CGW vs FFLV
vs
CGW vs FFLV
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF
vs
✓All holdings
✓Overlap Analysis
✓ETF Screener
✓Compare ETFs
Quick Verdict
FFLV has a lower expense ratio. CGW delivered stronger 1-year returns. FFLV offers more diversification with 132 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGW | FFLV |
|---|---|---|
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Fidelity Investments (US) |
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.38% |
| AUM | $1.0B | $16M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.45% | 1.49% |
| Holdings Count | 77 | 132 |
| Inception Date | 2007-05-14 | 2024-02-09 |
| Investment Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| 1-Month Return | +4.39% | +3.54% |
| YTD Return | +7.98% | +6.77% |
| 1-Year Return | +23.15% | +20.71% |
| 3-Year Return | +12.85% | - |
| 5-Year Return | +8.95% | - |
| 10-Year Return | +11.62% | - |
| Buy Score | 81 | 66 |
| Momentum Score | 83 | 79 |
| Value Score | 52 | - |
Holdings Overlap
0.0%
Weight Overlap
0
Shared Holdings
0
Total Unique
Sector Allocation
Loading chart...
Frequently Asked Questions
Which has lower fees, CGW or FFLV?
CGW has an expense ratio of 0.59% while FFLV charges 0.38%. FFLV is the cheaper option, saving you money on management fees over time.
Do CGW and FFLV hold the same stocks?
CGW and FFLV 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, CGW or FFLV?
Over the past year, CGW returned +23.15% while FFLV returned +20.71%. CGW outperformed over this period. Past performance does not guarantee future results.