CGW vs FTCB
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs First Trust Core Investment Grade ETF
Quick Verdict
FTCB has a lower expense ratio. CGW delivered stronger 1-year returns. FTCB offers more diversification with 331 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGW | FTCB | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.58% | 0.56% | |
| AUM | $1.0B | $2.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.52% | 5.24% | |
| Holdings | 82 | 721 | |
| YTD Return | +3.73% | -0.12% | |
| 1Y Return | +5.35% | +2.42% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.56% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +4.07% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.3% | 5.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -57.2% | -5.0% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 14, 2007 | Nov 7, 2023 |
CGW vs FTCB Performance
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and First Trust Core Investment Grade ETF (FTCB) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year CGW returned +5.35% while FTCB returned +2.42%. Year to date, CGW is up 3.73% versus a loss of 0.12% for FTCB.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CGW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 5.1% for FTCB. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -57.2% for CGW and -5.0% for FTCB. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.60. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGW charges 0.58% per year while FTCB charges 0.56%. On a $10,000 position that is $58 vs $56 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGW currently yields 1.52% against 5.24% for FTCB.
Holdings Overlap
CGW and FTCB share 0 holdings out of 399 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CGW or FTCB?
CGW has an expense ratio of 0.58% while FTCB charges 0.56%. FTCB is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $2 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGW or FTCB?
Over the past year CGW returned +5.35% vs +2.42% for FTCB, so CGW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), CGW annualized +7.27% vs +5.66% for FTCB. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGW or FTCB?
CGW has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 5.1% for FTCB. Worst drawdown: CGW -57.2% vs FTCB -5.0%.
Should I hold both CGW and FTCB?
CGW and FTCB have a monthly-return correlation of 0.60, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CGW and FTCB?
CGW and FTCB share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 399 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGW or FTCB?
CGW yields 1.52% while FTCB yields 5.24%, so FTCB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.