Screener
CGW vs RFG
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Pure Growth ETF
Key differences
- RFG costs 0.23% less per year.
- CGW is significantly larger than RFG — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, RFG has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| CGW | RFG | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.58% | 0.35% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $1.0B | $329M |
| Since | 2007 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 1.53% | 0.34% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +5.5% | +34.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | +10.0% | +20.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | +5.6% | +8.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.49 | 0.84 |
| Volatility 1Y | 13.38% | 18.65% |
| Max drawdown | -35.72% | -42.92% |
Similar to CGW and RFG
Explore further