POWA vs. CNAV
POWA (Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF) and CNAV (Mohr Company Nav ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. POWA is passively managed, while CNAV is actively managed. Over the past year, POWA returned 4.21% vs 72.64% for CNAV. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. POWA charges 0.40%/yr vs 1.31%/yr for CNAV.
Performance
POWA vs. CNAV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, POWA achieves a -2.29% return, which is significantly lower than CNAV's 47.26% return.
POWA
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.44%
- YTD
- -2.29%
- 6M
- -2.55%
- 1Y
- 4.21%
- 3Y*
- 10.86%
- 5Y*
- 7.41%
- 10Y*
- 10.28%
CNAV
- 1D
- 1.11%
- 1M
- 21.60%
- YTD
- 47.26%
- 6M
- 48.02%
- 1Y
- 72.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
POWA vs. CNAV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
POWA Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF | -2.29% | 11.71% | -2.77% |
CNAV Mohr Company Nav ETF | 47.26% | 16.80% | 6.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between POWA and CNAV is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2024 | 0.54 |
The correlation between POWA and CNAV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
POWA vs. CNAV — Risk / Return Rank
POWA
CNAV
POWA vs. CNAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF (POWA) and Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV). 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.
| POWA | CNAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.55 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.48 | -0.42 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.43 | 5.63 | -5.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.18 | 24.09 | -22.91 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| POWA | CNAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 | 2.91 | -2.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.64 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 1.62 | -1.08 |
Drawdowns
POWA vs. CNAV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum POWA drawdown since its inception was -47.91%, which is greater than CNAV's maximum drawdown of -30.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for POWA and CNAV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| POWA | CNAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.91% | -30.06% | -17.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.76% | -12.97% | +3.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.00% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.75% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.53% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.44% | 0.00% | -6.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.24% | -5.42% | -0.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.59% | 3.02% | +0.57% |
Volatility
POWA vs. CNAV - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF (POWA) is 3.12%, while Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV) has a volatility of 12.28%. This indicates that POWA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNAV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| POWA | CNAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.12% | 12.28% | -9.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.80% | 21.02% | -12.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.73% | 25.08% | -13.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.92% | 27.16% | -13.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.05% | 27.16% | -11.11% |
POWA vs. CNAV - Expense Ratio Comparison
POWA has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CNAV's 1.31% expense ratio.
Dividends
POWA vs. CNAV - Dividend Comparison
POWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, while CNAV has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNAV Mohr Company Nav ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
POWA Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF | 0.96% | 0.94% | 0.79% | 1.60% | 1.48% | 1.06% | 1.34% | 1.16% | 1.39% | 1.63% | 2.18% | 3.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
POWA and CNAV have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CNAV has higher volatility (12.28%) compared to POWA (3.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, POWA dropped -47.91% vs CNAV's -30.06%.
On 1-year performance, CNAV leads with 72.64% vs 4.21% for POWA. On fees, POWA is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, POWA has been the lower-risk option at 3.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CNAV has performed better with a 72.64% return vs 4.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
POWA is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for CNAV.
POWA has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.00% for CNAV.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Mohr. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for POWA and 1.31% for CNAV.
CNAV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 0.36), 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.
Find the right allocation for POWA and CNAV
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer