YMAG vs. KHYB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

YMAG (YieldMax Magnificent 7 Fund of Option Income ETFs) and KHYB (KraneShares Asia Pacific High Income Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - YMAG is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by YieldMax, while KHYB is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JP Morgan Asia Credit Index Non-Investment Grade Corporate Index.. YMAG is actively managed, while KHYB is passively managed. Over the past year, YMAG returned 27.02% vs 10.54% for KHYB. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. YMAG charges 1.28%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for KHYB.

Performance

YMAG vs. KHYB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax Magnificent 7 Fund of Option Income ETFs (YMAG) and KraneShares Asia Pacific High Income Bond ETF (KHYB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, YMAG achieves a 3.80% return, which is significantly higher than KHYB's 2.50% return.

YMAG

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: 2.07%
• YTD: 3.80%
• 6M: 4.38%
• 1Y: 27.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KHYB

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 1.41%
• YTD: 2.50%
• 6M: 3.54%
• 1Y: 10.54%
• 3Y*: 9.02%
• 5Y*: 0.17%
• 10Y*: —

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

YMAG vs. KHYB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
YMAG YieldMax Magnificent 7 Fund of Option Income ETFs	3.80%	18.64%	36.05%
KHYB KraneShares Asia Pacific High Income Bond ETF	2.50%	9.59%	8.45%

Correlation

The correlation between YMAG and KHYB is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2024	0.40

YMAG vs. KHYB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	YMAG	KHYB
Financial Services	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	100.0%
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

YMAG vs. KHYB — Risk / Return Rank

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

YMAG

YMAG Risk / Return Rank: 43
YMAG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
YMAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
YMAG Omega Ratio Rank: 44
YMAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
YMAG Martin Ratio Rank: 41

KHYB

KHYB Risk / Return Rank: 79
KHYB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
KHYB Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
KHYB Omega Ratio Rank: 94
KHYB Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
KHYB Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

YMAG vs. KHYB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax Magnificent 7 Fund of Option Income ETFs (YMAG) and KraneShares Asia Pacific High Income Bond ETF (KHYB). 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.

	YMAG	KHYB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.68	3.11	-1.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.27	4.81	-2.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.71	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.89	2.67	-0.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.63	11.98	-5.35
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

YMAG vs. KHYB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current YMAG Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is lower than the KHYB Sharpe Ratio of 3.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of YMAG and KHYB, 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

	YMAG	KHYB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.68	3.11	-1.44
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.03	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.19	0.28	+0.91

Drawdowns

YMAG vs. KHYB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum YMAG drawdown since its inception was -25.96%, smaller than the maximum KHYB drawdown of -33.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for YMAG and KHYB.

Drawdown Indicators

	YMAG	KHYB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.96%	-33.63%	+7.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.38%	-3.97%	-10.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-5.94%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-32.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.71%	-0.62%	-2.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.52%	-9.71%	+5.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.08%	0.88%	+3.20%

Volatility

YMAG vs. KHYB - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax Magnificent 7 Fund of Option Income ETFs (YMAG) has a higher volatility of 3.67% compared to KraneShares Asia Pacific High Income Bond ETF (KHYB) at 0.90%. This indicates that YMAG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KHYB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	YMAG	KHYB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.67%	0.90%	+2.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.52%	3.02%	+8.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.19%	3.40%	+12.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.88%	6.32%	+14.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.88%	5.71%	+15.17%

YMAG vs. KHYB - Expense Ratio Comparison

YMAG has a 1.28% expense ratio, which is higher than KHYB's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

YMAG vs. KHYB - Dividend Comparison

YMAG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 52.16%, more than KHYB's 8.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
KHYB KraneShares Asia Pacific High Income Bond ETF	8.13%	7.59%	10.11%	15.55%	9.67%	6.22%	4.76%	4.86%	2.56%
YMAG YieldMax Magnificent 7 Fund of Option Income ETFs	52.16%	52.27%	35.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both YMAG and KHYB in my portfolio?

YMAG and KHYB have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, YMAG or KHYB?

YMAG has higher volatility (3.67%) compared to KHYB (0.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, YMAG dropped -25.96% vs KHYB's -33.63%.

Which ETF is better, YMAG or KHYB?

On 1-year performance, YMAG leads with 27.02% vs 10.54% for KHYB. On fees, KHYB is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, KHYB has been the lower-risk option at 0.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, YMAG or KHYB?

Over the 1-year period, YMAG has performed better with a 27.02% return vs 10.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, YMAG or KHYB?

KHYB is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 1.28% for YMAG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, YMAG or KHYB?

YMAG has the higher dividend yield at 52.16%, compared with 8.13% for KHYB.

What is the main difference between YMAG and KHYB?

YMAG is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while KHYB is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 1.28% for YMAG and 0.69% for KHYB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KHYB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.11 vs 1.68), 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.