CGW vs. FLOWX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CGW (Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF) and FLOWX (Fidelity Water Sustainability Fund) are both funds - CGW is a Water Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Water Index, while FLOWX is a Energy Equities fund managed by Fidelity. Over the past 5 years, CGW returned 4.76%/yr vs 7.04%/yr for FLOWX. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGW charges 0.57%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for FLOWX.

Performance

CGW vs. FLOWX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGW achieves a -0.46% return, which is significantly lower than FLOWX's -0.31% return.

CGW

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: -2.82%
• YTD: -0.46%
• 6M: -1.22%
• 1Y: 4.53%
• 3Y*: 9.72%
• 5Y*: 4.76%
• 10Y*: 9.49%

FLOWX

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: -3.24%
• YTD: -0.31%
• 6M: -1.28%
• 1Y: 7.07%
• 3Y*: 12.35%
• 5Y*: 7.04%
• 10Y*: —

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

CGW vs. FLOWX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CGW Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF	-0.46%	18.10%	4.55%	15.50%	-22.00%	31.70%	38.11%
FLOWX Fidelity Water Sustainability Fund	-0.31%	18.02%	8.78%	18.58%	-19.94%	28.52%	35.89%

Correlation

The correlation between CGW and FLOWX is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2020	0.94

The correlation between CGW and FLOWX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CGW vs. FLOWX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGW

CGW Risk / Return Rank: 14
CGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
CGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
CGW Omega Ratio Rank: 13
CGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
CGW Martin Ratio Rank: 15

FLOWX

FLOWX Risk / Return Rank: 6
FLOWX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
FLOWX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
FLOWX Omega Ratio Rank: 6
FLOWX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
FLOWX Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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. FLOWX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) and Fidelity Water Sustainability Fund (FLOWX). 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.

	CGW	FLOWX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.34	0.45	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.57	0.72	-0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.09	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.42	0.50	-0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.10	1.44	-0.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGW vs. FLOWX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGW Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is comparable to the FLOWX Sharpe Ratio of 0.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGW and FLOWX, 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

	CGW	FLOWX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34	0.45	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	0.40	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.72	-0.38

Drawdowns

CGW vs. FLOWX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGW drawdown since its inception was -57.24%, which is greater than FLOWX's maximum drawdown of -30.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGW and FLOWX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGW	FLOWX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.24%	-30.63%	-26.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.86%	-12.84%	+1.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.24%	-16.13%	-0.11%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.74%	-30.63%	-2.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.92%	-10.68%	+1.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.84%	-7.38%	-2.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.13%	4.46%	-0.33%

Volatility

CGW vs. FLOWX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) is 4.43%, while Fidelity Water Sustainability Fund (FLOWX) has a volatility of 5.33%. This indicates that CGW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLOWX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGW	FLOWX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.43%	5.33%	-0.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.20%	11.22%	-1.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.31%	14.33%	-1.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.82%	17.86%	-1.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.72%	18.17%	-0.45%

CGW vs. FLOWX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGW has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is lower than FLOWX's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGW vs. FLOWX - Dividend Comparison

CGW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.59%, less than FLOWX's 2.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGW Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF	1.59%	1.58%	2.27%	1.55%	1.45%	1.59%	1.41%	1.48%	2.14%	1.71%	1.65%	1.67%
FLOWX Fidelity Water Sustainability Fund	2.94%	2.93%	2.51%	0.42%	0.08%	1.41%	1.49%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGW and FLOWX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, CGW and FLOWX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CGW or FLOWX?

FLOWX has higher volatility (5.33%) compared to CGW (4.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGW dropped -57.24% vs FLOWX's -30.63%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLOWX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.45 vs 0.34), 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.