GWRS vs. CGW

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

GWRS (Global Water Resources, 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 10 years, GWRS returned 0.25%/yr vs 9.85%/yr for CGW. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

GWRS vs. CGW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global Water Resources, Inc. (GWRS) 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, GWRS achieves a -14.20% return, which is significantly lower than CGW's 3.62% return. Over the past 10 years, GWRS has underperformed CGW with an annualized return of 0.25%, while CGW has yielded a comparatively higher 9.85% annualized return.

GWRS

• 1D: 1.43%
• 1M: 1.50%
• 6M: -15.89%
• YTD: -14.20%
• 1Y: -29.34%
• 3Y*: -16.16%
• 5Y*: -13.83%
• 10Y*: 0.25%

CGW

• 1D: -0.46%
• 1M: 3.74%
• 6M: 1.41%
• YTD: 3.62%
• 1Y: 6.77%
• 3Y*: 9.75%
• 5Y*: 5.30%
• 10Y*: 9.85%

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

GWRS vs. CGW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GWRS Global Water Resources, Inc.	-14.20%	-24.33%	-9.94%	0.95%	-20.68%	20.65%	12.34%	33.21%	11.84%	5.74%
CGW Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF	3.62%	18.10%	4.55%	15.50%	-22.00%	31.70%	15.41%	34.04%	-10.47%	27.08%

Correlation

The correlation between GWRS and CGW is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.40
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2016	0.38

Return for Risk

GWRS vs. CGW — Risk / Return Rank

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

GWRS

GWRS Risk / Return Rank: 11
GWRS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
GWRS Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
GWRS Omega Ratio Rank: 11
GWRS Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
GWRS Martin Ratio Rank: 12

CGW

CGW Risk / Return Rank: 18
CGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
CGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
CGW Omega Ratio Rank: 17
CGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
CGW Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

GWRS vs. CGW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global Water Resources, Inc. (GWRS) 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.

	GWRS	CGW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.87	0.50	-1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.08	0.79	-1.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	1.09	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.77	0.63	-1.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.31	1.45	-2.76

GWRS vs. CGW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GWRS Sharpe Ratio is -0.87, which is lower than the CGW Sharpe Ratio of 0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GWRS 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.

Drawdowns

GWRS vs. CGW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GWRS drawdown since its inception was -63.38%, which is greater than CGW's maximum drawdown of -57.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GWRS and CGW.

Drawdown Indicators

	GWRS	CGW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.38%	-57.24%	-6.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-38.17%	-10.86%	-27.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.36%	-16.24%	-32.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-63.38%	-32.74%	-30.64%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-63.38%	-35.72%	-27.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-60.62%	-5.18%	-55.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.31%	-9.82%	-12.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	22.46%	4.67%	+17.79%

Volatility

GWRS vs. CGW - Volatility Comparison

Global Water Resources, Inc. (GWRS) has a higher volatility of 9.00% compared to Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) at 4.41%. This indicates that GWRS'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

	GWRS	CGW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.00%	4.41%	+4.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.33%	10.89%	+15.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.75%	13.72%	+20.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.18%	16.87%	+15.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.59%	17.60%	+15.99%

Dividends

GWRS vs. CGW - Dividend Comparison

GWRS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, more than CGW's 1.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
GWRS Global Water Resources, Inc.	4.27%	3.60%	2.62%	2.28%	2.22%	1.71%	2.01%	2.18%	2.81%	2.94%	1.90%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GWRS and CGW in my portfolio?

GWRS and CGW have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GWRS or CGW?

GWRS has higher volatility (9.00%) compared to CGW (4.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GWRS dropped -63.38% vs CGW's -57.24%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.50 vs -0.87), 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.