KURE vs. EMLP
KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) and EMLP (First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - KURE is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while EMLP is a MLPs fund actively managed by First Trust. KURE is passively managed, while EMLP is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, KURE returned -16.33%/yr vs 15.47%/yr for EMLP. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KURE charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for EMLP.
Performance
KURE vs. EMLP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KURE achieves a -10.68% return, which is significantly lower than EMLP's 14.62% return.
KURE
- 1D
- -2.87%
- 1M
- -12.23%
- YTD
- -10.68%
- 6M
- -15.54%
- 1Y
- -5.05%
- 3Y*
- -6.04%
- 5Y*
- -16.33%
- 10Y*
- —
EMLP
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- -3.08%
- YTD
- 14.62%
- 6M
- 13.20%
- 1Y
- 18.77%
- 3Y*
- 21.22%
- 5Y*
- 15.47%
- 10Y*
- 10.24%
KURE vs. EMLP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | -10.68% | 24.87% | -17.83% | -17.70% | -25.43% | -16.01% | 68.97% | 34.30% | -30.07% |
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund | 14.62% | 9.67% | 33.39% | 8.05% | 10.39% | 23.20% | -13.36% | 23.40% | -8.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between KURE and EMLP is 0.05, 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 | 0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2018 | 0.17 |
The correlation between KURE and EMLP shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (1 year) to 0.17 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
KURE vs. EMLP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KURE
EMLP
Healthcare
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
Healthcare
KURE
EMLP
-
Consumer Defensive
KURE
EMLP
-
Basic Materials
KURE
-
EMLP
Communication Services
KURE
-
EMLP
-
Consumer Cyclical
KURE
-
EMLP
-
Energy
KURE
-
EMLP
Financial Services
KURE
-
EMLP
-
Industrials
KURE
-
EMLP
Real Estate
KURE
-
EMLP
-
Technology
KURE
-
EMLP
-
Utilities
KURE
-
EMLP
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. EMLP — Risk / Return Rank
KURE
EMLP
KURE vs. EMLP - 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 First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP). 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.
| KURE | EMLP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 1.32 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 3.82 | -4.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.39 | 12.42 | -12.80 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| KURE | EMLP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 | 1.89 | -2.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.52 | 1.07 | -1.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.58 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.11 | 0.57 | -0.67 |
Drawdowns
KURE vs. EMLP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, which is greater than EMLP's maximum drawdown of -43.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and EMLP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KURE | EMLP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -68.53% | -43.61% | -24.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.53% | -4.94% | -22.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.05% | -11.47% | -22.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -67.94% | -14.59% | -53.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -43.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -61.11% | -3.62% | -57.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -38.07% | -5.76% | -32.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.13% | 1.52% | +11.61% |
Volatility
KURE vs. EMLP - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) has a higher volatility of 7.23% compared to First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) at 4.10%. This indicates that KURE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMLP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KURE | EMLP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.23% | 4.10% | +3.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.67% | 7.87% | +9.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.49% | 9.97% | +16.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.86% | 14.53% | +17.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.39% | 17.69% | +14.70% |
KURE vs. EMLP - Expense Ratio Comparison
KURE has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLP's 0.96% expense ratio.
Dividends
KURE vs. EMLP - Dividend Comparison
KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, more than EMLP's 2.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund | 2.79% | 3.18% | 3.19% | 3.92% | 3.15% | 3.29% | 4.70% | 3.71% | 4.71% | 3.80% | 3.62% | 4.63% |
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | 4.70% | 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 EMLP have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KURE has higher volatility (7.23%) compared to EMLP (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs EMLP's -43.61%.
On 5-year performance, EMLP leads with 15.47% vs -16.33% for KURE. On fees, KURE is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, EMLP has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, EMLP has performed better with a 15.47% return vs -16.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KURE is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for EMLP.
KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 2.79% for EMLP.
KURE is categorized as China Equities, while EMLP is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: CICC and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for KURE and 0.96% for EMLP.
EMLP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs -0.19), 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 EMLP
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