PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
KLIP vs. APRP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

KLIP vs. APRP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KLIP achieves a -5.93% return, which is significantly lower than APRP's 9.54% return.


KLIP

1D
2.16%
1M
-0.26%
YTD
-5.93%
6M
-8.29%
1Y
3.54%
3Y*
9.17%
5Y*
10Y*

APRP

1D
0.03%
1M
1.84%
YTD
9.54%
6M
10.64%
1Y
18.46%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KLIP vs. APRP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between KLIP and APRP is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024

0.40

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

KLIP vs. APRP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

KLIP
KLIP Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
KLIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KLIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
KLIP Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
KLIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
KLIP Martin Ratio Rank: 1111
Martin Ratio Rank

APRP
APRP Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
APRP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
APRP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
APRP Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
APRP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
APRP Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

KLIP vs. APRP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP). 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.


KLIPAPRPDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.23

4.29

-4.06

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.42

7.33

-6.92

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

2.08

-1.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.25

17.17

-16.92

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

0.61

76.71

-76.10

KLIP vs. APRP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KLIP Sharpe Ratio is 0.23, which is lower than the APRP Sharpe Ratio of 4.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KLIP and APRP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


KLIPAPRPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

4.29

-4.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

1.37

-0.98

Drawdowns

KLIP vs. APRP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KLIP drawdown since its inception was -18.61%, which is greater than APRP's maximum drawdown of -13.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KLIP and APRP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


KLIPAPRPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.61%

-13.66%

-4.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.97%

-1.09%

-14.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.61%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.33%

0.00%

-11.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.78%

-1.23%

-2.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.65%

0.24%

+6.41%

Volatility

KLIP vs. APRP - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) has a higher volatility of 5.30% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP) at 1.17%. This indicates that KLIP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APRP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


KLIPAPRPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.30%

1.17%

+4.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.74%

3.36%

+9.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.70%

4.33%

+11.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.10%

9.50%

+8.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.10%

9.50%

+8.60%

KLIP vs. APRP - Expense Ratio Comparison

KLIP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than APRP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

KLIP vs. APRP - Dividend Comparison

KLIP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 27.57%, while APRP has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
APRP
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
KLIP
KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF
27.57%25.14%54.26%61.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


KLIP and APRP have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KLIP has higher volatility (5.30%) compared to APRP (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KLIP dropped -18.61% vs APRP's -13.66%.

On 1-year performance, APRP leads with 18.46% vs 3.54% for KLIP. On fees, APRP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, APRP has been the lower-risk option at 1.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, APRP has performed better with a 18.46% return vs 3.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

APRP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.

KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 27.57%, compared with 0.00% for APRP.

They also come from different issuers: CICC and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for KLIP and 0.50% for APRP.

APRP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.29 vs 0.23), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for KLIP and APRP

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