KURE vs. MAGC
KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) and MAGC (Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF) are both China Equities funds. KURE is passively managed, while MAGC is actively managed. Over the past year, KURE returned -5.05% vs -19.65% for MAGC. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KURE charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for MAGC.
Performance
KURE vs. MAGC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KURE achieves a -10.68% return, which is significantly higher than MAGC's -18.25% return.
KURE
- 1D
- -2.87%
- 1M
- -12.23%
- YTD
- -10.68%
- 6M
- -15.54%
- 1Y
- -5.05%
- 3Y*
- -6.04%
- 5Y*
- -16.33%
- 10Y*
- —
MAGC
- 1D
- -3.41%
- 1M
- -5.47%
- YTD
- -18.25%
- 6M
- -19.75%
- 1Y
- -19.65%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KURE vs. MAGC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | -10.68% | 24.87% | -18.99% |
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF | -18.25% | 16.35% | -14.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between KURE and MAGC 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024 | 0.56 |
The correlation between KURE and MAGC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. MAGC — Risk / Return Rank
KURE
MAGC
KURE vs. MAGC - 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 Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC). 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 | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.89 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 0.89 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | -0.60 | +0.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.39 | -1.15 | +0.77 |
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 | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 | -0.74 | +0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.52 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.11 | -0.34 | +0.24 |
Drawdowns
KURE vs. MAGC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KURE drawdown since its inception was -68.53%, which is greater than MAGC's maximum drawdown of -32.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KURE and MAGC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KURE | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -68.53% | -32.86% | -35.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.53% | -32.86% | +5.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.05% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -67.94% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -61.11% | -31.30% | -29.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -38.07% | -15.16% | -22.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.13% | 17.09% | -3.96% |
Volatility
KURE vs. MAGC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) is 7.23%, while Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) has a volatility of 11.15%. This indicates that KURE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MAGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KURE | MAGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.23% | 11.15% | -3.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.67% | 19.75% | -2.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.49% | 26.82% | -0.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.86% | 34.42% | -2.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.39% | 34.42% | -2.03% |
KURE vs. MAGC - Expense Ratio Comparison
KURE has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than MAGC's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
KURE vs. MAGC - Dividend Comparison
KURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, less than MAGC's 5.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
MAGC Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF | 5.02% | 4.10% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
KURE and MAGC 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.
MAGC has higher volatility (11.15%) compared to KURE (7.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KURE dropped -68.53% vs MAGC's -32.86%.
On 1-year performance, KURE leads with -5.05% vs -19.65% for MAGC. On fees, MAGC is cheaper at 0.59% 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 1-year period, KURE has performed better with a -5.05% return vs -19.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MAGC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for KURE.
MAGC has the higher dividend yield at 5.02%, compared with 4.70% for KURE.
They also come from different issuers: CICC and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for KURE and 0.59% for MAGC.
KURE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.19 vs -0.74), 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 MAGC
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