GWH vs. CGW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GWH (ESS Tech, Inc.) is a stock, while CGW (Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF) is Water Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Water Index. Over the past 5 years, GWH returned -63.81%/yr vs 4.58%/yr for CGW. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

GWH vs. CGW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ESS Tech, Inc. (GWH) 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, GWH achieves a -51.06% return, which is significantly lower than CGW's -1.32% return.

GWH

• 1D: -6.12%
• 1M: -17.12%
• YTD: -51.06%
• 6M: -59.47%
• 1Y: -30.83%
• 3Y*: -63.49%
• 5Y*: -63.81%
• 10Y*: —

CGW

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: -2.55%
• YTD: -1.32%
• 6M: -2.18%
• 1Y: 2.96%
• 3Y*: 9.32%
• 5Y*: 4.58%
• 10Y*: 9.46%

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

GWH vs. CGW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GWH ESS Tech, Inc.	-51.06%	-68.03%	-65.61%	-53.09%	-78.76%	13.27%
CGW Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF	-1.32%	18.10%	4.55%	15.50%	-22.00%	32.38%

Correlation

The correlation between GWH and CGW is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.29
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2021	0.31

Return for Risk

GWH vs. CGW — Risk / Return Rank

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

GWH

GWH Risk / Return Rank: 46
GWH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
GWH Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
GWH Omega Ratio Rank: 64
GWH Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
GWH Martin Ratio Rank: 33

CGW

CGW Risk / Return Rank: 11
CGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
CGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
CGW Omega Ratio Rank: 10
CGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
CGW Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

GWH vs. CGW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ESS Tech, Inc. (GWH) 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.

	GWH	CGW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.14	0.22	-0.36
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.55	0.41	+1.14
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.05	+0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.34	0.27	-0.61
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.47	0.73	-1.20
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GWH vs. CGW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GWH Sharpe Ratio is -0.14, which is lower than the CGW Sharpe Ratio of 0.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GWH 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

	GWH	CGW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.14	0.22	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.42	0.27	-0.69
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.54	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.42	0.34	-0.76

Drawdowns

GWH vs. CGW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GWH drawdown since its inception was -99.78%, which is greater than CGW's maximum drawdown of -57.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GWH and CGW.

Drawdown Indicators

	GWH	CGW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.78%	-57.24%	-42.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-91.46%	-10.86%	-80.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-97.41%	-16.24%	-81.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-99.78%	-32.74%	-67.04%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.74%	-9.70%	-90.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-78.82%	-9.84%	-68.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	65.31%	4.09%	+61.22%

Volatility

GWH vs. CGW - Volatility Comparison

ESS Tech, Inc. (GWH) has a higher volatility of 47.06% compared to Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) at 4.50%. This indicates that GWH'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

	GWH	CGW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	47.06%	4.50%	+42.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	65.85%	10.17%	+55.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	221.52%	13.28%	+208.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	153.29%	16.82%	+136.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	147.35%	17.72%	+129.63%

Dividends

GWH vs. CGW - Dividend Comparison

GWH has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CGW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGW Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF	1.60%	1.58%	2.27%	1.55%	1.45%	1.59%	1.41%	1.48%	2.14%	1.71%	1.65%	1.67%
GWH ESS Tech, Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GWH and CGW in my portfolio?

GWH and CGW have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GWH or CGW?

GWH has higher volatility (47.06%) compared to CGW (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GWH dropped -99.78% vs CGW's -57.24%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.22 vs -0.14), 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.