CGW vs MFEM
vs
CGW vs MFEM
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF
vs
✓All holdings
✓Overlap Analysis
✓ETF Screener
✓Compare ETFs
Quick Verdict
MFEM has a lower expense ratio. MFEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. MFEM offers more diversification with 772 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGW | MFEM |
|---|---|---|
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | PIMCO (US) |
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.49% |
| AUM | $1.0B | $127M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.45% | 2.32% |
| Holdings Count | 77 | 772 |
| Inception Date | 2007-05-14 | 2017-08-31 |
| Investment Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| 1-Month Return | +4.39% | +9.42% |
| YTD Return | +7.98% | +7.98% |
| 1-Year Return | +23.15% | +37.08% |
| 3-Year Return | +12.85% | +15.74% |
| 5-Year Return | +8.95% | +7.46% |
| 10-Year Return | +11.62% | - |
| Buy Score | 81 | 68 |
| Momentum Score | 83 | 79 |
| Value Score | 52 | 53 |
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 MFEM?
CGW has an expense ratio of 0.59% while MFEM charges 0.49%. MFEM is the cheaper option, saving you money on management fees over time.
Do CGW and MFEM hold the same stocks?
CGW and MFEM 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 MFEM?
Over the past year, CGW returned +23.15% while MFEM returned +37.08%. MFEM outperformed over this period. Past performance does not guarantee future results.