PGJ vs. KWEB
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB).
PGJ and KWEB are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PGJ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Halter USX China Index. It was launched on Dec 9, 2004. KWEB is a passively managed fund by CICC that tracks the performance of the CSI Overseas China Internet. It was launched on Jul 31, 2013. Both PGJ and KWEB are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: PGJ or KWEB.
Correlation
The correlation between PGJ and KWEB is 0.95, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
PGJ vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
PGJ:
0.25
KWEB:
0.38
PGJ:
0.66
KWEB:
0.87
PGJ:
1.08
KWEB:
1.10
PGJ:
0.12
KWEB:
0.20
PGJ:
0.70
KWEB:
1.14
PGJ:
12.74%
KWEB:
13.16%
PGJ:
35.58%
KWEB:
39.93%
PGJ:
-78.37%
KWEB:
-80.92%
PGJ:
-66.36%
KWEB:
-67.55%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a 6.21% return, which is significantly lower than KWEB's 14.04% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has outperformed KWEB with an annualized return of 0.69%, while KWEB has yielded a comparatively lower 0.62% annualized return.
PGJ
6.21%
3.54%
14.34%
12.25%
-7.09%
0.69%
KWEB
14.04%
0.40%
7.63%
18.35%
-7.13%
0.62%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
PGJ vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison
PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.76% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
PGJ vs. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) 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.
Dividends
PGJ vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison
PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%, more than KWEB's 3.58% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 4.43% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.31% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% | 0.89% | 0.96% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | 3.58% | 1.71% | 0.00% | 7.07% | 0.29% | 0.08% | 3.40% | 0.58% | 1.19% | 0.46% | 0.89% | 0.31% |
Drawdowns
PGJ vs. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, roughly equal to the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and KWEB. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
PGJ vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) is 11.54%, while KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a volatility of 13.17%. This indicates that PGJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KWEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.