PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
POWA vs. MOO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

POWA vs. MOO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF (POWA) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, POWA achieves a -2.29% return, which is significantly lower than MOO's 10.10% return. Over the past 10 years, POWA has outperformed MOO with an annualized return of 10.28%, while MOO has yielded a comparatively lower 7.00% annualized 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%

MOO

1D
0.48%
1M
-4.21%
YTD
10.10%
6M
11.54%
1Y
13.06%
3Y*
3.07%
5Y*
-0.70%
10Y*
7.00%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

POWA vs. MOO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
POWA
Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF
-2.29%11.71%13.18%10.58%-7.67%24.93%7.61%27.98%-3.96%21.52%
MOO
VanEck Agribusiness ETF
10.10%15.61%-12.43%-8.57%-8.10%23.99%14.59%22.29%-6.03%21.75%

Correlation

The correlation between POWA and MOO is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.46

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.58

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2007

0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between POWA and MOO has dropped to 0.46 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

POWA vs. MOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
POWA
MOO

Technology

25.3%

-

Industrials

19.0%
20.3%

Healthcare

18.4%
15.4%

Consumer Defensive

16.1%
37.9%

Consumer Cyclical

14.8%

-

Financial Services

2.3%

-

Real Estate

2.2%

-

Communication Services

2.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

26.2%

Energy

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

POWA
25.3%
MOO

-

Industrials

POWA
19.0%
MOO
20.3%

Healthcare

POWA
18.4%
MOO
15.4%

Consumer Defensive

POWA
16.1%
MOO
37.9%

Consumer Cyclical

POWA
14.8%
MOO

-

Financial Services

POWA
2.3%
MOO

-

Real Estate

POWA
2.2%
MOO

-

Communication Services

POWA
2.0%
MOO

-

Basic Materials

POWA

-

MOO
26.2%

Energy

POWA

-

MOO

-

Utilities

POWA

-

MOO

-

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. MOO — Risk / Return Rank

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

POWA
POWA Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
POWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
POWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
POWA Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
POWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
POWA Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

MOO
MOO Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
MOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
MOO Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
MOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
MOO Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

POWA vs. MOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF (POWA) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO). 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.


POWAMOODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.17

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.43

1.55

-1.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.18

3.88

-2.70

POWA vs. MOO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current POWA Sharpe Ratio is 0.36, which is lower than the MOO Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of POWA and MOO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


POWAMOODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.36

0.95

-0.58

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

-0.04

+0.58

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

0.39

+0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.22

+0.32

Drawdowns

POWA vs. MOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum POWA drawdown since its inception was -47.91%, smaller than the maximum MOO drawdown of -69.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for POWA and MOO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


POWAMOODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.91%

-69.53%

+21.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.76%

-8.45%

-1.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.00%

-26.83%

+11.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.75%

-39.52%

+21.77%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.53%

-39.52%

+2.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.44%

-17.50%

+11.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.24%

-16.97%

+10.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.59%

3.37%

+0.22%

Volatility

POWA vs. MOO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Bloomberg Pricing Power ETF (POWA) is 3.12%, while VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) has a volatility of 4.08%. This indicates that POWA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


POWAMOODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.12%

4.08%

-0.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.80%

10.57%

-1.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.73%

13.88%

-2.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.92%

17.12%

-3.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.05%

18.19%

-2.14%

POWA vs. MOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

POWA has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than MOO's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

POWA vs. MOO - Dividend Comparison

POWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, less than MOO's 2.24% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MOO
VanEck Agribusiness ETF
2.24%2.47%3.41%2.93%2.15%1.17%1.10%1.26%1.69%1.44%2.14%2.89%
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 MOO have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MOO has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to POWA (3.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, POWA dropped -47.91% vs MOO's -69.53%.

On 10-year performance, POWA leads with 10.28% vs 7.00% for MOO. 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 10-year period, POWA has performed better with a 10.28% return vs 7.00%. 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 0.55% for MOO.

MOO has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 0.96% for POWA.

POWA tracks Bloomberg Pricing Power Index, while MOO tracks MVIS Global Agribusiness Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for POWA and 0.55% for MOO.

MOO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for POWA and MOO

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