KWEB vs. PGJ
KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) and PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) are both China Equities funds - KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet Index while PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, KWEB returned -0.18%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for PGJ. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.70% expense ratio.
Performance
KWEB vs. PGJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KWEB achieves a -20.32% return, which is significantly lower than PGJ's -11.48% return. Over the past 10 years, KWEB has underperformed PGJ with an annualized return of -0.18%, while PGJ has yielded a comparatively higher 0.21% annualized return.
KWEB
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- -4.91%
- YTD
- -20.32%
- 6M
- -22.46%
- 1Y
- -15.17%
- 3Y*
- 4.22%
- 5Y*
- -14.33%
- 10Y*
- -0.18%
PGJ
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- -4.23%
- YTD
- -11.48%
- 6M
- -13.73%
- 1Y
- -7.05%
- 3Y*
- 2.92%
- 5Y*
- -13.73%
- 10Y*
- 0.21%
KWEB vs. PGJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | -20.32% | 23.55% | 12.01% | -9.06% | -17.24% | -49.01% | 58.23% | 29.92% | -33.80% | 69.73% |
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | -11.48% | 13.66% | 5.91% | -2.38% | -24.50% | -42.87% | 54.24% | 32.18% | -29.51% | 60.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between KWEB and PGJ is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2013 | 0.95 |
The correlation between KWEB and PGJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.
KWEB vs. PGJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
KWEB
PGJ
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Healthcare
Real Estate
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
KWEB
PGJ
Communication Services
KWEB
PGJ
Technology
KWEB
PGJ
Healthcare
KWEB
PGJ
Real Estate
KWEB
PGJ
Industrials
KWEB
PGJ
Consumer Defensive
KWEB
PGJ
Financial Services
KWEB
PGJ
Basic Materials
KWEB
-
PGJ
-
Energy
KWEB
-
PGJ
Utilities
KWEB
-
PGJ
-
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
KWEB vs. PGJ — Risk / Return Rank
KWEB
PGJ
KWEB vs. PGJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ). 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.
| KWEB | PGJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.92 | 0.97 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.45 | -0.28 | -0.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.90 | -0.52 | -0.37 |
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
| KWEB | PGJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.56 | -0.29 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.30 | -0.32 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.00 | 0.01 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.06 | 0.12 | -0.06 |
Drawdowns
KWEB vs. PGJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KWEB drawdown since its inception was -80.92%, roughly equal to the maximum PGJ drawdown of -78.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KWEB and PGJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KWEB | PGJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.92% | -78.37% | -2.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -34.13% | -25.69% | -8.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.13% | -30.82% | -3.31% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -72.17% | -70.00% | -2.17% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -80.92% | -78.37% | -2.55% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -68.62% | -66.25% | -2.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -35.25% | -31.74% | -3.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.97% | 13.49% | +3.48% |
Volatility
KWEB vs. PGJ - Volatility Comparison
KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a higher volatility of 11.53% compared to Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) at 8.54%. This indicates that KWEB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PGJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KWEB | PGJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.53% | 8.54% | +2.99% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.09% | 17.28% | +2.81% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.25% | 24.46% | +2.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 47.67% | 43.73% | +3.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 39.98% | 36.69% | +3.29% |
KWEB vs. PGJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both KWEB and PGJ have an expense ratio of 0.70%.
Dividends
KWEB vs. PGJ - Dividend Comparison
KWEB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.73%, more than PGJ's 3.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | 7.73% | 6.16% | 3.51% | 1.71% | 0.00% | 7.07% | 0.29% | 0.08% | 3.40% | 0.58% | 1.19% | 0.46% |
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 3.58% | 3.38% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, KWEB and PGJ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
KWEB has higher volatility (11.53%) compared to PGJ (8.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KWEB dropped -80.92% vs PGJ's -78.37%.
On 10-year performance, PGJ leads with 0.21% vs -0.18% for KWEB. Both ETFs have the same 0.70% expense ratio. On volatility, PGJ has been the lower-risk option at 8.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PGJ has performed better with a 0.21% return vs -0.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KWEB and PGJ have the same expense ratio: 0.70% per year.
KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 7.73%, compared with 3.58% for PGJ.
KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet Index, while PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index. They also come from different issuers: KraneShares and Invesco.
PGJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.29 vs -0.56), 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 KWEB and PGJ
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