KGRN vs. ICLN
KGRN (KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF) and ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KGRN is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China IMI Environment 10/40 Index, while ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KGRN returned -12.17%/yr vs -1.22%/yr for ICLN. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KGRN charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ICLN.
Performance
KGRN vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KGRN achieves a -13.26% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's 23.83% return.
KGRN
- 1D
- -1.22%
- 1M
- -13.67%
- YTD
- -13.26%
- 6M
- -13.39%
- 1Y
- -10.47%
- 3Y*
- -3.05%
- 5Y*
- -12.17%
- 10Y*
- —
ICLN
- 1D
- -0.93%
- 1M
- -11.28%
- YTD
- 23.83%
- 6M
- 22.71%
- 1Y
- 58.94%
- 3Y*
- 6.01%
- 5Y*
- -1.22%
- 10Y*
- 11.35%
KGRN vs. ICLN - 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% |
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF | 23.83% | 47.05% | -25.72% | -20.41% | -5.43% | -24.18% | 141.82% | 44.36% | -9.03% | 2.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between KGRN and ICLN is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2017 | 0.52 |
The correlation between KGRN and ICLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.
KGRN vs. ICLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KGRN
ICLN
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Utilities
Technology
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
KGRN
ICLN
Industrials
KGRN
ICLN
Utilities
KGRN
ICLN
Technology
KGRN
ICLN
Energy
KGRN
ICLN
Basic Materials
KGRN
-
ICLN
Communication Services
KGRN
-
ICLN
-
Consumer Defensive
KGRN
-
ICLN
-
Financial Services
KGRN
-
ICLN
-
Healthcare
KGRN
-
ICLN
-
Real Estate
KGRN
-
ICLN
-
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. ICLN — Risk / Return Rank
KGRN
ICLN
KGRN vs. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF (KGRN) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). 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 | ICLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.33 | -0.39 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.38 | 3.62 | -4.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.92 | 12.13 | -13.05 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
KGRN vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KGRN drawdown since its inception was -66.24%, smaller than the maximum ICLN drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KGRN and ICLN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KGRN | ICLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -66.24% | -87.15% | +20.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.39% | -16.38% | -11.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -42.19% | -43.18% | +0.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -63.60% | -57.16% | -6.44% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -66.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -54.58% | -44.60% | -9.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -34.05% | -66.52% | +32.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.44% | 4.87% | +6.57% |
Volatility
KGRN vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI China Clean Technology Index ETF (KGRN) is 6.77%, while iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a volatility of 13.11%. This indicates that KGRN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KGRN | ICLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.77% | 13.11% | -6.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.09% | 23.13% | -7.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.48% | 28.51% | -5.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.67% | 27.69% | +6.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.82% | 27.32% | +5.50% |
KGRN vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
KGRN has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than ICLN's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
KGRN vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison
KGRN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, more than ICLN's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF | 0.91% | 1.63% | 1.85% | 1.59% | 0.89% | 1.18% | 0.34% | 1.36% | 2.77% | 2.49% | 3.88% | 2.36% |
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 ICLN have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ICLN has higher volatility (13.11%) compared to KGRN (6.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KGRN dropped -66.24% vs ICLN's -87.15%.
On 5-year performance, ICLN leads with -1.22% vs -12.17% for KGRN. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% 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, ICLN has performed better with a -1.22% return vs -12.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ICLN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KGRN.
KGRN has the higher dividend yield at 0.98%, compared with 0.91% for ICLN.
KGRN is categorized as China Equities, while ICLN is Alternative Energy Equities. KGRN tracks MSCI China IMI Environment 10/40 Index, while ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KGRN and 0.39% for ICLN.
ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 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 ICLN
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