CGWvsMGNRETF Comparison
VS
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) and American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) belong to the same industry segment: Natural Resources. CGW's top 3 sector exposures are Utilities, Industrials and Non-Energy Materials. In contrast, MGNR's top sector exposures are Non-Energy Materials, Energy and Industrials. CGW is less expensive with a Total Expense Ratio (TER) of 0.59%, versus 0.75% for MGNR. CGW is up 3.81% year-to-date (YTD) with +$41M in YTD flows. MGNR performs better with 11.41% YTD performance, and +$463M in YTD flows. Run a side-by-side ETF comparison of CGW and MGNR below, and assess how they stack up in performance, liquidity, risk, exposure, holdings, and more, helping you select the best ETF for your investments.
Find out how industry players manage ETF portfolios. Discover our library of Model portfolios
CGW vs MGNR performance and flow charts
Performance
Cumulative Flows
Historic performance and flows
Data as of 08/03/2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | CGW MGNR | -0.63%+1.12% | +1.88%-9.75% | +3.81%+11.41% | +5.49%+49.34% | +34.27%n/a | +23.01%n/a |
| Flows | CGW MGNR | +$5M+$29M | +$15M+$120M | +$41M+$463M | +$26M+$587M | -$156M- | -$134M- |
Volatility and drawdown
| 3M | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volatility | CGW MGNR | +14.52%+24.19% | +13.31%+23.87% | +13.78%n/a | +15.73%n/a |
| Max drawdown | CGW MGNR | -5.68%-15.40% | -10.52%-15.40% | -14.42%n/a | -32.65%n/a |
| Max drawdown duration | CGW MGNR | 50d62d | 158d62d | 227dn/a | 862dn/a |
Trading data
CGW | MGNR | |
Last sale 8/4/2026 at 2:37 PM | $65.59 | $50.04 |
| Previous close 08/03/2026 | $65.27 | $49.00 |
| Consolidated volume 08/03/2026 | ||
| Average volume 30 days | ||
| Average discount or premium 30 days | ||
| Average Bid/Ask spread 30 days |
Replication quality
Data as of July 31, 2026
1-year trailing difference
Create an account to view replication metrics
Join for free
MGNR
is actively managed and doesn’t replicate an indexCGW | MGNR | |
|---|---|---|
| Tracking error | ||
| Tracking difference | ||
| 1 year cumulative return difference | ||
| Best | ||
| Worst | ||
| Daily return difference | ||
| Average | ||
| Worst | ||
Advertisement
Main metrics
Last update 8/4/2026 at 2:37 PM
Live
Closed
CGW | MGNR | |
|---|---|---|
| Last price | $65.59 | $50.04 |
| 1D performance | +0.49% | +2.12% |
| AuM | $1.06 B | $842.85 M |
| E/R | 0.59% | 0.75% |
Characteristics
CGW | MGNR | |
|---|---|---|
| Management strategy | Passive | Active |
| Provider | Invesco | American Beacon |
| Benchmark | S&P Global Water Index | - |
| N° of holdings | 67 | 44 |
| Asset class | Equities | - |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | Join | Join |
| Inception date | May 14, 2007 | February 6, 2024 |
| ESG | Yes | No |
Advertisement
Exposure
Countries
CGW
USA
59.15%
United Kingdom
11.29%
Brazil
10.57%
Other
18.99%
MGNR
USA
50.31%
Canada
22.92%
Other
26.77%
Sectors
CGW
Utilities
43.48%
Industrials
36.56%
Non-Energy Materi.
16.18%
Other
3.78%
MGNR
Non-Energy Materi.
53.87%
Energy
25.46%
Industrials
12.39%
Consumer Non-Cycl.
7.66%
Other
0.62%
Advertisement
Diversification
CGW
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
65.66%
MGNR
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
52.98%
Top 15 holdings
Data as of June 30, 2026
CGW
American Water Works Co., Inc.
7.85%
Xylem, Inc.
7.34%
Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo SABESP
7.32%
Essential Utilities, Inc.
5.80%
Veralto Corp.
5.33%
Ecolab, Inc.
4.18%
United Utilities Group Plc
4.16%
Severn Trent Plc
3.95%
Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc.
3.53%
Geberit AG
3.38%
Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
3.15%
American States Water Co.
2.63%
Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp.
2.41%
California Water Service Group
2.40%
Core & Main, Inc.
2.22%
MGNR
Smurfit WestRock Plc
4.89%
Teck Resources Limited
4.84%
Hudbay Minerals, Inc.
4.48%
ArcelorMittal SA
4.08%
Range Resources Corp.
3.65%
Vista Energy SAB de CV
3.49%
Anglogold Ashanti Plc
3.27%
Darling Ingredients, Inc.
3.27%
Antero Resources Corp.
3.20%
Nextpower, Inc.
3.13%
Alcoa Corp.
3.13%
Bloom Energy Corp.
3.08%
Bunge Global SA
2.98%
Kinross Gold Corp.
2.84%
Venture Global, Inc.
2.66%
Frequently asked questions about CGW and MGNR
How have the CGW and MGNR ETFs performed in 2026?
As of August 3, 2026, CGW is up 3.81% year-to-date (YTD), while MGNR has returned 11.41%. That puts MGNR better performer ahead so far this year.
Which ETF is attracting more investor money: CGW or MGNR?
Year-to-date, the CGW ETF saw +$41M in flows, compared to +$463M for MGNR.
Which ETF is more volatile: CGW or MGNR?
Over the past year, CGW had a volatility of 13.31%, while MGNR experienced 23.87%.
Which ETF is bigger: CGW or MGNR?
As of August 3, 2026, CGW holds $1.06 B in assets under management (AUM), while MGNR manages $842.85 M.
What sectors do the CGW and MGNR ETFs invest in?
CGW leans toward sectors like Utilities, Industrials and Non-Energy Materials. Meanwhile, MGNR focuses on Non-Energy Materials, Energy and Industrials.
What are the top holdings of the CGW ETF and MGNR ETF?
CGW top holdings include American Water Works Co., Inc., Xylem, Inc. and Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo SABESP. MGNR holds in its top three: Smurfit WestRock Plc, Teck Resources Limited and Hudbay Minerals, Inc..
Which ETF is more diversified: CGW or MGNR?
CGW holds 67 securities with 65.66% of its assets in the top 15. MGNR has 44 securities and a top 15 weight of 52.98%.
Advertisement
Latest news about CGW & MGNR
Advertisement
