PGJ vs. KLIP

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both China Equities funds. PGJ is passively managed, while KLIP is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PGJ returned -2.44%/yr vs 6.33%/yr for KLIP. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for KLIP.

Performance

PGJ vs. KLIP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -10.65% return, which is significantly lower than KLIP's -6.77% return.

PGJ

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 12.40%
• 6M: -12.46%
• YTD: -10.65%
• 1Y: -7.71%
• 3Y*: -2.44%
• 5Y*: -9.42%
• 10Y*: 0.02%
• ALL TIME*: 4.06%

KLIP

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: 6.88%
• 6M: -11.18%
• YTD: -6.77%
• 1Y: -3.11%
• 3Y*: 6.33%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.52%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	$647.66K	$581.47K	$1.00M
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	$588.59K	$569.42K	$702.75K

PGJ vs. KLIP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	-10.65%	13.66%	5.91%	-16.52%
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	-6.77%	16.92%	3.37%	11.11%

Correlation

The correlation between PGJ and KLIP is 0.85, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2023	0.88

The correlation between PGJ and KLIP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

PGJ vs. KLIP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PGJ	KLIP
Consumer Cyclical	43.7%	34.2%
Technology	17.6%	4.2%
Communication Services	13.0%	45.8%
Consumer Defensive	8.2%	4.0%
Financial Services	6.8%	2.0%
Industrials	6.7%	-
Real Estate	2.3%	3.9%
Healthcare	0.7%	6.0%
Energy	0.6%	-
Basic Materials	0.0%	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

PGJ vs. KLIP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PGJ

PGJ Risk / Return Rank: 7
PGJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
PGJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
PGJ Omega Ratio Rank: 7
PGJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
PGJ Martin Ratio Rank: 8

KLIP

KLIP Risk / Return Rank: 8
KLIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Omega Ratio Rank: 8
KLIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
KLIP Martin Ratio Rank: 9

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PGJ vs. KLIP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). 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.

	PGJ	KLIP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.31	-0.19	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.28	-0.15	-0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	0.98	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.22	-0.15	-0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.43	-0.34	-0.09

PGJ vs. KLIP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGJ Sharpe Ratio is -0.31, which is lower than the KLIP Sharpe Ratio of -0.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGJ and KLIP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PGJ vs. KLIP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than KLIP's maximum drawdown of -21.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and KLIP.

Drawdown Indicators

	PGJ	KLIP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.37%	-21.48%	-56.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-35.08%	-21.48%	-13.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.08%	-21.48%	-13.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-62.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-78.37%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-65.94%	-12.12%	-53.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.01%	-4.33%	-27.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.86%	9.22%	+8.64%

Volatility

PGJ vs. KLIP - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) has a higher volatility of 6.17% compared to KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) at 2.37%. This indicates that PGJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KLIP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PGJ	KLIP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.17%	2.37%	+3.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.70%	12.99%	+4.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.96%	16.60%	+8.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.15%	17.98%	+25.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.76%	17.98%	+18.78%

PGJ vs. KLIP - Expense Ratio Comparison

PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KLIP's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

PGJ vs. KLIP - Dividend Comparison

PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.98%, less than KLIP's 27.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	27.54%	25.14%	54.26%	61.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	2.98%	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

Can I hold both PGJ and KLIP in my portfolio?

PGJ and KLIP have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PGJ or KLIP?

PGJ has higher volatility (6.17%) compared to KLIP (2.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs KLIP's -21.48%.

Which ETF is better, PGJ or KLIP?

On 3-year performance, KLIP leads with 6.33% vs -2.44% for PGJ. On fees, PGJ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, KLIP has been the lower-risk option at 2.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PGJ or KLIP?

Over the 3-year period, KLIP has performed better with a 6.33% return vs -2.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PGJ or KLIP?

PGJ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KLIP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PGJ or KLIP?

KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 27.54%, compared with 2.98% for PGJ.

What is the main difference between PGJ and KLIP?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.95% for KLIP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KLIP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.19 vs -0.31), 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.