CGW vs SBIO
vs
CGW vs SBIO
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF
vs
✓All holdings
✓Overlap Analysis
✓ETF Screener
✓Compare ETFs
Quick Verdict
SBIO has a lower expense ratio. SBIO delivered stronger 1-year returns. SBIO offers more diversification with 86 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGW | SBIO |
|---|---|---|
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | ALPS Advisors |
| Expense Ratio | 0.58% | 0.50% |
| AUM | $1.1B | $197M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.52% | 0.00% |
| Holdings Count | 82 | 87 |
| Inception Date | 2007-05-14 | 2014-12-30 |
| Investment Style | Mid Cap Blend | Small Cap Growth |
| 1-Month Return | -3.82% | +1.42% |
| YTD Return | -1.65% | +8.15% |
| 1-Year Return | +4.08% | +87.52% |
| 3-Year Return | +10.37% | +21.37% |
| 5-Year Return | +4.62% | +3.88% |
| 10-Year Return | +9.48% | +8.82% |
| Buy Score | 59 | 61 |
| Momentum Score | 15 | 59 |
| Value Score | 72 | 70 |
Holdings Overlap
0.0%
Weight Overlap
0
Shared Holdings
86
Total Unique
Sector Allocation
Loading chart...
Frequently Asked Questions
Which has lower fees, CGW or SBIO?
CGW has an expense ratio of 0.58% while SBIO charges 0.50%. SBIO is the cheaper option, saving you money on management fees over time.
Do CGW and SBIO hold the same stocks?
CGW and SBIO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. They hold 86 unique securities combined. The moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Which performed better, CGW or SBIO?
Over the past year, CGW returned +4.08% while SBIO returned +87.52%. SBIO outperformed over this period. Past performance does not guarantee future results.