CGWvsMOOETF Comparison
VS
Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) belong to the same industry segment: Natural Resources. CGW's top 3 sector exposures are Utilities, Industrials and Non-Energy Materials. In contrast, MOO's top sector exposures are Consumer Non-Cyclicals, Non-Energy Materials and Industrials. CGW is more expensive with a Total Expense Ratio (TER) of 0.59%, versus 0.56% for MOO. CGW is up 5.61% year-to-date (YTD) with +$41M in YTD flows. MOO performs better with 12.18% YTD performance, and +$327M in YTD flows. Run a side-by-side ETF comparison of CGW and MOO 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 MOO performance and flow charts
Performance
Cumulative Flows
Historic performance and flows
Data as of 08/04/2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | CGW MOO | +1.10%+0.47% | +3.65%-2.64% | +5.61%+12.18% | +7.33%+14.52% | +36.17%+3.53% | +25.15%+0.56% |
| Flows | CGW MOO | +$5M+$127K | +$15M-$165M | +$41M+$327M | +$26M+$273M | -$156M-$54M | -$138M+$134M |
Volatility and drawdown
| 3M | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volatility | CGW MOO | +14.80%+13.66% | +13.39%+13.50% | +13.81%+14.64% | +15.75%+16.47% |
| Max drawdown | CGW MOO | -5.68%-9.34% | -10.52%-10.98% | -14.42%-25.38% | -32.65%-39.01% |
| Max drawdown duration | CGW MOO | 50d91d | 159d166d | 227d898d | 862d1567d |
Trading data
CGW | MOO | |
Last sale 8/5/2026 at 5:06 PM | $66.63 | $81.45 |
| Previous close 08/04/2026 | $66.31 | $81.69 |
| Consolidated volume 08/04/2026 | ||
| 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
CGW | MOO | |
|---|---|---|
| Tracking error | ||
| Tracking difference | ||
| 1 year cumulative return difference | ||
| Best | ||
| Worst | ||
| Daily return difference | ||
| Average | ||
| Worst | ||
Advertisement
Main metrics
Last update 8/5/2026 at 5:06 PM
Live
Closed
CGW | MOO | |
|---|---|---|
| Last price | $66.63 | $81.45 |
| 1D performance | +0.48% | -0.29% |
| AuM | $1.08 B | $970.83 M |
| E/R | 0.59% | 0.56% |
Advertisement
Exposure
Countries
CGW
USA
59.15%
United Kingdom
11.29%
Brazil
10.57%
Other
18.99%
MOO
USA
52.47%
Germany
9.66%
Other
37.87%
Sectors
CGW
Utilities
43.48%
Industrials
36.56%
Non-Energy Materi.
16.18%
Other
3.78%
MOO
Consumer Non-Cycl.
33.56%
Non-Energy Materi.
27.89%
Industrials
22.41%
Healthcare
16.13%
Other
0%
Diversification
CGW
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
65.66%
MOO
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
72.43%
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%
MOO
Bayer AG
8.82%
Deere & Co.
8.78%
Corteva, Inc.
8.78%
Nutrien Ltd.
5.99%
Zoetis, Inc.
5.30%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.
5.10%
Kubota Corp.
4.76%
Tyson Foods, Inc.
4.46%
CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
4.25%
Bunge Global SA
3.44%
Mowi ASA
2.84%
CNH Industrial NV
2.61%
Wilmar International Ltd.
2.49%
The Toro Co.
2.45%
Darling Ingredients, Inc.
2.37%
Frequently asked questions about CGW and MOO
How have the CGW and MOO ETFs performed in 2026?
As of August 4, 2026, CGW is up 5.61% year-to-date (YTD), while MOO has returned 12.18%. That puts MOO better performer ahead so far this year.
Which ETF is attracting more investor money: CGW or MOO?
Year-to-date, the CGW ETF saw +$41M in flows, compared to +$327M for MOO.
Which ETF is more volatile: CGW or MOO?
Over the past year, CGW had a volatility of 13.39%, while MOO experienced 13.5%.
Which ETF is bigger: CGW or MOO?
As of August 4, 2026, CGW holds $1.08 B in assets under management (AUM), while MOO manages $970.83 M.
What sectors do the CGW and MOO ETFs invest in?
CGW leans toward sectors like Utilities, Industrials and Non-Energy Materials. Meanwhile, MOO focuses on Consumer Non-Cyclicals, Non-Energy Materials and Industrials.
What are the top holdings of the CGW ETF and MOO ETF?
CGW top holdings include American Water Works Co., Inc., Xylem, Inc. and Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo SABESP. MOO holds in its top three: Bayer AG, Deere & Co. and Corteva, Inc..
Which ETF is more diversified: CGW or MOO?
CGW holds 67 securities with 65.66% of its assets in the top 15. MOO has 46 securities and a top 15 weight of 72.43%.
Advertisement
Latest news about CGW & MOO
There's an ETF for that? The 3 Best ETFs for Investing in Water
January 17, 2024
CGW
Agricultural Commodity Futures ETFs vs Agricultural Equities ETFs
December 18, 2023
MOO
Advertisement
Advertisement
