KURE vs. AIA
KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) and AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KURE is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while AIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KURE returned -16.64%/yr vs 11.23%/yr for AIA. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KURE charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AIA.
Performance
KURE vs. AIA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KURE achieves a -11.03% return, which is significantly lower than AIA's 44.58% return.
KURE
- 1D
- 0.40%
- 1M
- -5.31%
- YTD
- -11.03%
- 6M
- -13.96%
- 1Y
- -8.07%
- 3Y*
- -3.44%
- 5Y*
- -16.64%
- 10Y*
- —
AIA
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- 0.11%
- YTD
- 44.58%
- 6M
- 46.86%
- 1Y
- 76.36%
- 3Y*
- 36.48%
- 5Y*
- 11.23%
- 10Y*
- 15.19%
KURE vs. AIA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | -11.03% | 24.87% | -17.83% | -17.70% | -25.43% | -16.01% | 68.97% | 34.30% | -30.01% |
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF | 44.58% | 47.79% | 20.26% | 4.32% | -24.08% | -10.91% | 33.73% | 22.21% | -21.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between KURE and AIA is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2018 | 0.54 |
The correlation between KURE and AIA shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (1 year) to 0.54 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
KURE vs. AIA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KURE
AIA
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
KURE
AIA
Consumer Defensive
KURE
AIA
-
Basic Materials
KURE
-
AIA
-
Communication Services
KURE
-
AIA
Consumer Cyclical
KURE
-
AIA
Energy
KURE
-
AIA
Financial Services
KURE
-
AIA
Industrials
KURE
-
AIA
Real Estate
KURE
-
AIA
Technology
KURE
-
AIA
Utilities
KURE
-
AIA
-
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
KURE vs. AIA — Risk / Return Rank
KURE
AIA
KURE vs. AIA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA). 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.
| KURE | AIA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 1.46 | -0.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.26 | 5.43 | -5.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.54 | 18.38 | -18.93 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
KURE vs. AIA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, which is greater than AIA's maximum drawdown of -60.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and AIA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KURE | AIA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -68.53% | -60.89% | -7.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.88% | -14.15% | -16.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.05% | -21.64% | -12.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -67.94% | -50.11% | -17.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -54.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -61.26% | -6.47% | -54.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -38.22% | -16.64% | -21.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.85% | 4.17% | +10.68% |
Volatility
KURE vs. AIA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) is 7.54%, while iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a volatility of 16.19%. This indicates that KURE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AIA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KURE | AIA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.54% | 16.19% | -8.65% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.04% | 26.31% | -8.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.09% | 29.37% | -3.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.85% | 26.33% | +5.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.32% | 23.92% | +8.40% |
KURE vs. AIA - Expense Ratio Comparison
KURE has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than AIA's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
KURE vs. AIA - Dividend Comparison
KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.71%, more than AIA's 1.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF | 1.52% | 2.50% | 2.78% | 2.07% | 2.59% | 1.54% | 1.11% | 2.24% | 2.49% | 1.45% | 2.29% | 2.88% |
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | 4.71% | 4.19% | 1.29% | 0.65% | 0.05% | 14.12% | 0.00% | 0.25% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KURE and AIA have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AIA has higher volatility (16.19%) compared to KURE (7.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs AIA's -60.89%.
On 5-year performance, AIA leads with 11.23% vs -16.64% for KURE. On fees, AIA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, KURE has been the lower-risk option at 7.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, AIA has performed better with a 11.23% return vs -16.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AIA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for KURE.
KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.71%, compared with 1.52% for AIA.
KURE is categorized as China Equities, while AIA is Asia Pacific Equities. KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for KURE and 0.50% for AIA.
AIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs -0.31), 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 KURE and AIA
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