XPP vs. KBA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and KBA (KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF) are both China Equities funds - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while KBA tracks the MSCI China A Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XPP returned -5.62%/yr vs 9.42%/yr for KBA. Their 0.70 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for KBA.

Performance

XPP vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -13.25% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 7.15% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed KBA with an annualized return of -5.62%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively higher 9.42% annualized return.

XPP

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 29.99%
• 6M: -18.24%
• YTD: -13.25%
• 1Y: -7.90%
• 3Y*: 4.02%
• 5Y*: -14.42%
• 10Y*: -5.62%
• ALL TIME*: -4.67%

KBA

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 1.13%
• 6M: 7.50%
• YTD: 7.15%
• 1Y: 34.07%
• 3Y*: 12.68%
• 5Y*: 7.04%
• 10Y*: 9.42%
• ALL TIME*: 9.52%

*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)
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	$842.71K	$977.36K	$2.09M
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	$97.64K	$74.04K	$132.37K

XPP vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-13.25%	45.84%	38.18%	-34.77%	-50.06%	-40.45%	7.07%	24.88%	-31.36%	80.21%
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	7.15%	33.88%	15.73%	-16.77%	-3.49%	3.17%	41.62%	35.44%	-26.28%	30.69%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and KBA is 0.56, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.67
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.70
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014	0.70

The correlation between XPP and KBA shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (1 year) to 0.72 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XPP vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XPP	KBA
Financial Services	48.4%	16.9%
Basic Materials	-	10.1%
Communication Services	-	1.2%
Consumer Cyclical	-	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.8%
Energy	-	2.4%
Healthcare	-	4.0%
Industrials	-	14.4%
Real Estate	-	0.4%
Technology	-	37.5%
Utilities	-	3.2%

Return for Risk

XPP vs. KBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

XPP

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

KBA

KBA Risk / Return Rank: 76
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

XPP vs. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). 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.

	XPP	KBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.27	1.63	-1.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.12	2.27	-2.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.29	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.24	4.08	-4.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.50	9.76	-10.26

XPP vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.27, which is lower than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and KBA, 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

XPP vs. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than KBA's maximum drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and KBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	XPP	KBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.90%	-53.24%	-36.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-44.78%	-8.33%	-36.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.56%	-31.23%	-17.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-81.38%	-39.76%	-41.62%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.90%	-45.32%	-44.58%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-77.04%	-6.47%	-70.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.11%	-25.53%	-22.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.55%	3.48%	+18.07%

Volatility

XPP vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 10.66% compared to KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) at 8.55%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XPP	KBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.66%	8.55%	+2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.57%	16.45%	+13.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.39%	20.87%	+19.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	62.33%	27.33%	+35.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.80%	25.49%	+29.31%

XPP vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

XPP vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than KBA's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KBA KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF	1.46%	1.56%	2.18%	2.34%	49.05%	9.07%	0.65%	1.53%	3.77%	1.46%	6.62%	29.08%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	2.41%	2.32%	2.96%	2.87%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.81%	1.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XPP and KBA in my portfolio?

XPP and KBA have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XPP or KBA?

XPP has higher volatility (10.66%) compared to KBA (8.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs KBA's -53.24%.

Which ETF is better, XPP or KBA?

On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 9.42% vs -5.62% for XPP. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KBA has been the lower-risk option at 8.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XPP or KBA?

Over the 10-year period, KBA has performed better with a 9.42% return vs -5.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XPP or KBA?

KBA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XPP or KBA?

XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 1.46% for KBA.

What is the main difference between XPP and KBA?

XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.60% for KBA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs -0.27), 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.