FLOWX vs. CGW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

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

Performance

FLOWX vs. CGW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

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

FLOWX

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

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%

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

FLOWX vs. CGW - Yearly Performance Comparison

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

Correlation

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

Return for Risk

FLOWX vs. CGW — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

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

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.

FLOWX vs. CGW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Water Sustainability Fund (FLOWX) 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.

	FLOWX	CGW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.45	0.34	+0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.72	0.57	+0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.07	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.50	0.42	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.44	1.10	+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.

FLOWX vs. CGW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLOWX Sharpe Ratio is 0.45, which is higher than the CGW Sharpe Ratio of 0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLOWX 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLOWX	CGW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45	0.34	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.40	0.28	+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	0.72	0.34	+0.38

Drawdowns

FLOWX vs. CGW - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

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

Volatility

FLOWX vs. CGW - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Water Sustainability Fund (FLOWX) has a higher volatility of 5.33% compared to Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) at 4.43%. This indicates that FLOWX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

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

FLOWX vs. CGW - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FLOWX vs. CGW - Dividend Comparison

FLOWX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.94%, more than CGW's 1.59% 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 FLOWX and CGW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, FLOWX and CGW 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, FLOWX or CGW?

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

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.