PIO vs. FMAT

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

PIO (Invesco Global Water ETF) and FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PIO is a Water Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ OMX Global Water Index, while FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PIO returned 8.71%/yr vs 9.55%/yr for FMAT. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. PIO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FMAT.

Performance

PIO vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Global Water ETF (PIO) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PIO achieves a 2.47% return, which is significantly lower than FMAT's 8.05% return. Over the past 10 years, PIO has underperformed FMAT with an annualized return of 8.71%, while FMAT has yielded a comparatively higher 9.55% annualized return.

PIO

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: -1.36%
• 6M: -2.92%
• YTD: 2.47%
• 1Y: 3.32%
• 3Y*: 7.98%
• 5Y*: 2.43%
• 10Y*: 8.71%
• ALL TIME*: 4.54%

FMAT

• 1D: -2.33%
• 1M: -4.27%
• 6M: -0.47%
• YTD: 8.05%
• 1Y: 16.93%
• 3Y*: 7.48%
• 5Y*: 5.78%
• 10Y*: 9.55%
• ALL TIME*: 8.42%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	$2.12M	$3.31M	$3.29M
PIO Invesco Global Water ETF	$316.94K	$288.77K	$459.19K

PIO vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PIO Invesco Global Water ETF	2.47%	14.25%	-0.44%	22.19%	-24.06%	25.97%	14.22%	35.59%	-9.71%	26.52%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	8.05%	12.11%	0.47%	13.71%	-11.54%	27.45%	19.57%	23.35%	-17.40%	23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between PIO and FMAT is 0.74, 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.	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.76
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.76
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013	0.74

The correlation between PIO and FMAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

PIO vs. FMAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PIO	FMAT
Industrials	53.0%	0.1%
Utilities	17.6%	-
Healthcare	10.2%	0.6%
Basic Materials	9.6%	90.2%
Technology	8.1%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	1.6%	7.1%
Financial Services	0.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	0.1%
Energy	-	0.4%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

PIO vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PIO

PIO Risk / Return Rank: 14
PIO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
PIO Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
PIO Omega Ratio Rank: 14
PIO Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
PIO Martin Ratio Rank: 14

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 34
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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.

PIO vs. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Global Water ETF (PIO) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). 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.

	PIO	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.20	0.86	-0.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.39	1.30	-0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.15	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.23	1.19	-0.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.54	3.41	-2.87

PIO vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PIO Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PIO and FMAT, 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

PIO vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PIO drawdown since its inception was -64.88%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PIO and FMAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	PIO	FMAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.88%	-41.11%	-23.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.14%	-13.48%	+0.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.08%	-23.17%	+6.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.27%	-25.40%	-8.87%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.76%	-41.11%	+5.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.96%	-8.21%	+1.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.36%	-6.86%	-8.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.56%	4.69%	+0.87%

Volatility

PIO vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Global Water ETF (PIO) is 4.33%, while Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a volatility of 5.53%. This indicates that PIO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PIO	FMAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.33%	5.53%	-1.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.71%	15.12%	-2.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.35%	18.65%	-3.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.74%	19.73%	-1.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.14%	21.21%	-3.07%

PIO vs. FMAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PIO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than FMAT's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

PIO vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

PIO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than FMAT's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.47%	1.64%	1.68%	1.71%	2.00%	1.44%	1.73%	1.89%	2.18%	1.53%	1.78%	2.16%
PIO Invesco Global Water ETF	0.90%	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 FMAT in my portfolio?

PIO and FMAT have a correlation of 0.74, 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 FMAT?

FMAT has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to PIO (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PIO dropped -64.88% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

Which ETF is better, PIO or FMAT?

On 10-year performance, FMAT leads with 9.55% vs 8.71% for PIO. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, PIO has been the lower-risk option at 4.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PIO or FMAT?

Over the 10-year period, FMAT has performed better with a 9.55% return vs 8.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PIO or FMAT?

FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PIO.

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

FMAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 0.90% for PIO.

What is the main difference between PIO and FMAT?

PIO is categorized as Water Equities, while FMAT is Materials. PIO tracks NASDAQ OMX Global Water Index, while FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PIO and 0.08% for FMAT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.86 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.