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

Performance

KURE vs. KEMQ - 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 Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ). 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 KEMQ's 6.99% return.


KURE

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

KEMQ

1D
-2.81%
1M
7.12%
YTD
6.99%
6M
8.35%
1Y
36.95%
3Y*
24.42%
5Y*
-2.87%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KURE vs. KEMQ - 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%
KEMQ
KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF
6.99%56.28%13.81%0.77%-38.09%-27.31%39.26%28.26%-31.36%

Correlation

The correlation between KURE and KEMQ is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.41

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

0.56

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

0.57

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

0.57

The correlation between KURE and KEMQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (1 year) to 0.57 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

KURE vs. KEMQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
KURE
KEMQ

Healthcare

99.3%
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

0.7%
0.4%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

-

33.0%

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

45.0%

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

KURE
99.3%
KEMQ
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

KURE
0.7%
KEMQ
0.4%

Basic Materials

KURE

-

KEMQ

-

Communication Services

KURE

-

KEMQ
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

KURE

-

KEMQ
33.0%

Energy

KURE

-

KEMQ

-

Financial Services

KURE

-

KEMQ

-

Industrials

KURE

-

KEMQ

-

Real Estate

KURE

-

KEMQ

-

Technology

KURE

-

KEMQ
45.0%

Utilities

KURE

-

KEMQ

-

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. KEMQ — 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

KEMQ
KEMQ Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
KEMQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KEMQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
KEMQ Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
KEMQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
KEMQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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. KEMQ - 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 Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ). 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.


KUREKEMQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.61

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.99

1.25

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.18

1.69

-1.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.39

4.52

-4.90

KURE vs. KEMQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KURE Sharpe Ratio is -0.19, which is lower than the KEMQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KURE and KEMQ, 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


KUREKEMQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.19

1.42

-1.61

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.52

-0.09

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.11

0.06

-0.17

Drawdowns

KURE vs. KEMQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, roughly equal to the maximum KEMQ drawdown of -70.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and KEMQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


KUREKEMQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-68.53%

-70.72%

+2.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-27.53%

-21.94%

-5.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.05%

-21.94%

-12.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-67.94%

-66.02%

-1.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-61.11%

-28.14%

-32.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-38.07%

-35.69%

-2.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.13%

8.20%

+4.93%

Volatility

KURE vs. KEMQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) is 7.23%, while KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ) has a volatility of 10.09%. This indicates that KURE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KEMQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


KUREKEMQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.23%

10.09%

-2.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.67%

20.87%

-3.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.49%

26.14%

+0.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.86%

31.88%

-0.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.39%

29.58%

+2.81%

KURE vs. KEMQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

KURE vs. KEMQ - Dividend Comparison

KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, less than KEMQ's 4.92% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
KEMQ
KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF
4.92%5.27%0.73%0.29%0.00%0.28%2.28%1.76%0.00%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions


KURE and KEMQ have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KEMQ has higher volatility (10.09%) compared to KURE (7.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs KEMQ's -70.72%.

On 5-year performance, KEMQ leads with -2.87% vs -16.33% for KURE. On fees, KEMQ is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KURE has been the lower-risk option at 7.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, KEMQ has performed better with a -2.87% return vs -16.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

KEMQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.92%, compared with 4.70% for KURE.

KURE is categorized as China Equities, while KEMQ is Emerging Markets Equities. KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while KEMQ tracks Solactive Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for KURE and 0.60% for KEMQ.

KEMQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.42 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 KEMQ

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