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 Consumer Non-Cyclicals. CGW is less expensive with a Total Expense Ratio (TER) of 0.59%, versus 0.75% for MGNR. CGW is up 3.73% year-to-date (YTD) with +$41M in YTD flows. MGNR performs better with 7.51% YTD performance, and +$940M 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 11/02/2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | CGW MGNR | +3.82%-5.05% | -0.08%-3.50% | +3.73%+7.51% | +4.69%+17.31% | +47.09%n/a | +19.51%n/a |
| Flows | CGW MGNR | -$358K+$40M | -$358K+$477M | +$41M+$940M | +$46M+$994M | -$126M- | -$209M- |
Volatility and drawdown
| 3M | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volatility | CGW MGNR | +12.89%+21.18% | +13.46%+23.92% | +13.63%n/a | +15.80%n/a |
| Max drawdown | CGW MGNR | -7.04%-16.16% | -10.52%-16.59% | -14.42%n/a | -32.65%n/a |
| Max drawdown duration | CGW MGNR | 89d69d | 249d153d | 227dn/a | 862dn/a |
Trading data
CGW | MGNR | |
Last sale 11/2/2026 at 2:30 PM | $65.28 | $46.74 |
| Previous close 11/02/2026 | $64.06 | $47.03 |
| Consolidated volume 11/02/2026 | ||
| Average volume 30 days | ||
| Average discount or premium 30 days | ||
| Average Bid/Ask spread 30 days |
Replication quality
Data as of October 30, 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 11/2/2026 at 2:30 PM
Live
Closed
CGW | MGNR | |
|---|---|---|
| Last price | $65.28 | $46.74 |
| 1D performance | +1.90% | -0.61% |
| AuM | $1.06 B | $1.23 B |
| 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 | 66 | 45 |
| 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
55.93%
United Kingdom
14.3%
Brazil
10.44%
Other
19.34%
MGNR
USA
46.63%
Canada
28.49%
Other
24.88%
Sectors
CGW
Utilities
46.01%
Industrials
34.95%
Non-Energy Materi.
15.61%
Other
3.43%
MGNR
Non-Energy Materi.
58.49%
Energy
22.89%
Consumer Non-Cycl.
10.17%
Other
8.45%
Advertisement
Diversification
CGW
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
67.82%
MGNR
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
54.7%
Top 15 holdings
Data as of September 30, 2026
CGW
American Water Works Co., Inc.
8.09%
Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo SABESP
7.48%
Xylem, Inc.
7.04%
United Utilities Group Plc
5.84%
Essential Utilities, Inc.
5.83%
Severn Trent Plc
5.25%
Veralto Corp.
4.88%
Ecolab, Inc.
4.23%
Geberit AG
3.69%
Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
3.46%
Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc.
3.30%
Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp.
2.44%
American States Water Co.
2.24%
Core & Main, Inc.
2.10%
California Water Service Group
1.92%
MGNR
ArcelorMittal SA
4.45%
Smurfit WestRock Plc
4.20%
Venture Global, Inc.
4.05%
Hudbay Minerals, Inc.
3.95%
Teck Resources Limited
3.89%
Range Resources Corp.
3.84%
Anglogold Ashanti Plc
3.74%
Darling Ingredients, Inc.
3.58%
Vista Energy SAB de CV
3.52%
Equinox Gold Corp.
3.52%
Antero Resources Corp.
3.37%
Kinross Gold Corp.
3.32%
Bunge Global SA
3.16%
Freeport-McMoRan, Inc.
3.13%
First Quantum Minerals Ltd.
2.97%
Frequently asked questions about CGW and MGNR
How have the CGW and MGNR ETFs performed in 2026?
As of November 2, 2026, CGW is up 3.73% year-to-date (YTD), while MGNR has returned 7.51%. 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 +$940M for MGNR.
Which ETF is more volatile: CGW or MGNR?
Over the past year, CGW had a volatility of 13.46%, while MGNR experienced 23.92%.
Which ETF is bigger: CGW or MGNR?
As of November 2, 2026, CGW holds $1.06 B in assets under management (AUM), while MGNR manages $1.23 B.
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 Consumer Non-Cyclicals.
What are the top holdings of the CGW ETF and MGNR ETF?
CGW top holdings include American Water Works Co., Inc., Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo SABESP and Xylem, Inc.. MGNR holds in its top three: ArcelorMittal SA, Smurfit WestRock Plc and Venture Global, Inc..
Which ETF is more diversified: CGW or MGNR?
CGW holds 66 securities with 67.82% of its assets in the top 15. MGNR has 45 securities and a top 15 weight of 54.7%.
Advertisement
Latest news about CGW & MGNR
Could Water ETFs Be the Next AI Bottleneck Trade?
September 10, 2026
CGW
There's an ETF for that? The 3 Best ETFs for Investing in Water
January 17, 2024
CGW
Advertisement
Advertisement
