CWS vs PHO
AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF vs Invesco Water Resources ETF
Which is better, CWS or PHO?
Each has led over a different period.
PHO has a lower expense ratio. CWS led over 1Y and 5Y, PHO over 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. CWS is less concentrated, with 52.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.0%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CWS | PHO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.59%Best |
| AUM | $119M | $1.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.32% | 0.55% |
| Holdings | 27 | 87 |
| YTD Return | -0.26%Best | -0.55% |
| 1Y Return | +1.21%Best | -3.47% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +9.99% | +10.27%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.71%Best | +5.09% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.3%Best | 16.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.8%Best | -35.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,497Best | $12,818 |
| Top 10 Weight | 52.5%Best | 57.0% |
| Fund Family | Advisor Shares | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 20, 2016 | Dec 6, 2005 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 21, 2016 to Oct 15, 2026 (10.1 years).
CWS vs PHO growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 10.1 years both funds cover.
CWS vs PHO Performance
AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) is an ETF from Advisor Shares and Invesco Water Resources ETF (PHO) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year CWS returned +1.21% while PHO returned -3.47%. Year to date, CWS is down 0.26% versus a loss of 0.55% for PHO.
Over three years, CWS compounded at +9.99% per year against +10.27% for PHO; over five years the annualized figures are +7.71% and +5.09% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, PHO has the edge at +11.44% annualized vs +10.98%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PHO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 16.3% for CWS. 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 -33.8% for CWS and -35.0% for PHO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CWS charges 0.65% per year while PHO charges 0.59%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $59 annually, a gap of $6 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CWS currently yields 0.32% against 0.55% for PHO.
Holdings Overlap
8.4% of CWS's money is in holdings PHO also owns. 6.0% of PHO's money is in holdings CWS also owns.
CWS and PHO share little of their money.
2 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in CWS and 41 in PHO, against full books of 27 and 87.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 26 and 41 positions we hold weights for.
PHO holds 37 positions CWS does not, 92.2% of the fund.
Largest: FERG 8.34%, ECL 8.10%, WAT 7.25%, IDXX 6.80%, ROP 6.15%
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CWS and PHO you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CWS or PHO?
CWS has an expense ratio of 0.65% while PHO charges 0.59%. PHO is the cheaper option, by $6 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CWS or PHO?
Over the past year CWS returned +1.21% vs -3.47% for PHO, so CWS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), CWS annualized +10.98% vs +11.44% for PHO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CWS or PHO?
PHO has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 16.3% for CWS. Worst drawdown: CWS -33.8% vs PHO -35.0%.
Should I hold both CWS and PHO?
CWS and PHO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CWS and PHO?
8.4% of CWS's money is in holdings PHO also owns. 6.0% of PHO's is in holdings CWS also owns. They hold 2 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in CWS and 41 in PHO.
Which pays a higher dividend, CWS or PHO?
CWS yields 0.32% while PHO yields 0.55%, so PHO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PHO better than CWS?
PHO has a lower expense ratio. CWS led over 1Y and 5Y, PHO over 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. CWS is less concentrated, with 52.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.