% | 21.45% | -1.11% | -14.75% | -40.45% | 5.91% | 138.49% | 12.12% | -29.32% | -0.37% |
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 5.17% | 34.96% | 9.84% | -16.71% | -30.09% | -24.54% | 57.33% | 33.57% | -34.77% | 4.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between KGRN and CQQQ is 0.64, 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 | 0.64 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2017 | 0.72 |
The correlation between KGRN and CQQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (1 year) to 0.77 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KGRN
CQQQ
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Utilities
-
Technology
Energy
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
KGRN
CQQQ
Industrials
KGRN
CQQQ
Utilities
KGRN
CQQQ
-
Technology
KGRN
CQQQ
Energy
KGRN
CQQQ
-
Basic Materials
KGRN
-
CQQQ
Communication Services
KGRN
-
CQQQ
Consumer Defensive
KGRN
-
CQQQ
-
Financial Services
KGRN
-
CQQQ
Healthcare
KGRN
-
CQQQ
-
Real Estate
KGRN
-
CQQQ
-
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
KGRN vs. CQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
KGRN
CQQQ
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF (KGRN) and Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ). 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.
| KGRN | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.91 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.17 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.38 | 1.12 | -1.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.92 | 2.56 | -3.48 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KGRN drawdown since its inception was -66.24%, smaller than the maximum CQQQ drawdown of -73.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KGRN and CQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KGRN | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -66.24% | -73.99% | +7.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.39% | -24.41% | -2.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -42.19% | -35.93% | -6.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -63.60% | -66.96% | +3.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -73.99% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -54.58% | -47.83% | -6.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -34.05% | -28.36% | -5.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.44% | 10.71% | +0.73% |
Volatility
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF (KGRN) is 6.77%, while Invesco China Technology ETF (CQQQ) has a volatility of 10.33%. This indicates that KGRN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KGRN | CQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.77% | 10.33% | -3.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.09% | 23.29% | -7.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.48% | 30.50% | -7.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.67% | 38.15% | -3.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.82% | 33.37% | -0.55% |
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
KGRN has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CQQQ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
KGRN vs. CQQQ - Dividend Comparison
KGRN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, less than CQQQ's 2.06% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CQQQ Invesco China Technology ETF | 2.06% | 2.17% | 0.28% | 0.55% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.01% | 0.43% | 1.41% | 1.69% | 1.77% |
KGRN KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF | 0.98% | 0.85% | 1.49% | 0.74% | 1.98% | 0.41% | 0.01% | 5.88% | 2.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KGRN and CQQQ have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CQQQ has higher volatility (10.33%) compared to KGRN (6.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KGRN dropped -66.24% vs CQQQ's -73.99%.
On 5-year performance, CQQQ leads with -7.79% vs -12.17% for KGRN. On fees, CQQQ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, KGRN has been the lower-risk option at 6.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, CQQQ has performed better with a -7.79% return vs -12.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CQQQ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KGRN.
CQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.06%, compared with 0.98% for KGRN.
KGRN tracks MSCI China IMI Environment 10/40 Index, while CQQQ tracks FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KGRN and 0.70% for CQQQ.
CQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.90 vs -0.45), 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 KGRN and CQQQ
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