CGW vs INCE
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs Franklin Income Equity Focus ETF
Quick Verdict
INCE has a lower expense ratio. INCE delivered stronger 1-year returns. INCE offers more diversification with 97 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGW | INCE | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.58% | 0.29% | |
| AUM | $1.1B | $282M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.54% | 4.86% | |
| Holdings | 82 | 97 | |
| YTD Return | +2.34% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.85% | +23.49% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.23% | +17.60% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.55% | +10.71% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.3% | 13.8% | |
| Max Drawdown | -57.2% | -34.1% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 14, 2007 | Sep 20, 2016 |
CGW vs INCE Performance
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Franklin Income Equity Focus ETF (INCE) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US). Over the past year CGW returned +2.85% while INCE returned +23.49%. Year to date, CGW is up 2.34% versus a gain of 16.64% for INCE.
Over three years, CGW compounded at +11.23% per year against +17.60% for INCE; over five years the annualized figures are +3.55% and +10.71% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, INCE has the edge at +12.55% annualized vs +7.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CGW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 13.8% for INCE. 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 -34.1% for INCE. 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 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGW charges 0.58% per year while INCE charges 0.29%. On a $10,000 position that is $58 vs $29 annually, a gap of $29 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGW currently yields 1.54% against 4.86% for INCE.
Holdings Overlap
CGW and INCE share 0 holdings out of 126 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 INCE?
CGW has an expense ratio of 0.58% while INCE charges 0.29%. INCE is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $29 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGW or INCE?
Over the past year CGW returned +2.85% vs +23.49% for INCE, so INCE leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), CGW annualized +7.18% vs +12.55% for INCE. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGW or INCE?
CGW has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 13.8% for INCE. Worst drawdown: CGW -57.2% vs INCE -34.1%.
Should I hold both CGW and INCE?
CGW and INCE have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CGW and INCE?
CGW and INCE share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 126 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGW or INCE?
CGW yields 1.54% while INCE yields 4.86%, so INCE 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.