KURE vs. KWEB
KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds - KURE tracks the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index while KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KURE returned -12.93%/yr vs -11.84%/yr for KWEB. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KURE charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.
Performance
KURE vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KURE achieves a 4.58% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -19.30% return.
KURE
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 19.80%
- 6M
- -6.46%
- YTD
- 4.58%
- 1Y
- 2.10%
- 3Y*
- 1.22%
- 5Y*
- -12.93%
- 10Y*
- —
KWEB
- 1D
- 1.78%
- 1M
- 6.18%
- 6M
- -24.46%
- YTD
- -19.30%
- 1Y
- -17.48%
- 3Y*
- 1.80%
- 5Y*
- -11.84%
- 10Y*
- 0.00%
KURE vs. KWEB - 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% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | -19.30% | 23.55% | 12.01% | -9.06% | -17.24% | -49.01% | 58.23% | 29.92% | -41.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between KURE and KWEB is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2018 | 0.61 |
The correlation between KURE and KWEB shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.61 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
KURE vs. KWEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KURE
KWEB
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
KURE
KWEB
Consumer Defensive
KURE
KWEB
Basic Materials
KURE
-
KWEB
-
Communication Services
KURE
-
KWEB
Consumer Cyclical
KURE
-
KWEB
Energy
KURE
-
KWEB
-
Financial Services
KURE
-
KWEB
Industrials
KURE
-
KWEB
Real Estate
KURE
-
KWEB
Technology
KURE
-
KWEB
Utilities
KURE
-
KWEB
-
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. KWEB — Risk / Return Rank
KURE
KWEB
KURE vs. KWEB - 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 CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). 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 | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 0.91 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.07 | -0.42 | +0.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.13 | -0.84 | +0.97 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
KURE vs. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and KWEB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KURE | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -68.53% | -80.92% | +12.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.88% | -41.62% | +10.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.05% | -41.62% | +7.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -66.18% | -68.04% | +1.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -80.92% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -54.46% | -68.22% | +13.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -38.35% | -35.54% | -2.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.66% | 20.90% | -5.24% |
Volatility
KURE vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) has a higher volatility of 10.98% compared to KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) at 8.46%. This indicates that KURE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KWEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KURE | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.98% | 8.46% | +2.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.06% | 20.13% | -0.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.98% | 27.46% | +0.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.94% | 47.59% | -15.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.43% | 40.01% | -7.58% |
KURE vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison
KURE has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
KURE vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison
KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.01%, less than KWEB's 7.63% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | 7.63% | 6.16% | 3.51% | 1.71% | 0.00% | 7.07% | 0.29% | 0.08% | 3.40% | 0.58% | 1.19% | 0.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KURE and KWEB have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KURE has higher volatility (10.98%) compared to KWEB (8.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs KWEB's -80.92%.
On 5-year performance, KWEB leads with -11.84% vs -12.93% for KURE. On fees, KURE is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, KWEB has been the lower-risk option at 8.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, KWEB has performed better with a -11.84% return vs -12.93%. 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 0.70% for KWEB.
KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 7.63%, compared with 4.01% for KURE.
KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index, while KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for KURE and 0.70% for KWEB.
KURE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.08 vs -0.64), 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 KWEB
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