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 -12.93%/yr vs 10.80%/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 4.58% return, which is significantly lower than AIA's 36.49% return.
KURE
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 19.80%
- 6M
- -6.46%
- YTD
- 4.58%
- 1Y
- 2.10%
- 3Y*
- 1.22%
- 5Y*
- -12.93%
- 10Y*
- —
AIA
- 1D
- -2.81%
- 1M
- -6.64%
- 6M
- 25.90%
- YTD
- 36.49%
- 1Y
- 63.00%
- 3Y*
- 32.07%
- 5Y*
- 10.80%
- 10Y*
- 13.33%
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 | 4.58% | 24.87% | -17.83% | -17.70% | -25.43% | -16.01% | 68.97% | 34.30% | -30.01% |
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF | 36.49% | 47.79% | 20.26% | 4.32% | -24.08% | -10.91% | 33.73% | 22.21% | -21.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between KURE and AIA is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 |
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 0.34 (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 | -1.99 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 1.36 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.07 | 4.48 | -4.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.13 | 13.55 | -13.42 |
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 | -66.18% | -48.18% | -18.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -54.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -54.46% | -11.70% | -42.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -38.35% | -16.62% | -21.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.66% | 4.66% | +11.00% |
Volatility
KURE vs. AIA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) is 10.98%, while iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a volatility of 13.25%. 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 | 10.98% | 13.25% | -2.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.06% | 27.44% | -7.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.98% | 30.65% | -2.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.94% | 26.58% | +5.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.43% | 24.05% | +8.38% |
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 4.01%, more than AIA's 1.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF | 1.61% | 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 | 4.01% | 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 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AIA has higher volatility (13.25%) compared to KURE (10.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs AIA's -60.89%.
On 5-year performance, AIA leads with 10.80% vs -12.93% for KURE. On fees, AIA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, KURE has been the lower-risk option at 10.98%. 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 10.80% return vs -12.93%. 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 4.01%, compared with 1.61% 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 (2.07 vs 0.08), 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