CGW vs IZRL
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF vs ARK Israel Innovative Technology ETF
Quick Verdict
IZRL has a lower expense ratio. IZRL delivered stronger 1-year returns. CGW offers more diversification with 82 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGW | IZRL | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.58% | 0.49% | |
| AUM | $1.1B | $137M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.54% | 2.63% | |
| Holdings | 82 | 67 | |
| YTD Return | +2.34% | -3.33% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.85% | +7.20% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.23% | +15.13% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.55% | -0.29% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.3% | 23.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -57.2% | -60.0% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Ark Invest | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 14, 2007 | Dec 4, 2017 |
CGW vs IZRL Performance
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and ARK Israel Innovative Technology ETF (IZRL) is a ETF from Ark Invest. Over the past year CGW returned +2.85% while IZRL returned +7.20%. Year to date, CGW is up 2.34% versus a loss of 3.33% for IZRL.
Over three years, CGW compounded at +11.23% per year against +15.13% for IZRL; over five years the annualized figures are +3.55% and -0.29% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, CGW has the edge at +7.18% annualized vs +5.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IZRL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.5% compared with 17.3% for CGW. 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 -60.0% for IZRL. 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 IZRL charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $58 vs $49 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGW currently yields 1.54% against 2.63% for IZRL.
Holdings Overlap
CGW and IZRL share 0 holdings out of 133 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 IZRL?
CGW has an expense ratio of 0.58% while IZRL charges 0.49%. IZRL is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $9 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGW or IZRL?
Over the past year CGW returned +2.85% vs +7.20% for IZRL, so IZRL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), CGW annualized +7.18% vs +5.06% for IZRL. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGW or IZRL?
IZRL has been the more volatile fund at 23.5% annualized versus 17.3% for CGW. Worst drawdown: CGW -57.2% vs IZRL -60.0%.
Should I hold both CGW and IZRL?
CGW and IZRL 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 IZRL?
CGW and IZRL share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 133 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGW or IZRL?
CGW yields 1.54% while IZRL yields 2.63%, so IZRL 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.