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 693 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
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 5 common holdings with a 0.3% weight overlap. They hold 748 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.