PGJ vs. KWEB

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds - PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index while KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PGJ returned 0.64%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for KWEB. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.76%/yr for KWEB.

Performance

PGJ vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -8.75% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -20.06% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has outperformed KWEB with an annualized return of 0.64%, while KWEB has yielded a comparatively lower 0.02% annualized return.

PGJ

• 1D: 1.98%
• 1M: -1.05%
• YTD: -8.75%
• 6M: -12.02%
• 1Y: -1.79%
• 3Y*: 3.86%
• 5Y*: -13.04%
• 10Y*: 0.64%

KWEB

• 1D: -3.92%
• 1M: -4.79%
• YTD: -20.06%
• 6M: -22.24%
• 1Y: -12.78%
• 3Y*: 4.05%
• 5Y*: -14.28%
• 10Y*: 0.02%

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

PGJ vs. KWEB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF	-8.75%	13.66%	5.91%	-2.38%	-24.50%	-42.87%	54.24%	32.18%	-29.51%	60.27%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-20.06%	23.55%	12.01%	-9.06%	-17.24%	-49.01%	58.23%	29.92%	-33.80%	69.73%

Correlation

The correlation between PGJ and KWEB is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
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 PGJ and KWEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

PGJ vs. KWEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PGJ	KWEB
Consumer Cyclical	44.8%	37.7%
Technology	16.2%	17.6%
Communication Services	14.5%	24.8%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	3.1%
Industrials	6.5%	3.1%
Financial Services	3.6%	2.2%
Real Estate	3.1%	5.2%
Energy	2.3%	-
Healthcare	0.8%	6.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

PGJ vs. KWEB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

PGJ

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

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 5
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 5

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

PGJ vs. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends 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.

	PGJ	KWEB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.07	-0.47	+0.40
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.07	-0.52	+0.59
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	0.94	+0.07
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	-0.38	+0.33
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.08	-0.76	+0.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PGJ vs. KWEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGJ Sharpe Ratio is -0.07, which is higher than the KWEB Sharpe Ratio of -0.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGJ and KWEB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PGJ	KWEB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.07	-0.47	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.30	-0.30	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.02	0.00	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.12	0.06	+0.06

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	PGJ	KWEB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.37%	-80.92%	+2.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.69%	-34.13%	+8.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.82%	-34.13%	+3.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-70.00%	-72.17%	+2.17%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-78.37%	-80.92%	+2.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-65.21%	-68.52%	+3.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.73%	-35.24%	+3.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.32%	16.85%	-3.53%

Volatility

PGJ vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) is 8.19%, while KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a volatility of 11.52%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	PGJ	KWEB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.19%	11.52%	-3.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.14%	20.11%	-2.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.35%	27.25%	-2.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.74%	47.67%	-3.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.70%	39.99%	-3.29%

PGJ vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.76% expense ratio.

Dividends

PGJ vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison

PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, less than KWEB's 7.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	7.70%	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	3.47%	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 KWEB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, PGJ and KWEB 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.

Which is riskier, PGJ or KWEB?

KWEB has higher volatility (11.52%) compared to PGJ (8.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs KWEB's -80.92%.

Which ETF is better, PGJ or KWEB?

On 10-year performance, PGJ leads with 0.64% vs 0.02% for KWEB. On fees, PGJ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, PGJ has been the lower-risk option at 8.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PGJ or KWEB?

Over the 10-year period, PGJ has performed better with a 0.64% return vs 0.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PGJ or KWEB?

PGJ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for KWEB.

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

KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 7.70%, compared with 3.47% for PGJ.

What is the main difference between PGJ and KWEB?

PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.76% for KWEB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PGJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.07 vs -0.47), 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.