ACES vs CGW
vs
ACES vs CGW
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF
vs
✓All holdings
✓Overlap Analysis
✓ETF Screener
✓Compare ETFs
Quick Verdict
ACES has a lower expense ratio. ACES delivered stronger 1-year returns. CGW offers more diversification with 77 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | CGW |
|---|---|---|
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Invesco (US) |
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.59% |
| AUM | $118M | $1.0B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.70% | 1.45% |
| Holdings Count | 38 | 77 |
| Inception Date | 2018-06-27 | 2007-05-14 |
| Investment Style | Mid Cap Growth | Mid Cap Blend |
| 1-Month Return | -8.31% | +4.39% |
| YTD Return | -3.93% | +7.98% |
| 1-Year Return | +37.28% | +23.15% |
| 3-Year Return | -11.44% | +12.85% |
| 5-Year Return | -15.90% | +8.95% |
| 10-Year Return | - | +11.62% |
| Buy Score | 58 | 81 |
| Momentum Score | 33 | 83 |
| Value Score | 63 | 52 |
Holdings Overlap
0.0%
Weight Overlap
0
Shared Holdings
0
Total Unique
Sector Allocation
Loading chart...
Frequently Asked Questions
Which has lower fees, ACES or CGW?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while CGW charges 0.59%. ACES is the cheaper option, saving you money on management fees over time.
Do ACES and CGW hold the same stocks?
ACES and CGW share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. They hold 0 unique securities combined. The moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Which performed better, ACES or CGW?
Over the past year, ACES returned +37.28% while CGW returned +23.15%. ACES outperformed over this period. Past performance does not guarantee future results.