Screener
CGW vs RFV
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Pure Value ETF
Key differences
- RFV costs 0.23% less per year.
- CGW is significantly larger than RFV — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, RFV has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| CGW | RFV | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.58% | 0.35% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $1.0B | $313M |
| Since | 2007 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 1.53% | 1.88% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +5.5% | +24.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | +10.0% | +16.7% |
| CAGR 5Y | +5.6% | +9.8% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.49 | 0.67 |
| Volatility 1Y | 13.38% | 18.26% |
| Max drawdown | -35.72% | -52.24% |
Similar to CGW and RFV
Explore further