MOOvsCGWETF Comparison
VS
VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) and Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF (CGW) belong to the same industry segment: Natural Resources. MOO's top 3 sector exposures are Consumer Non-Cyclicals, Non-Energy Materials and Industrials. In contrast, CGW's top sector exposures are Utilities, Industrials and Non-Energy Materials. MOO is less expensive with a Total Expense Ratio (TER) of 0.56%, versus 0.59% for CGW. MOO is up 19.2% year-to-date (YTD) with +$458M in YTD flows. CGW performs worse with 1.08% YTD performance, and +$41M in YTD flows. Run a side-by-side ETF comparison of MOO and CGW 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
MOO vs CGW performance and flow charts
Performance
Cumulative Flows
Historic performance and flows
Data as of 09/10/2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | MOO CGW | +6.27%-3.55% | +12.03%+2.99% | +19.20%+1.08% | +19.58%+2.20% | +15.25%+36.47% | +5.84%+16.34% |
| Flows | MOO CGW | +$111M- | +$139M+$15M | +$458M+$41M | +$422M+$26M | +$89M-$148M | +$279M-$185M |
Volatility and drawdown
| 3M | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volatility | MOO CGW | +13.42%+12.99% | +13.71%+13.05% | +14.67%+13.79% | +16.52%+15.77% |
| Max drawdown | MOO CGW | -3.05%-4.72% | -10.98%-10.52% | -22.31%-14.42% | -39.01%-32.65% |
| Max drawdown duration | MOO CGW | 23d36d | 193d196d | 852d227d | 1604d862d |
Trading data
MOO | CGW | |
Last sale 9/11/2026 at 1:30 PM | $86.48 | $63.49 |
| Previous close 09/10/2026 | $86.79 | $63.45 |
| Consolidated volume 09/10/2026 | ||
| Average volume 30 days | ||
| Average discount or premium 30 days | ||
| Average Bid/Ask spread 30 days |
Replication quality
Data as of August 31, 2026
1-year trailing difference
Create an account to view replication metrics
Join for free
MOO | CGW | |
|---|---|---|
| Tracking error | ||
| Tracking difference | ||
| 1 year cumulative return difference | ||
| Best | ||
| Worst | ||
| Daily return difference | ||
| Average | ||
| Worst | ||
Advertisement
Main metrics
Last update 9/11/2026 at 1:30 PM
Live
Closed
MOO | CGW | |
|---|---|---|
| Last price | $86.48 | $63.49 |
| 1D performance | -0.36% | +0.06% |
| AuM | $1.16 B | $1.03 B |
| E/R | 0.56% | 0.59% |
Advertisement
Exposure
Countries
MOO
USA
51.57%
Germany
9.81%
Norway
7.29%
Other
31.34%
CGW
USA
57.49%
United Kingdom
14.01%
Brazil
10.44%
Other
18.06%
Sectors
MOO
Consumer Non-Cycl.
34.03%
Non-Energy Materi.
29.09%
Industrials
20.65%
Healthcare
16.24%
CGW
Utilities
45.55%
Industrials
35.95%
Non-Energy Materi.
15.23%
Other
3.27%
Advertisement
Diversification
MOO
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
72.49%
CGW
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
68.16%
Top 15 holdings
Data as of July 31, 2026
MOO
Corteva, Inc.
8.92%
Bayer AG
8.89%
Deere & Co.
7.95%
Nutrien Ltd.
6.57%
Zoetis, Inc.
5.21%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.
5.07%
CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
4.81%
Kubota Corp.
4.77%
Tyson Foods, Inc.
4.37%
Bunge Global SA
3.14%
Mowi ASA
3.01%
Darling Ingredients, Inc.
2.58%
Wilmar International Ltd.
2.57%
Yara International ASA
2.39%
CNH Industrial NV
2.24%
CGW
American Water Works Co., Inc.
8.35%
Xylem, Inc.
8.21%
Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo SABESP
7.29%
Essential Utilities, Inc.
5.88%
United Utilities Group Plc
5.49%
Severn Trent Plc
4.99%
Veralto Corp.
4.83%
Ecolab, Inc.
4.13%
Geberit AG
3.43%
Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc.
3.36%
Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
3.13%
Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp.
2.60%
American States Water Co.
2.34%
California Water Service Group
2.10%
Core & Main, Inc.
2.03%
Frequently asked questions about MOO and CGW
How have the MOO and CGW ETFs performed in 2026?
As of September 10, 2026, MOO is up 19.2% year-to-date (YTD), while CGW has returned 1.08%. That puts MOO better performer ahead so far this year.
Which ETF is attracting more investor money: MOO or CGW?
Year-to-date, the MOO ETF saw +$458M in flows, compared to +$41M for CGW.
Which ETF is more volatile: MOO or CGW?
Over the past year, MOO had a volatility of 13.71%, while CGW experienced 13.05%.
Which ETF is bigger: MOO or CGW?
As of September 10, 2026, MOO holds $1.16 B in assets under management (AUM), while CGW manages $1.03 B.
What sectors do the MOO and CGW ETFs invest in?
MOO leans toward sectors like Consumer Non-Cyclicals, Non-Energy Materials and Industrials. Meanwhile, CGW focuses on Utilities, Industrials and Non-Energy Materials.
What are the top holdings of the MOO ETF and CGW ETF?
MOO top holdings include Corteva, Inc., Bayer AG and Deere & Co.. CGW holds in its top three: American Water Works Co., Inc., Xylem, Inc. and Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo SABESP.
Which ETF is more diversified: MOO or CGW?
MOO holds 46 securities with 72.49% of its assets in the top 15. CGW has 66 securities and a top 15 weight of 68.16%.
Advertisement
Latest news about MOO & CGW
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
Agricultural Commodity Futures ETFs vs Agricultural Equities ETFs
December 18, 2023
MOO
Advertisement
Advertisement
