KLIP vs. KRBN

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) and KRBN (KraneShares Global Carbon ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KLIP is a Options Trading fund managed by CICC, while KRBN is a Commodities fund tracking the IHS Markit Global Carbon Index. Over the past 3 years, KLIP returned 9.17%/yr vs 3.50%/yr for KRBN. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KLIP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KRBN.

Performance

KLIP vs. KRBN - 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 KraneShares Global Carbon ETF (KRBN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with KLIP having a -5.93% return and KRBN slightly higher at -5.82%.

KLIP

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

KRBN

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 5.47%
• YTD: -5.82%
• 6M: -0.67%
• 1Y: 16.58%
• 3Y*: 3.50%
• 5Y*: 7.53%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KLIP vs. KRBN - 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%
KRBN KraneShares Global Carbon ETF	-5.82%	23.11%	-13.56%	9.14%

Correlation

The correlation between KLIP and KRBN is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 13, 2023	0.11

KLIP vs. KRBN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KLIP	KRBN
Communication Services	40.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	38.4%	-
Healthcare	6.9%	-
Real Estate	4.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	-
Technology	3.6%	-
Financial Services	2.0%	59.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Energy	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

KLIP vs. KRBN — Risk / Return Rank

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

KLIP

KLIP Risk / Return Rank: 12
KLIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
KLIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
KLIP Omega Ratio Rank: 12
KLIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
KLIP Martin Ratio Rank: 11

KRBN

KRBN Risk / Return Rank: 22
KRBN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
KRBN Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
KRBN Omega Ratio Rank: 25
KRBN Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
KRBN Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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. KRBN - 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 KraneShares Global Carbon ETF (KRBN). 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	KRBN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.23	0.88	-0.65
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.42	1.23	-0.81
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.17	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.25	0.73	-0.48
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.61	1.91	-1.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KLIP vs. KRBN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KLIP Sharpe Ratio is 0.23, which is lower than the KRBN Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KLIP and KRBN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KLIP	KRBN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23	0.88	-0.65
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.27	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.39	0.57	-0.18

Drawdowns

KLIP vs. KRBN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KLIP drawdown since its inception was -18.61%, smaller than the maximum KRBN drawdown of -36.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KLIP and KRBN.

Drawdown Indicators

	KLIP	KRBN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.61%	-36.42%	+17.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.97%	-24.98%	+9.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.61%	-27.34%	+8.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.42%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.33%	-14.15%	+2.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.78%	-16.14%	+12.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.65%	9.53%	-2.88%

Volatility

KLIP vs. KRBN - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) and KraneShares Global Carbon ETF (KRBN) have volatilities of 5.30% and 5.15%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KLIP	KRBN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.30%	5.15%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.74%	16.63%	-3.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.70%	18.97%	-3.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.10%	28.11%	-10.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.10%	28.64%	-10.54%

KLIP vs. KRBN - Expense Ratio Comparison

KLIP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than KRBN's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

KLIP vs. KRBN - Dividend Comparison

KLIP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 27.57%, more than KRBN's 2.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	27.57%	25.14%	54.26%	61.22%	0.00%	0.00%
KRBN KraneShares Global Carbon ETF	2.02%	1.90%	7.10%	7.60%	22.91%	0.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KLIP and KRBN in my portfolio?

KLIP and KRBN have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KLIP or KRBN?

KLIP has higher volatility (5.30%) compared to KRBN (5.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KLIP dropped -18.61% vs KRBN's -36.42%.

Which ETF is better, KLIP or KRBN?

On 3-year performance, KLIP leads with 9.17% vs 3.50% for KRBN. On fees, KRBN is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, KRBN has been the lower-risk option at 5.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KLIP or KRBN?

Over the 3-year period, KLIP has performed better with a 9.17% return vs 3.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KLIP or KRBN?

KRBN is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KLIP or KRBN?

KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 27.57%, compared with 2.02% for KRBN.

What is the main difference between KLIP and KRBN?

KLIP is categorized as Options Trading, while KRBN is Commodities. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for KLIP and 0.79% for KRBN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KRBN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.88 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.