KTEC vs. KMLM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

KTEC (KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF) and KMLM (KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KTEC is a China Equities fund tracking the Hang Seng Tech Index, while KMLM is a Systematic Trend fund tracking the KFA MLM Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KTEC returned -12.60%/yr vs 4.34%/yr for KMLM. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. KTEC charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for KMLM.

Performance

KTEC vs. KMLM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC) and KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF (KMLM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KTEC achieves a -21.33% return, which is significantly lower than KMLM's 6.97% return.

KTEC

• 1D: -2.22%
• 1M: -7.85%
• YTD: -21.33%
• 6M: -21.98%
• 1Y: -19.03%
• 3Y*: 3.17%
• 5Y*: -12.60%
• 10Y*: —

KMLM

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: -4.98%
• YTD: 6.97%
• 6M: 6.95%
• 1Y: 12.95%
• 3Y*: -0.70%
• 5Y*: 4.34%
• 10Y*: —

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

KTEC vs. KMLM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
KTEC KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF	-21.33%	21.01%	16.13%	-10.41%	-26.12%	-29.98%
KMLM KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF	6.97%	-2.98%	-1.69%	-5.66%	30.61%	-4.85%

Correlation

The correlation between KTEC and KMLM is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.04
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.04
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2021	-0.09

The correlation between KTEC and KMLM shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (5 years) to 0.04 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

KTEC vs. KMLM — Risk / Return Rank

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

KTEC

KTEC Risk / Return Rank: 4
KTEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
KTEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
KTEC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
KTEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
KTEC Martin Ratio Rank: 4

KMLM

KMLM Risk / Return Rank: 33
KMLM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
KMLM Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
KMLM Omega Ratio Rank: 32
KMLM Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
KMLM Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

KTEC vs. KMLM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC) and KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF (KMLM). 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.

	KTEC	KMLM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.69	1.16	-1.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.88	1.61	-2.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.90	1.21	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	1.62	-2.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.08	5.47	-6.55

KTEC vs. KMLM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KTEC Sharpe Ratio is -0.69, which is lower than the KMLM Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KTEC and KMLM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

KTEC vs. KMLM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KTEC drawdown since its inception was -66.90%, which is greater than KMLM's maximum drawdown of -27.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KTEC and KMLM.

Drawdown Indicators

	KTEC	KMLM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.90%	-27.47%	-39.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.76%	-8.04%	-26.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.76%	-22.28%	-12.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-66.90%	-27.47%	-39.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.35%	-16.59%	-33.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.97%	-12.76%	-31.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.67%	2.37%	+15.30%

Volatility

KTEC vs. KMLM - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC) has a higher volatility of 8.17% compared to KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF (KMLM) at 2.95%. This indicates that KTEC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KMLM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KTEC	KMLM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.17%	2.95%	+5.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.90%	9.82%	+11.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.88%	11.39%	+16.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.21%	14.57%	+28.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.05%	14.69%	+28.36%

KTEC vs. KMLM - Expense Ratio Comparison

KTEC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than KMLM's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

KTEC vs. KMLM - Dividend Comparison

KTEC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.26%, less than KMLM's 4.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
KMLM KFA Mount Lucas Index Strategy ETF	4.70%	5.02%	0.82%	0.00%	13.22%	6.94%
KTEC KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF	4.26%	3.36%	0.27%	0.81%	0.16%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KTEC and KMLM in my portfolio?

KTEC and KMLM have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KTEC or KMLM?

KTEC has higher volatility (8.17%) compared to KMLM (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KTEC dropped -66.90% vs KMLM's -27.47%.

Which ETF is better, KTEC or KMLM?

On 5-year performance, KMLM leads with 4.34% vs -12.60% for KTEC. On fees, KTEC is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, KMLM has been the lower-risk option at 2.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KTEC or KMLM?

Over the 5-year period, KMLM has performed better with a 4.34% return vs -12.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KTEC or KMLM?

KTEC is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for KMLM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KTEC or KMLM?

KMLM has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 4.26% for KTEC.

What is the main difference between KTEC and KMLM?

KTEC is categorized as China Equities, while KMLM is Systematic Trend. KTEC tracks Hang Seng Tech Index, while KMLM tracks KFA MLM Index. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for KTEC and 0.90% for KMLM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KMLM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.16 vs -0.69), 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.