PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CWW.TO vs. PHO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CWW.TO vs. PHO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CWW.TO (iShares Global Water Index ETF) and PHO (Invesco Water Resources ETF) are both Water Equities funds - CWW.TO tracks the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD while PHO tracks the NASDAQ OMX US Water Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CWW.TO returned 8.42%/yr vs 12.35%/yr for PHO. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CWW.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for PHO.

Performance

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) and Invesco Water Resources ETF (PHO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CWW.TO is traded in CAD, while PHO is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the PHO values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWW.TO achieves a 0.67% return, which is significantly higher than PHO's -4.20% return. Over the past 10 years, CWW.TO has underperformed PHO with an annualized return of 8.42%, while PHO has yielded a comparatively higher 12.35% annualized return.

CWW.TO

1D
0.76%
1M
-0.37%
YTD
0.67%
6M
-4.32%
1Y
3.23%
3Y*
6.26%
5Y*
4.32%
10Y*
8.42%

PHO

1D
0.71%
1M
0.56%
YTD
-4.20%
6M
-8.29%
1Y
-2.42%
3Y*
8.96%
5Y*
8.22%
10Y*
12.35%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		0.67%10.11%2.99%11.71%-16.52%27.08%12.93%26.85%-2.69%17.91%
PHO
Invesco Water Resources ETF		-4.20%2.68%17.92%16.24%-8.79%30.09%18.79%30.81%1.54%15.68%

Correlation

The correlation between CWW.TO and PHO is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.69

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

0.71

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

0.76

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2009

0.63

The correlation between CWW.TO and PHO shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (all time) to 0.76 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CWW.TO
PHO

Utilities

46.7%
14.1%

Industrials

44.2%
56.3%

Basic Materials

5.8%
8.4%

Energy

1.6%

-

Technology

1.1%
13.1%

Consumer Cyclical

0.5%

-

Real Estate

0.2%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

0.0%

Healthcare

-

8.2%

Utilities

CWW.TO
46.7%
PHO
14.1%

Industrials

CWW.TO
44.2%
PHO
56.3%

Basic Materials

CWW.TO
5.8%
PHO
8.4%

Energy

CWW.TO
1.6%
PHO

-

Technology

CWW.TO
1.1%
PHO
13.1%

Consumer Cyclical

CWW.TO
0.5%
PHO

-

Real Estate

CWW.TO
0.2%
PHO

-

Communication Services

CWW.TO

-

PHO

-

Consumer Defensive

CWW.TO

-

PHO

-

Financial Services

CWW.TO

-

PHO
0.0%

Healthcare

CWW.TO

-

PHO
8.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Global Water Index ETF

Invesco Water Resources ETF

Often compared with CWW.TO:
CWW.TO vs. FIWCWW.TO vs. COW.TOCWW.TO vs. CIF.TOCWW.TO vs. KBWBCWW.TO vs. VFV.TOCWW.TO vs. XAW.TOCWW.TO vs. ENFR
Often compared with PHO:
PHO vs. FIWPHO vs. CGWPHO vs. PIOPHO vs. AQWAPHO vs. SPYPHO vs. VOOPHO vs. EVX

Return for Risk

CWW.TO vs. PHO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CWW.TO
CWW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
PHO
PHO Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
PHO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PHO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
PHO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
PHO Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
PHO Martin Ratio Rank: 55
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.

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) and Invesco Water Resources ETF (PHO). 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.

CWW.TOPHODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.23
-0.16

+0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.44
-0.13

+0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

0.99

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.32

-0.16

+0.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.79

-0.38

+1.17

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.23, which is higher than the PHO Sharpe Ratio of -0.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWW.TO and PHO, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CWW.TOPHODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

-0.16

+0.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.50

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.51

0.70

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.65

-0.27

Drawdowns

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWW.TO drawdown since its inception was -46.54%, which is greater than PHO's maximum drawdown of -28.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWW.TO and PHO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CWW.TOPHODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.54%

-28.81%

-17.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.24%

-15.49%

+5.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.77%

-18.06%

-1.71%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.05%

-27.55%

-3.50%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.05%

-28.81%

-2.24%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.12%

-11.42%

+3.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.47%

-5.25%

-4.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

6.40%

-2.29%

Volatility

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.23% compared to Invesco Water Resources ETF (PHO) at 3.99%. This indicates that CWW.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PHO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CWW.TOPHODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.23%

3.99%

+0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.85%

11.32%

-0.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.83%

15.19%

-1.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.40%

16.51%

-1.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.52%

17.80%

-1.28%

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWW.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than PHO's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWW.TO vs. PHO - Dividend Comparison

CWW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.56%, more than PHO's 0.58% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		1.56%1.34%1.05%1.17%1.28%2.62%1.11%1.24%2.95%1.41%1.60%1.16%
PHO
Invesco Water Resources ETF		0.58%0.54%0.45%0.59%0.49%0.20%0.39%0.43%0.46%0.34%0.47%0.75%

Frequently Asked Questions

CWW.TO and PHO have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, PHO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

PHO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for CWW.TO.

CWW.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while PHO tracks NASDAQ OMX US Water Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for CWW.TO and 0.60% for PHO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CWW.TO and PHO

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