Posts filed under “ETFs”
The Financial Times – ETF glow fades for US investors
A record number of new US exchange traded funds failed to attract substantial investor demand last year, leaving fund operators facing losses in one of the first signs that the industry’s explosive growth may have peaked. ETFs allow investors to trade baskets of securities, such as the S&P 500 or precious metals, on exchanges with low management fees. Their popularity has surged in recent years, drawing investors away from mutual funds. The US ETF industry ended last year with more than $1tn in assets under management, compared with $540bn at the start of 2009. But that rapid growth has attracted scrutiny from regulators, and there are signs the market may be saturated. “There are a huge and growing number of ETFs out there that are truly sub-scale [uneconomic]” said Ogden Hammond, who tracks the industry for McKinsey, the consultancy. “Larger fund managers have more ability to absorb losses, but at some point operators will have to make a decision about pulling the plug.” Data prepared for the Financial Times by XTF, an ETF research firm, shows 79 per cent of the 190 exchange traded products launched in the first six months of last year failed to attract $30m in assets under management, an industry benchmark for profitability. In 2010 the corresponding figure was 62 per cent and in 2009 it was less than half.
Source: Arbor Research
Ever wonder what allows ETFs to be liquid? The answer is “creation and redemption,” the process that lets ETFs trade even when volume is low. Using simple illustrations and a metaphor about flowers, this seven-minute animation will change the way you look at ETFs.
Hat tip Themis Trading
GLD vs. SPY Relative Price click for larger graphic Source: Solari Report, Yahoo Finance > Here is an interesting observation: The value of the SPDR Gold Trust (GLD) is now worth more than the SPDR S&P 500 (SPY) representing the full index. (This refers to the ETFs and not the underlying value of the SPX…Read More
The S&P500 is one of the most widely held indices in the US. And yet, the Market Cap weighted version has a tendency to become dominated by a handful of big caps. This is especially likely towards the end of a major run, when a handful of megacaps dominate the trading action. One possible solution?…Read More
Ari Weinberg is the WSJ Editor for Financial Tools; His perspective can also be seen on occasion at the Journal’s MarketBeat. ~~~ PIMCO made a big splash in the small world of actively-managed exchange-traded funds by filing for an ETF version of its Total Return Fund. As many have accurately noted, PIMCO’s filing makes a…Read More
Interesting cover on Barron’s this week: This is hardly a contrary view — I’ve heard from lots of people saying they are doing the same thing. As mentioned previously, stick with the small cap funds (DFJ, SCJ, and JSC). The large market cap ETF (EWJ) is not the ideal investment for the bounce back (already…Read More
click for larger chart Chart courtesy of FusionIQ, Bloomberg > I wanted to follow up a post from last year about EWJ. Back in December ’10, I mentioned 10 Reasons I Am Thinking About Japan. Regardless of your views going forward, if you owned or traded this, you should have had a plan in place,…Read More
NEW YORK (Big Picture Exclusive) – Gargantuan money manager Blackrock reported on Friday that assets in U.S.-listed exchange-traded funds and exchange-traded products have surpassed the $1 trillion milestone for the first time. Combined assets in U.S.-listed ETFs and ETPs reached $1.027 trillion late Thursday, BlackRock said. That includes 894 ETFs with assets of $887.2 billion…Read More
I first recommended GLD on Power lunch back in 2005. The Gold ETF was under $50, and the rec was greeted with widespread skepticism. The basis for the call was the 1% rate level that had set off a spiral of inflation in everything priced in US dollars or credit. But I had no idea…Read More
ETF’s Firm Foundations by Matt Hougan
November 20, 2010
Matt Hougan is the President of ETF Analytics and the Global Head of Editorial for IndexUniverse. This is a guest column written by him in response to the recent negative press reports about ETFs.
Over the past few months, a series of poorly researched “white papers” have criticized exchange-traded funds and raised questions about the soundness of the ETF structure.
These papers—from the Kauffman Foundation, Bogan Associates, and others—center on three main assertions:
1) ETFs are fundamentally flawed and subject to collapse during stressful market conditions.
2) ETFs are a serious threat to market stability and are likely to cause future “flash crashes.”
3) ETFs are driving up the correlation between individual stocks, ruining price discovery in the markets, and thereby threatening capitalism as we know it.
All three assertions are false. They rest on a foundation of flawed logic, simple misunderstandings of ETF structures, and superficial research.
Despite transparent flaws, these arguments have received widespread media attention, from CNBC to the Financial Times. That’s a shame, because even a little bit of research could debunk the claims quickly.
Claim 1: ETFs Are Fundamentally Flawed and Could Collapse
The argument that ETFs could collapse was first advanced by a research outfit named Bogan Associates in a white paper published on September 15, 2010. It centers on the fact that many ETFs have high short interest, often many multiples of the number of shares outstanding.
The Bogan report focused on the SPDR S&P Retail ETF (NYSEArca: XRT), which at the time the report was written had over 500 percent short interest; in other words, each share in XRT had been sold short five times.
That sounds terrifying. How can an ETF have more shares sold short than exist in the first place? But it happens regularly with both stocks and ETFs, and it is both perfectly legal and safe.
Imagine that I own all of the shares of XRT. I want to earn a little extra money, so I lend them to you, for a fee, so that you can sell them short. You sell them to a guy named Bob. XRT has 100 percent short interest.
If Bob then lends them to someone else who sells short, the ETF now has 200 percent short interest. They may then lend the shares to another party, and so on.
Bogan’s particular concern with ETF short interest ties to one of the most important features of the ETF structure: the ability of large shareholders in the ETF to “redeem” shares back to the ETF issuer. If a large institution owns 50,000 shares of a fund like XRT, it can give them back to the ETF issuer and receive in exchange an equal value in the underlying stocks held in the ETF portfolio.
Bogan’s concern is that if even one-fifth of the people who bought XRT from short sellers redeem their shares, the ETF provider will be forced to hand out all the underlying securities in the fund. The fund will then be left holding nothing, and anyone who still has XRT in their portfolio will be left holding worthless paper.
It’s easy to see the concern. So easy, in fact, that the lawyers who designed ETFs put protections in place to guard against this situation. Those protections vary in detail but follow a similar form: When ETFs have high short interest, redeeming shareholders must prove they have clean, unencumbered ownership before a redemption is processed. This language exists in every prospectus I’ve looked at; the team at Bogan Associates either didn’t open a prospectus or was simply engaged in scare tactics.
The Kauffman report, published last week, took this mistaken concept and shoved it one tangled step further. Kauffman’s primary concern was that, during a market crisis, investors might place huge buy orders for an ETF, flooding it with cash. They suggested that the ETF issuer would then have to chase stocks, trying to put that cash to work. If the issuer couldn’t buy the shares, the ETF’s value would be in question.