PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DGT vs. CGW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DGT vs. CGW - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGT achieves a 14.11% return, which is significantly higher than CGW's 3.58% return. Over the past 10 years, DGT has outperformed CGW with an annualized return of 13.82%, while CGW has yielded a comparatively lower 9.92% annualized return.


DGT

1D
0.34%
1M
1.92%
6M
8.79%
YTD
14.11%
1Y
29.88%
3Y*
21.39%
5Y*
14.43%
10Y*
13.82%
ALL TIME*
5.62%

CGW

1D
0.46%
1M
-0.82%
6M
-1.08%
YTD
3.58%
1Y
6.44%
3Y*
10.27%
5Y*
4.19%
10Y*
9.92%
ALL TIME*
7.28%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$1.71M$1.82M$1.98M
$1.76M$1.50M$2.39M

DGT vs. CGW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DGT
State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF
14.11%30.04%14.15%20.95%-8.00%21.50%9.67%22.19%-9.65%24.87%
CGW
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF
3.58%18.10%4.55%15.50%-22.00%31.70%15.41%34.04%-10.47%27.08%

Correlation

The correlation between DGT and CGW is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.71

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.75

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.77

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2007

0.76

The correlation between DGT and CGW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

DGT vs. CGW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
DGT
CGW

Technology

16.7%
1.4%

Financial Services

15.2%
0.0%

Industrials

12.3%
45.5%

Healthcare

11.6%

-

Consumer Cyclical

7.3%
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

6.5%

-

Energy

5.2%
1.9%

Basic Materials

4.9%
6.0%

Communication Services

4.5%

-

Real Estate

1.5%
0.2%

Utilities

1.3%
44.6%

Technology

DGT
16.7%
CGW
1.4%

Financial Services

DGT
15.2%
CGW
0.0%

Industrials

DGT
12.3%
CGW
45.5%

Healthcare

DGT
11.6%
CGW

-

Consumer Cyclical

DGT
7.3%
CGW
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

DGT
6.5%
CGW

-

Energy

DGT
5.2%
CGW
1.9%

Basic Materials

DGT
4.9%
CGW
6.0%

Communication Services

DGT
4.5%
CGW

-

Real Estate

DGT
1.5%
CGW
0.2%

Utilities

DGT
1.3%
CGW
44.6%

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

DGT vs. CGW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

DGT
DGT Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
DGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGT Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
DGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGT Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

CGW
CGW Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
CGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGW Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
CGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGW Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

DGT vs. CGW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF (DGT) and Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW). 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.


DGTCGWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.08

+0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.58

0.60

+2.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.34

1.33

+13.01

DGT vs. CGW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DGT Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is higher than the CGW Sharpe Ratio of 0.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGT and CGW, 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

DGT vs. CGW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGT drawdown since its inception was -55.36%, roughly equal to the maximum CGW drawdown of -57.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGT and CGW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DGTCGWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.36%

-57.24%

+1.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.38%

-10.86%

+2.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.67%

-14.19%

-0.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.18%

-32.74%

+7.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.40%

-35.72%

+1.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-5.21%

+5.21%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.75%

-9.81%

-3.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.09%

4.85%

-2.76%

Volatility

DGT vs. CGW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF (DGT) is 2.95%, while Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) has a volatility of 3.99%. This indicates that DGT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DGTCGWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.95%

3.99%

-1.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.33%

10.79%

-0.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.39%

13.90%

-1.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.14%

16.87%

-1.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.79%

17.62%

-0.83%

DGT vs. CGW - Expense Ratio Comparison

DGT has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CGW's 0.57% expense ratio.


Dividends

DGT vs. CGW - Dividend Comparison

DGT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.46%, more than CGW's 1.53% 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%
DGT
State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF
2.46%2.78%2.83%2.53%3.15%2.66%1.97%2.76%2.50%1.93%2.31%2.37%

Frequently Asked Questions


DGT and CGW have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CGW has higher volatility (3.99%) compared to DGT (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGT dropped -55.36% vs CGW's -57.24%.

On 10-year performance, DGT leads with 13.82% vs 9.92% for CGW. On fees, DGT is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, DGT has been the lower-risk option at 2.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DGT has performed better with a 13.82% return vs 9.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DGT is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.57% for CGW.

DGT has the higher dividend yield at 2.46%, compared with 1.53% for CGW.

DGT is categorized as Global Equities, while CGW is Water Equities. DGT tracks The Global Dow, while CGW tracks S&P Global Water Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for DGT and 0.57% for CGW.

DGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 0.47), 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 DGT and CGW

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