PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
KURE vs. KBA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

KURE vs. KBA - 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 KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KURE achieves a -10.68% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 12.62% return.


KURE

1D
-2.87%
1M
-12.23%
YTD
-10.68%
6M
-15.54%
1Y
-5.05%
3Y*
-6.04%
5Y*
-16.33%
10Y*

KBA

1D
0.14%
1M
4.32%
YTD
12.62%
6M
16.80%
1Y
49.12%
3Y*
16.22%
5Y*
6.46%
10Y*
10.15%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KURE vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
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%
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
12.62%33.88%15.73%-16.77%-3.49%3.17%41.62%35.44%-32.92%

Correlation

The correlation between KURE and KBA is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.47

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.62

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2018

0.68

Over the past year, the correlation between KURE and KBA has dropped to 0.47 - well below their long-term average of 0.68, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

KURE vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
KURE
KBA

Healthcare

99.3%
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

0.7%
6.8%

Basic Materials

-

10.9%

Communication Services

-

1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

-

5.7%

Energy

-

3.2%

Financial Services

-

18.5%

Industrials

-

15.8%

Real Estate

-

0.6%

Technology

-

29.8%

Utilities

-

3.2%

Healthcare

KURE
99.3%
KBA
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

KURE
0.7%
KBA
6.8%

Basic Materials

KURE

-

KBA
10.9%

Communication Services

KURE

-

KBA
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

KURE

-

KBA
5.7%

Energy

KURE

-

KBA
3.2%

Financial Services

KURE

-

KBA
18.5%

Industrials

KURE

-

KBA
15.8%

Real Estate

KURE

-

KBA
0.6%

Technology

KURE

-

KBA
29.8%

Utilities

KURE

-

KBA
3.2%

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. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

KURE
KURE Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
KURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
KURE Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
KURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
KURE Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank

KBA
KBA Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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. KBA - 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 KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). 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.


KUREKBADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.99

1.50

-0.51

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.18

6.45

-6.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.39

17.29

-17.68

KURE vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KURE Sharpe Ratio is -0.19, which is lower than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KURE and KBA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


KUREKBADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.19

2.80

-2.99

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.52

0.24

-0.75

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.11

0.35

-0.46

Drawdowns

KURE vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, which is greater than KBA's maximum drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and KBA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


KUREKBADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-68.53%

-53.24%

-15.29%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-27.53%

-7.65%

-19.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.05%

-31.23%

-2.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-67.94%

-39.95%

-27.99%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-61.11%

-1.25%

-59.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-38.07%

-25.81%

-12.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.13%

2.85%

+10.28%

Volatility

KURE vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) have volatilities of 7.23% and 7.29%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


KUREKBADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.23%

7.29%

-0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.67%

12.44%

+5.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.49%

17.65%

+8.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.86%

27.20%

+4.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.39%

25.32%

+7.07%

KURE vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

KURE has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

KURE vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, more than KBA's 1.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
1.39%1.56%2.18%2.34%49.05%9.07%0.65%1.53%3.77%1.46%6.62%29.08%
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 KBA have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KBA has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to KURE (7.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs KBA's -53.24%.

On 5-year performance, KBA leads with 6.46% vs -16.33% for KURE. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, KBA has performed better with a 6.46% return vs -16.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for KURE.

KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 1.39% for KBA.

KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for KURE and 0.60% for KBA.

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for KURE and KBA

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