PIO vs. CGW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PIO (Invesco Global Water ETF) and CGW (Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF) are both Water Equities funds from Invesco - PIO tracks the NASDAQ OMX Global Water Index while CGW tracks the S&P Global Water Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PIO returned 8.55%/yr vs 9.46%/yr for CGW. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PIO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.57%/yr for CGW.

Performance

PIO vs. CGW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Global Water ETF (PIO) 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, PIO achieves a 0.14% return, which is significantly higher than CGW's -1.32% return. Over the past 10 years, PIO has underperformed CGW with an annualized return of 8.55%, while CGW has yielded a comparatively higher 9.46% annualized return.

PIO

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: -2.45%
• YTD: 0.14%
• 6M: -1.81%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: 8.97%
• 5Y*: 3.23%
• 10Y*: 8.55%

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)

PIO vs. CGW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PIO Invesco Global Water ETF	0.14%	14.25%	-0.44%	22.19%	-24.06%	25.97%	14.22%	35.59%	-9.71%	26.52%
CGW Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF	-1.32%	18.10%	4.55%	15.50%	-22.00%	31.70%	15.41%	34.04%	-10.47%	27.08%

Correlation

The correlation between PIO and CGW is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2007	0.87

The correlation between PIO and CGW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

PIO vs. CGW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PIO	CGW
Industrials	56.4%	44.3%
Basic Materials	8.6%	5.8%
Technology	8.0%	1.1%
Utilities	7.7%	46.6%
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	0.5%
Healthcare	4.6%	-
Financial Services	0.2%	0.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	1.6%
Real Estate	-	0.2%

Return for Risk

PIO vs. CGW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PIO

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

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.

PIO vs. CGW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Global Water ETF (PIO) 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.

	PIO	CGW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.20	0.22	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.39	0.41	-0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.05	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.22	0.27	-0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.63	0.73	-0.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PIO vs. CGW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PIO Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is comparable to the CGW Sharpe Ratio of 0.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PIO 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

	PIO	CGW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20	0.22	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.18	0.27	-0.09
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.47	0.54	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.20	0.34	-0.14

Drawdowns

PIO vs. CGW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PIO drawdown since its inception was -64.88%, which is greater than CGW's maximum drawdown of -57.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PIO and CGW.

Drawdown Indicators

	PIO	CGW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.88%	-57.24%	-7.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.14%	-10.86%	-2.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.08%	-16.24%	-0.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.27%	-32.74%	-1.53%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.76%	-35.72%	-0.04%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.07%	-9.70%	+0.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.43%	-9.84%	-5.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.60%	4.09%	+0.51%

Volatility

PIO vs. CGW - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Global Water ETF (PIO) and Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) have volatilities of 4.44% and 4.50%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PIO	CGW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.44%	4.50%	-0.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.12%	10.17%	+1.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.58%	13.28%	+1.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.63%	16.82%	+0.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.22%	17.72%	+0.50%

PIO vs. CGW - Expense Ratio Comparison

PIO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CGW's 0.57% expense ratio.

Dividends

PIO vs. CGW - Dividend Comparison

PIO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%, less than CGW's 1.60% yield.

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%
PIO Invesco Global Water ETF	1.02%	1.04%	0.78%	0.84%	1.02%	1.19%	0.88%	1.20%	2.00%	1.00%	1.45%	1.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PIO and CGW in my portfolio?

PIO and CGW have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PIO or CGW?

CGW has higher volatility (4.50%) compared to PIO (4.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PIO dropped -64.88% vs CGW's -57.24%.

Which ETF is better, PIO or CGW?

On 10-year performance, CGW leads with 9.46% vs 8.55% for PIO. On fees, CGW is cheaper at 0.57% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PIO or CGW?

Over the 10-year period, CGW has performed better with a 9.46% return vs 8.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PIO or CGW?

CGW is cheaper with a 0.57% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PIO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PIO or CGW?

CGW has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 1.02% for PIO.

What is the main difference between PIO and CGW?

PIO tracks NASDAQ OMX Global Water Index, while CGW tracks S&P Global Water Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PIO and 0.57% for CGW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.22 vs 0.20), 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.