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 68 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | CGW |
|---|---|---|
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Invesco (US) |
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.58% |
| AUM | $119M | $1.0B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.63% | 1.52% |
| Holdings Count | 38 | 82 |
| Inception Date | 2018-06-27 | 2007-05-14 |
| Investment Style | Mid Cap Growth | Mid Cap Blend |
| 1-Month Return | -15.21% | +5.03% |
| YTD Return | +4.73% | +3.29% |
| 1-Year Return | +38.15% | +6.67% |
| 3-Year Return | -6.90% | +9.93% |
| 5-Year Return | -13.32% | +5.67% |
| 10-Year Return | - | +9.87% |
| Buy Score | 59 | 61 |
| Momentum Score | 49 | 39 |
| Value Score | 58 | 70 |
Holdings Overlap
0.0%
Weight Overlap
0
Shared Holdings
105
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 0.58%. 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 105 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 +38.15% while CGW returned +6.67%. ACES outperformed over this period. Past performance does not guarantee future results.