KLIP vs. APRW
KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) and APRW (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Over the past 3 years, KLIP returned 9.17%/yr vs 10.34%/yr for APRW. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KLIP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for APRW.
Performance
KLIP vs. APRW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KLIP achieves a -5.93% return, which is significantly lower than APRW's 6.37% return.
KLIP
- 1D
- 2.16%
- 1M
- -0.26%
- YTD
- -5.93%
- 6M
- -8.29%
- 1Y
- 3.54%
- 3Y*
- 9.17%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
APRW
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 1.20%
- YTD
- 6.37%
- 6M
- 7.18%
- 1Y
- 12.77%
- 3Y*
- 10.34%
- 5Y*
- 7.20%
- 10Y*
- —
KLIP vs. APRW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF | -5.93% | 16.92% | 3.37% | 10.67% |
APRW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF | 6.37% | 6.18% | 11.25% | 10.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between KLIP and APRW is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 13, 2023 | 0.38 |
KLIP vs. APRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KLIP
APRW
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Technology
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Industrials
-
Utilities
-
Communication Services
KLIP
APRW
Consumer Cyclical
KLIP
APRW
Healthcare
KLIP
APRW
Real Estate
KLIP
APRW
Consumer Defensive
KLIP
APRW
Technology
KLIP
APRW
Financial Services
KLIP
APRW
Basic Materials
KLIP
-
APRW
Energy
KLIP
-
APRW
Industrials
KLIP
-
APRW
Utilities
KLIP
-
APRW
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. APRW — Risk / Return Rank
KLIP
APRW
KLIP vs. APRW - 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 AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW). 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.
| KLIP | APRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.23 | 4.91 | -4.68 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.42 | 9.02 | -8.60 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 2.26 | -1.20 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.25 | 17.37 | -17.12 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.61 | 89.07 | -88.46 |
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
| KLIP | APRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.23 | 4.91 | -4.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.08 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 1.16 | -0.76 |
Drawdowns
KLIP vs. APRW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KLIP drawdown since its inception was -18.61%, which is greater than APRW's maximum drawdown of -9.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KLIP and APRW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KLIP | APRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.61% | -9.61% | -9.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.97% | -0.75% | -15.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.61% | -9.61% | -9.00% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -9.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.33% | 0.00% | -11.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.78% | -1.12% | -2.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.65% | 0.15% | +6.50% |
Volatility
KLIP vs. APRW - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) has a higher volatility of 5.30% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW) at 0.63%. This indicates that KLIP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APRW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KLIP | APRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.30% | 0.63% | +4.67% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.74% | 1.84% | +10.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.70% | 2.62% | +13.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.10% | 6.72% | +11.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.10% | 6.41% | +11.69% |
KLIP vs. APRW - Expense Ratio Comparison
KLIP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than APRW's 0.74% expense ratio.
Dividends
KLIP vs. APRW - Dividend Comparison
KLIP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 27.57%, while APRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APRW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.67% |
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF | 27.57% | 25.14% | 54.26% | 61.22% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KLIP and APRW have a correlation of 0.39, 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 APRW (0.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KLIP dropped -18.61% vs APRW's -9.61%.
On 3-year performance, APRW leads with 10.34% vs 9.17% for KLIP. On fees, APRW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, APRW has been the lower-risk option at 0.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, APRW has performed better with a 10.34% return vs 9.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
APRW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.
KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 27.57%, compared with 0.00% for APRW.
They also come from different issuers: CICC and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for KLIP and 0.74% for APRW.
APRW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.91 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.
Find the right allocation for KLIP and APRW
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