CGW vs. FIW
CGW (Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF) and FIW (First Trust Water ETF) are both Water Equities funds - CGW tracks the S&P Global Water Index while FIW tracks the ISE Clean Edge Water Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CGW returned 9.85%/yr vs 12.18%/yr for FIW. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGW charges 0.57%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FIW.
Performance
CGW vs. FIW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGW achieves a 3.62% return, which is significantly higher than FIW's -0.70% return. Over the past 10 years, CGW has underperformed FIW with an annualized return of 9.85%, while FIW has yielded a comparatively higher 12.18% annualized return.
CGW
- 1D
- -0.46%
- 1M
- 3.74%
- 6M
- 1.41%
- YTD
- 3.62%
- 1Y
- 6.77%
- 3Y*
- 9.75%
- 5Y*
- 5.30%
- 10Y*
- 9.85%
FIW
- 1D
- -0.41%
- 1M
- 2.07%
- 6M
- -5.26%
- YTD
- -0.70%
- 1Y
- -1.44%
- 3Y*
- 7.15%
- 5Y*
- 5.72%
- 10Y*
- 12.18%
CGW vs. FIW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGW Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF | 3.62% | 18.10% | 4.55% | 15.50% | -22.00% | 31.70% | 15.41% | 34.04% | -10.47% | 27.08% |
FIW First Trust Water ETF | -0.70% | 7.20% | 8.38% | 20.35% | -15.70% | 32.00% | 21.15% | 37.37% | -9.23% | 24.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGW and FIW is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2007 | 0.85 |
The correlation between CGW and FIW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
CGW vs. FIW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CGW
FIW
Utilities
Industrials
Basic Materials
Energy
-
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Utilities
CGW
FIW
Industrials
CGW
FIW
Basic Materials
CGW
FIW
Energy
CGW
FIW
-
Technology
CGW
FIW
Consumer Cyclical
CGW
FIW
Real Estate
CGW
FIW
-
Financial Services
CGW
FIW
-
Communication Services
CGW
-
FIW
-
Consumer Defensive
CGW
-
FIW
Healthcare
CGW
-
FIW
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CGW vs. FIW — Risk / Return Rank
CGW
FIW
CGW vs. FIW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) and First Trust Water ETF (FIW). 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.
| CGW | FIW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.81 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.00 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.63 | -0.11 | +0.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.45 | -0.25 | +1.70 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CGW vs. FIW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGW drawdown since its inception was -57.24%, which is greater than FIW's maximum drawdown of -52.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGW and FIW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGW | FIW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -57.24% | -52.75% | -4.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.86% | -13.81% | +2.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.24% | -18.32% | +2.08% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.74% | -28.53% | -4.21% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.72% | -36.60% | +0.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.18% | -6.87% | +1.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.82% | -8.29% | -1.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.67% | 5.86% | -1.19% |
Volatility
CGW vs. FIW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) is 4.41%, while First Trust Water ETF (FIW) has a volatility of 5.00%. This indicates that CGW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FIW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGW | FIW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.41% | 5.00% | -0.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.89% | 12.22% | -1.33% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.72% | 16.05% | -2.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.87% | 18.44% | -1.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.60% | 19.88% | -2.28% |
CGW vs. FIW - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGW has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is higher than FIW's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGW vs. FIW - Dividend Comparison
CGW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, more than FIW's 0.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
FIW First Trust Water ETF | 0.72% | 0.69% | 0.69% | 0.68% | 0.67% | 0.37% | 0.56% | 0.55% | 0.73% | 1.13% | 0.51% | 0.76% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGW and FIW have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FIW has higher volatility (5.00%) compared to CGW (4.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGW dropped -57.24% vs FIW's -52.75%.
On 10-year performance, FIW leads with 12.18% vs 9.85% for CGW. On fees, FIW is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CGW has been the lower-risk option at 4.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FIW has performed better with a 12.18% return vs 9.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FIW is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.57% for CGW.
CGW has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.72% for FIW.
CGW tracks S&P Global Water Index, while FIW tracks ISE Clean Edge Water Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for CGW and 0.50% for FIW.
CGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.50 vs -0.09), 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.
Find the right allocation for CGW and FIW
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