KURE vs. CNXT

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) and CNXT (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF) are both China Equities funds - KURE tracks the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index while CNXT tracks the SME-ChiNext 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KURE returned -12.93%/yr vs 1.49%/yr for CNXT. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.65% expense ratio.

Performance

KURE vs. CNXT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KURE achieves a 4.58% return, which is significantly lower than CNXT's 18.94% return.

KURE

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: 19.80%
• 6M: -6.46%
• YTD: 4.58%
• 1Y: 2.10%
• 3Y*: 1.22%
• 5Y*: -12.93%
• 10Y*: —

CNXT

• 1D: -4.09%
• 1M: -10.81%
• 6M: 10.95%
• YTD: 18.94%
• 1Y: 76.32%
• 3Y*: 22.42%
• 5Y*: 1.49%
• 10Y*: 5.36%

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

KURE vs. CNXT - 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%
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	18.94%	59.31%	12.42%	-21.47%	-35.58%	8.78%	63.30%	42.66%	-40.65%

Correlation

The correlation between KURE and CNXT 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	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2018	0.67

Over the past year, the correlation between KURE and CNXT has dropped to 0.35 - well below their long-term average of 0.67, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

KURE vs. CNXT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KURE	CNXT
Healthcare	99.3%	3.9%
Consumer Defensive	0.7%	1.4%
Basic Materials	-	4.9%
Communication Services	-	0.9%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.6%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	3.7%
Industrials	-	37.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	44.3%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

KURE vs. CNXT — Risk / Return Rank

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

KURE

KURE Risk / Return Rank: 11
KURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
KURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
KURE Omega Ratio Rank: 11
KURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
KURE Martin Ratio Rank: 10

CNXT

CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 84
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 75
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

KURE vs. CNXT - 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 VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT). 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	CNXT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.08	2.21	-2.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.31	2.83	-2.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.35	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.07	4.63	-4.56
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.13	15.98	-15.84

KURE vs. CNXT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KURE Sharpe Ratio is 0.08, which is lower than the CNXT Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KURE and CNXT, 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

KURE vs. CNXT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, roughly equal to the maximum CNXT drawdown of -68.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and CNXT.

Drawdown Indicators

	KURE	CNXT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.53%	-68.98%	+0.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.88%	-16.58%	-14.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.05%	-48.60%	+14.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-66.18%	-61.21%	-4.97%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-54.46%	-16.58%	-37.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-38.35%	-42.58%	+4.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.66%	4.79%	+10.87%

Volatility

KURE vs. CNXT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) is 10.98%, while VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) has a volatility of 15.45%. This indicates that KURE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNXT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KURE	CNXT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.98%	15.45%	-4.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.06%	25.57%	-5.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.98%	34.75%	-6.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.94%	35.92%	-3.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.43%	32.02%	+0.41%

KURE vs. CNXT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both KURE and CNXT have an expense ratio of 0.65%.

Dividends

KURE vs. CNXT - Dividend Comparison

KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.01%, more than CNXT's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNXT VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF	0.15%	0.18%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	9.22%	0.01%	0.45%	0.00%	0.19%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KURE and CNXT in my portfolio?

KURE and CNXT 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.

Which is riskier, KURE or CNXT?

CNXT has higher volatility (15.45%) compared to KURE (10.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs CNXT's -68.98%.

Which ETF is better, KURE or CNXT?

On 5-year performance, CNXT leads with 1.49% vs -12.93% for KURE. Both ETFs have the same 0.65% expense ratio. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, KURE or CNXT?

Over the 5-year period, CNXT has performed better with a 1.49% return vs -12.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KURE or CNXT?

KURE and CNXT have the same expense ratio: 0.65% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KURE or CNXT?

KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.01%, compared with 0.15% for CNXT.

What is the main difference between KURE and CNXT?

KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while CNXT tracks SME-ChiNext 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and VanEck.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNXT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 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.