PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CGW vs. ESPO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CGW vs. ESPO

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

CGW (Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF) and ESPO (VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGW is a Water Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Water Index, while ESPO is a Gaming fund tracking the MVIS Global Video Gaming and eSports Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CGW returned 5.78%/yr vs 5.00%/yr for ESPO. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGW charges 0.57%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ESPO.

Performance

CGW vs. ESPO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) and VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF (ESPO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGW achieves a 3.58% return, which is significantly higher than ESPO's -17.72% return.

CGW

1D
1.75%
1M
3.46%
YTD
3.58%
6M
2.52%
1Y
7.83%
3Y*
10.91%
5Y*
5.78%
10Y*
10.60%

ESPO

1D
-1.06%
1M
-3.82%
YTD
-17.72%
6M
-18.33%
1Y
-19.58%
3Y*
17.30%
5Y*
5.00%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGW vs. ESPO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
CGW
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF		3.58%18.10%4.55%15.50%-22.00%31.70%15.41%34.04%-5.28%
ESPO
VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF		-17.72%25.79%47.61%33.64%-34.71%-2.13%83.93%42.36%-12.49%

Correlation

The correlation between CGW and ESPO is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.37

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.48

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2018

0.54

The correlation between CGW and ESPO shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.55 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CGW vs. ESPO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CGW
ESPO

Utilities

45.8%

-

Industrials

44.6%

-

Basic Materials

6.0%

-

Energy

1.7%

-

Technology

1.2%
55.8%

Consumer Cyclical

0.5%
14.3%

Real Estate

0.2%

-

Financial Services

0.0%

-

Communication Services

-

29.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Utilities

CGW
45.8%
ESPO

-

Industrials

CGW
44.6%
ESPO

-

Basic Materials

CGW
6.0%
ESPO

-

Energy

CGW
1.7%
ESPO

-

Technology

CGW
1.2%
ESPO
55.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CGW
0.5%
ESPO
14.3%

Real Estate

CGW
0.2%
ESPO

-

Financial Services

CGW
0.0%
ESPO

-

Communication Services

CGW

-

ESPO
29.7%

Consumer Defensive

CGW

-

ESPO

-

Healthcare

CGW

-

ESPO

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF

VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF

Often compared with CGW:
CGW vs. PHOCGW vs. FIWCGW vs. PIOCGW vs. AQWACGW vs. SPYCGW vs. GWRSCGW vs. DGT
Often compared with ESPO:
ESPO vs. HEROESPO vs. ESGB.LESPO vs. GAMRESPO vs. NERDESPO vs. VGTESPO vs. MDLZESPO vs. SNSR

Return for Risk

CGW vs. ESPO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CGW
CGW Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
CGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGW Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
CGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGW Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank
ESPO
ESPO Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
ESPO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESPO Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESPO Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
ESPO Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESPO Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CGW vs. ESPO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) and VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF (ESPO). 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.

CGWESPODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.57
-1.06

+1.64

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.89
-1.43

+2.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

0.83

+0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.72

-0.67

+1.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.72

-1.17

+2.89

CGW vs. ESPO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGW Sharpe Ratio is 0.57, which is higher than the ESPO Sharpe Ratio of -1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGW and ESPO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CGW vs. ESPO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGW drawdown since its inception was -57.24%, which is greater than ESPO's maximum drawdown of -50.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGW and ESPO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CGWESPODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-57.24%

-50.99%

-6.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.86%

-29.43%

+18.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.24%

-29.43%

+13.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.74%

-48.33%

+15.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.72%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.21%

-29.43%

+24.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.83%

-15.12%

+5.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.57%

16.70%

-12.13%

Volatility

CGW vs. ESPO - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) has a higher volatility of 4.62% compared to VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF (ESPO) at 4.34%. This indicates that CGW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ESPO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CGWESPODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.62%

4.34%

+0.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.79%

14.67%

-3.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.71%

18.51%

-4.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.86%

25.09%

-8.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.64%

25.67%

-8.03%

CGW vs. ESPO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGW has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is higher than ESPO's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGW vs. ESPO - Dividend Comparison

CGW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, more than ESPO's 1.51% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGW
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF		1.53%1.58%2.27%1.55%1.45%1.59%1.41%1.48%2.14%1.71%1.65%1.67%
ESPO
VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF		1.51%1.24%0.44%0.96%0.91%3.36%0.12%0.22%0.04%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CGW and ESPO have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CGW has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to ESPO (4.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGW dropped -57.24% vs ESPO's -50.99%.

On 5-year performance, CGW leads with 5.78% vs 5.00% for ESPO. On fees, ESPO is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, ESPO has been the lower-risk option at 4.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, CGW has performed better with a 5.78% return vs 5.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ESPO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.57% for CGW.

CGW has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 1.51% for ESPO.

CGW is categorized as Water Equities, while ESPO is Gaming. CGW tracks S&P Global Water Index, while ESPO tracks MVIS Global Video Gaming and eSports Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for CGW and 0.55% for ESPO.

CGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.57 vs -1.06), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGW and ESPO

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