PPH vs. KURE
PPH (VanEck Pharmaceutical ETF) and KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PPH is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Pharmaceutical 25 Index, while KURE is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PPH returned 9.77%/yr vs -12.95%/yr for KURE. Their 0.24 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PPH charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for KURE.
Performance
PPH vs. KURE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PPH achieves a 6.76% return, which is significantly higher than KURE's 0.26% return.
PPH
- 1D
- -1.60%
- 1M
- -2.48%
- 6M
- 1.87%
- YTD
- 6.76%
- 1Y
- 31.28%
- 3Y*
- 13.22%
- 5Y*
- 9.77%
- 10Y*
- 7.89%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.70%
KURE
- 1D
- -1.13%
- 1M
- 3.83%
- 6M
- -1.87%
- YTD
- 0.26%
- 1Y
- -8.42%
- 3Y*
- -0.55%
- 5Y*
- -12.95%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -2.00%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $464.90K | $1.53M | $860.94K | |
| $27.28M | $26.89M | $27.29M |
PPH vs. KURE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PPH VanEck Pharmaceutical ETF | 6.76% | 22.00% | 8.05% | 6.95% | 2.64% | 17.79% | 5.49% | 19.39% | -9.23% |
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | 0.26% | 24.87% | -17.83% | -17.70% | -25.43% | -16.01% | 68.97% | 34.30% | -30.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between PPH and KURE is 0.18, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2018 | 0.24 |
PPH vs. KURE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PPH
KURE
Healthcare
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
PPH
KURE
Industrials
PPH
KURE
-
Basic Materials
PPH
-
KURE
-
Communication Services
PPH
-
KURE
-
Consumer Cyclical
PPH
-
KURE
-
Consumer Defensive
PPH
-
KURE
Energy
PPH
-
KURE
-
Financial Services
PPH
-
KURE
-
Real Estate
PPH
-
KURE
-
Technology
PPH
-
KURE
-
Utilities
PPH
-
KURE
-
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
PPH vs. KURE — Risk / Return Rank
PPH
KURE
PPH vs. KURE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Pharmaceutical ETF (PPH) and KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE). 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.
| PPH | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 0.97 | +0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.92 | -0.27 | +3.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.38 | -0.52 | +7.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PPH vs. KURE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PPH drawdown since its inception was -51.45%, smaller than the maximum KURE drawdown of -68.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PPH and KURE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PPH | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.45% | -68.53% | +17.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.76% | -30.88% | +20.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.06% | -34.05% | +15.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.26% | -63.73% | +43.47% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.70% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.35% | -56.34% | +51.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.22% | -38.44% | +21.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.25% | 16.11% | -11.86% |
Volatility
PPH vs. KURE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Pharmaceutical ETF (PPH) is 5.91%, while KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) has a volatility of 10.95%. This indicates that PPH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KURE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PPH | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.91% | 10.95% | -5.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.58% | 20.76% | -7.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.90% | 28.28% | -10.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.44% | 31.44% | -16.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.07% | 32.43% | -15.36% |
PPH vs. KURE - Expense Ratio Comparison
PPH has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than KURE's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
PPH vs. KURE - Dividend Comparison
PPH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.00%, less than KURE's 4.18% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | 4.18% | 4.19% | 1.29% | 0.65% | 0.05% | 14.12% | 0.00% | 0.25% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PPH VanEck Pharmaceutical ETF | 2.00% | 1.78% | 1.98% | 2.09% | 1.55% | 1.62% | 1.66% | 1.77% | 1.97% | 1.92% | 2.43% | 1.93% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PPH and KURE have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KURE has higher volatility (10.95%) compared to PPH (5.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PPH dropped -51.45% vs KURE's -68.53%.
On 5-year performance, PPH leads with 9.77% vs -12.95% for KURE. On fees, PPH is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, PPH has been the lower-risk option at 5.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, PPH has performed better with a 9.77% return vs -12.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PPH is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for KURE.
KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.18%, compared with 2.00% for PPH.
PPH is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while KURE is China Equities. PPH tracks MVIS US Listed Pharmaceutical 25 Index, while KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for PPH and 0.65% for KURE.
PPH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs -0.30), 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 PPH and KURE
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