FLCH ranks 2nd and KBA 5th of 28 funds in the China Category.
FLCH vs KBA
FLCH −0.37pt a year
0.19%0.56%
FLCH 3.7×the volume
108K29.2K
KBA +5.8pt
−4.1%+1.7%
FLCH vs KBA Performance
−18.7%+9.0%
- FLCH 0.19%, better
- KBA 0.56%
- FLCH $252M
- KBA $105M
- FLCH −20.9%
- KBA −5.5%, better
- FLCH 2.63%, better
- KBA 1.71%
- FLCH 1112
- KBA 52
- FLCH 108K sh, better
- KBA 29.2K sh
- FLCH $19.38
- KBA $28.35
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | FLCH | KBA |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A100Higher | A86 |
| Mission | A87Higher | A83 |
| Risk | B64 | A76Higher |
| Tradability | B62Higher | C51 |
| Holdings | B65Higher | B61 |
| Durability | A70Higher | B60 |
Rank among China funds
Same Category. FLCH and KBA are both graded against the same 28 China funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
FLCHA
KBAA
In short
FLCH Cheap and wide, in the best way. FLCH holds roughly a thousand Chinese stocks and charges 0.19% a year, a fraction of what most single-country China funds ask. Whole market, small toll.
KBA The first US-listed ETF built on an MSCI China A-share index, running since 2014. It owns mainland Shanghai and Shenzhen stocks through Stock Connect rather than Hong Kong listings or ADRs.
Stated mandate
FLCH The Fund seeks investment results that closely correspond, before fees and expenses, to the performance of the FTSE China RIC Capped Index.
KBA The fund tracks the MSCI China A 50 Connect Index, which represents 50 large-cap Chinese A-shares listed in Shanghai and Shenzhen and accessible through Stock Connect.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
FLCH vs KBA Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
FLCH vs KBA Cost
Overpaying KBA vs FLCH
$7,136
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
FLCH 0.19%
$3,952
KBA 0.56%
$11,088
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | FLCH | KBA | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $347 | $1,006 | $659 |
| 20 | $1,351 | $3,855 | $2,504 |
| 30 | $3,952 | $11,088 | $7,136 |
- 0.19%FLCH, cheaper
- 0.56%KBA
- Middle half of China funds
- Median 0.65%
FLCH cheapest of 28 funds
KBA 4th cheapest of 28 funds
FLCH vs KBA Dividends
- FLCH 2.63%, better
- KBA 1.71%
- FLCH $0.51
- KBA $0.48
- FLCH $0.14
- KBA $0.48
- FLCH Jun 26, 2026
- KBA Dec 22, 2025
- FLCH Jul 6, 2026
- KBA Dec 23, 2025
- FLCH Twice a year
- KBA Annual
Distribution history
FLCH vs KBA Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- FLCH
- KBA
Risk facts
- Volatility
- FLCH 21.1%KBA 19.2%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- FLCH 0.29KBA 0.43, better
- Worst fall
- FLCH −48.1%KBA −39.7%, better
- Market sensitivity
- FLCH 0.55KBA 0.68
Popular comparisons
- 0.19% · 0.32%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.32%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.19% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.19% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.