Skip to content
Beacon
Screener

KURE vs KLIP

KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF vs KraneShares KWEB Covered Call Strategy ETF

KURE

KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF

KraneShares

Annual cost

0.65%

Fund size

$82M

KLIP

KraneShares KWEB Covered Call Strategy ETF

KraneShares

Annual cost

0.95%

Fund size

$114M

Key differences

  • KURE costs 0.30% less per year.
  • KURE is classified as equity, while KLIP is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
  • KURE covers emerging markets markets; KLIP covers north america.
  • KURE follows a index tracking strategy; KLIP uses option income.
  • Over the last 3 years, KLIP has delivered higher annualized returns.
  • KURE has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.

Side-by-side comparison

KUREKLIP
Annual cost (TER)0.65%0.95%
Fund size (AUM)$82M$114M
Since20182023
Dividend yield4.14%28.57%
Asset classequityalternative
Regionemerging marketsnorth america
Strategyindex trackingoption income
CAGR 1Y+3.5%+1.4%
CAGR 3Y-4.9%+10.6%
CAGR 5Y-14.7%N/A
Sharpe 3Y-0.140.46
Volatility 1Y26.25%15.47%
Max drawdown-68.53%-18.61%

Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.

Similar to KURE and KLIP