Tag Archives: exchange-traded funds

sec-chair-white-marketsmuse

SEC Chair White: “I Have A Dream..”

SEC Mary Joe White has a dream, and even if she aspires to leverage the inspirational outlook of  Dr. Martin Luther King, securities industry members are debating whether her dream could prove to be a reality any sooner than the civil rights agenda expressed by Dr. King so many years ago.  In a series of comments during the past several weeks from Chairperson White regarding the SEC’s agenda for the remainder of her tenure as President Obama’s designated SEC Chairperson, Ms. White, who is operating with only 3 of 5 Commissioners until two open vacancies are filled before the Second of Never,  she is vowing one of the top three items on her list includes “better understanding exchange-traded funds aka ETFs before the SEC approves prospectuses.” That makes sense.

One only wonders why that elementary concept had never occurred to any one previously—despite repeated calls from among others, former SEC Commissioner Steve Wallman (1994-1997) who has long questioned the approval process for many of the complex exchange-traded products the SEC has rubber-stamped, including inverse and commodities-related products that even professionals often do not understand.  Since his departure from the SEC, Wallman has proven adept at doing the right things while serving at the helm as Founder/Chairman/CEO of the investment firm Foliofn.com.

Other matters of importance according to White include “the desire on part of SEC to introduce “fiduciary definitions for registered advisers and brokers..” which in plain speaks means : White’s agenda is to figure out how to completely change the culture of the securities brokerage industry by forcing people to be ethical and moral. MarketsMuse sources have indicated White is proposing to have those folks swear an oath that says:

“My first obligation is to protect my clients’ interest above all else and to make sure I never even think of trying to sell them something that might be inappropriate for their goals or possibly even toxic—despite the fact my office manager says I have to sell house product only or I’m out of a job. After I meet that first obligation, my second obligation is to then make enough money to pay for my kids college and have enough left over for that condo in Florida.”

Insiders familiar with White’s agenda have told MarketsMuse that she has acknowledged her seemingly altruistic mission is not without challenge or headwinds given that the “securities industry at large is much like the NRA when it comes to influential prowess.”

Directly and indirectly, Wall Street firms and its executives contribute hundreds of millions of dollars every year to lobby SEC Officials and members of Congress(which the SEC reports to) on behalf of their interests—which presumably includes two big drivers that have driven the investment industry since the days of Joe Kennedy Sr.: (i) selling investment vehicles that look great on paper and in marketing collateral [even if they might or might not prove to be toxic at some point and might or might not be appropriate for a specific individual given that people’s moods change a lot] (ii) how to pay the mortgage on the brokers’ first house, the $200k for each of their kids college tuition bills, the country club memberships that provides venues in which to sell those investment products,  sharpen up the golf game, and of course, pay for the second and third homes, etc etc.

Another item on White’s laundry list is to expand the  exam program for registered brokers and advisers. Currently, 10% of the nearly 12,000 advisers sit and take ‘refresher tests’ that are abridged versions of the Series 7—an exam that has approximately 40% brokers FAIL the first time and 30% fail the second time. Some could argue the test is maybe too difficult, given the national average score is 67 vs. a passing grade of 72. Or, one could argue the barrier to entry to become a registered broker or adviser is simply being a good test taker. Idiots and Muppets can get licensed, as long as they take 8 practice exams the night before the actual exam and memorize the correct answers. So, Chairperson White wants more folks taking more tests; a good thing for the SEC because this is big a revenue-generator for the Agency—which has repeatedly claimed it does not have enough money to even pay for air conditioning in its Washington DC office. Staff members have said this alone is vexing, given that SEC examiners and enforcement agents have become accustomed to keeping windows wide open five months of the year and continuously grapple with files on their desks blowing out of their windows and many of those files pertain to complaints filed by investors and updated paper notes sent by from enforcement agents in the field via courier pigeons.

Courtesy of  an admittedly more illustrious news media outlet than MarketsMuse might be, the following is ‘official coverage from InvestmentNews.com:

(InvestmentNews) Despite missing two of its five members, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairwoman Mary Jo White said Friday the agency will forge ahead on rules to raise investment-advice standards and enhance oversight of advisers.

“At the moment, as you know, we are a commission of just three members, but — as has occurred in the past — we can carry forward all of the business of the commission,” Ms. White said at the Practising Law Institute conference in Washington. “And, while we look forward to welcoming new colleagues, Commissioners Stein, [Michael] Piwowar and I are fully engaged in advancing the commission’s work.”

The Obama administration has nominated Republican Hester Peirce and Democrat Lisa Fairfax to replace two members who have departed the SEC, Republican Daniel Gallagher and Democrat Luis Aguilar, but the Senate has not yet begun the confirmation process. Continue reading

bond-etf-trading

Bank Trading Desks Merge Bonds and ETFs

Corporate Bonds and exchange-traded funds is a combination that first seemed counter-intuitive to the select universe of traders who are actually fluent in both corporate bond trading and equity trading; two practice areas that are distinctively different. “Stocks are bought and bonds are sold” as they used to say, and the nuances of trading these distinctive asset classes in the secondary marketplace have long been at odds with each other.

This explains why fixed income traders from both the buy-side and sell-side rarely even knew their equity-trading counterparts, no less engaged in cross-asset trading. But thanks to shrinking trading profit margins, Wall Street trading desks now ‘get the joke’, and per story below, are bolstering their business models.

(REUTERS) Feb 18 Wall Street banks are ramping up businesses that trade exchange-traded funds full of bonds, a bright spot of growth at an otherwise bleak time for trading but one that may carry unappreciated risk.

Barclays PLC, Credit Suisse Group AG and Goldman Sachs Group Inc have all created special teams to make markets in bond ETFs. The teams include staff across stock and bond markets, since the ETFs trade like stocks on stock exchanges, but their underlying securities are bonds.

All told, 12 to 15 banks now have a presence in the business, whereas a few years ago almost none did, said Anthony Perrotta, global head of research and consulting at TABB Group.

“There are a lot of institutions that, even though they might be retrenching in fixed-income trading, are looking at ETFs as a way to galvanize their business,” said Martin Small, who oversees U.S. operations for BlackRock Inc’s iShares unit, which is the largest ETF issuer.

Although these businesses are sprouting up across Wall Street, they are unlikely to make up for huge profits banks earned during the glory days of bond trading, at least not anytime soon.

Investors pay banks 0.01 percent to 0.03 percent to trade a bond ETF, according to TABB Group, compared with 1.03 percent for an individual bond. Traders say they are hoping to make up for piddling margins by selling more of the product, since the ETF business is a bulk-volume one that is rapidly growing.

The sales push comes after years of pressure from leading ETF creators like BlackRock and State Street Corp to make markets for the bond ETFs. Those firms rake in billions of dollars’ worth of revenue from ETFs each year, and view bond ETFs as a way to grow their own businesses.

Firms that create ETFs need banks to act as intermediaries for sales, and also to ensure that prices are in sync with underlying securities. Before banks entered the market, trades were handled by market-makers like KCG Holdings Inc, Cantor Fitzgerald and Susquehanna Capital Group, who have been in the business for years.

As Wall Street has warmed to bond ETFs, the market has quickly grown. Assets under management in the U.S. rose 44 percent to $372 billion at the end of January from $258 billion a year earlier, according to fund research service Lipper. That represents about 19 percent of the broader $2 trillion U.S. ETF market.

While the bond-ETF boom may be good for Wall Street, it is not without risk.

It comes at a time when liquidity in the corporate bond market has shriveled due to new rules that require banks to hold a lot of capital against those securities. As a result, banks avoid buying bonds from investors unless they can resell them quickly, and do not maintain much inventory for interested buyers.

Despite their holdings, bond ETFs trade more like stocks, on stock exchanges, so they are not facing the same type of liquidity issue. But it is unclear how they will perform if investors rush for the exit all at once, or if markets come under serious stress. During the Aug. 24 “flash crash,” for instance, some ETFs failed to trade properly.

The full story from Reuters is here

geared-etfs-sec-marketsmuse

SEC Aims To Ban Geared ETFs

The US SEC apparently has its cross-hairs on so-called ‘geared ETFs,’  those high-testosterone, levered instruments that incorporate derivatives so as to deliver an advertised 2x or 3x return for certain strategies versus a typical 1:1 correlation provided by plain vanilla exchange-traded funds.  The SEC proposal would effectively ban the use of those products altogether.

As reported by Ari Weinberg in his most recent column in Pensions & Investments,  SEC staffers are holding further rounds of reviews of proposed rule changes that could effectively eliminate triple-leveraged and triple-inverse ETFs, which totaled 66 funds and $11.3 billion in assets under management as of Jan. 15, according to research firm XTF. Excluding exchange-traded notes, which are not subject to the Investment Company Act, the entire leveraged and inverse ETF universe includes 195 funds and $30.1 billion in assets.

This is not to suggest that  ‘inverse return’ exchange-traded funds are bad (even if many are actually completely unsuitable for most investors),  it’s just that nobody at the SEC seems to understand how they work, despite the fact these products need first be approved by the SEC before they can be issued, and despite the fact the SEC has given its green light to the these derivative-powered exchange-traded notes aka ETNs since they were first conceived and popularized  nearly 15 years ago.  According to one senior investment manager executive  overseeing nearly $10bil AUM and who asked not to be identified in this article, “..The proposed rules being discussed now simply proves that the SEC need not ever understand a financial product before they rubber-stamp the issuance of a financial instrument that would fall under SEC oversight.” He further added, “Its hard to say which is more broken, the SEC or products they allow to be sold to institutional and retail investors.”

“The SEC is responding to a combination of concerns, some of which are well founded and some of which are less well founded. There’s a belief that ETFs create risk because of asset class exposures, high trading volumes and market structure issues,” says Edward Baer, counsel at Ropes & Gray in San Francisco, who recently served as chief legal officer for BlackRock (BLK) Inc. (BLK)’s iShares business.

Geared ETFs, offered separately by ProShares and Direxion Investments, are designed to track two or three times the daily return (or inverse) of an underlying index. Awareness of the products peaked during the volatile days of the financial crisis, but both FINRA and the SEC have repeatedly voiced concerns that the products are misunderstood by many investors or used improperly.

As noted in the P&I story by Ari Weinberg..

In turn, both the SEC and FINRA have stated that regulatory examinations in 2016 will focus on the knock-on effects and risks to authorized participants in the ETF ecosystem. This network of investment banks and trading firms greases the wheels of ETF trading by creating or redeeming shares in the primary market and buying or selling in the secondary market. Their trading is motivated by the profit potential in arbitraging away price discrepancies in the ETF share price and the underlying assets.

“AP activities may … result in pressure on the financial integrity of broker-dealers in some conditions and this, in turn, could impair the liquidity provision function the broker-dealer plays when acting as an AP,” FINRA wrote in its annual examination priorities letter.

Similarly, the SEC’s office of compliance inspections and examinations said that it would focus on ETF compliance with their exemptive relief, as well as sales, trading, and disclosures involving ETFs.

For the full story from P&I, click here

 

junk-bond-etf-liquidity

Junk Bond ETFs-The Liquidity Debate Goes to SEC

MarketsMuse ETF and Fixed Income curators have frequently spotlighted the ongoing debates as to whether corporate bond ETFs, and in particular, junk bond-specific exchange-traded-funds pose special risks. Some argue that a liquidity crisis could unravel the high yield bond sector if/when institutional investors decide that risk of recession continues to ratchet higher, leading all of those investors to run for the exit at the same time, and in turn, causing a reverberation across the ETF market. The counter side to that thesis is that corporate bond ETFs (NYSE:HYG among them) are insulated from the risk of a catastrophe that might envelope the underlying components (the actual bonds themselves). One thing that is certain is that the US SEC is not certain, and they’ve raised the volume on this topic.

Adding light to this topic is WSJ columnist Ari Weinberg, someone who is arguably one of the best educated members of the 4th Estate when it comes to ETFs, and Monday night column deserves our kudos and sharing select extracts…Roll the tape..

junk-bond-etf-liquidity-crisisMost investors in mutual funds and exchange-traded funds probably don’t worry much about liquidity. After all, fund shares can be bought and sold easily anytime online, and trades are completed in one to three business days.

But there is another layer of trading—the trading the funds themselves do when a wave of selling by investors requires the funds to sell some of their assets—that has the Securities and Exchange Commission worried about liquidity. And the commission wants investors to be more aware of the risks it sees.

The issue is particularly pertinent for the fixed-income fund market, because assets that some of those funds hold are very thinly traded. Here’s a look at what’s involved.

Deciding between the two isn’t always straightforward. Here’s help clarifying the differences and similarities.

The SEC’s concern is that some mutual funds and ETFs might hold too many securities that aren’t easy to sell quickly. As a result, the funds might not always be able to adjust their holdings without “materially affecting” the funds’ net asset value per share, the commission said in its September announcement of proposed new liquidity-risk management rules. In other words, selling a substantial amount of illiquid securities quickly could drive down their price, resulting in a big loss for a fund, lowering its value.

Among other things, the proposed rules would require funds to categorize the liquidity risk of their holdings according to how many days it would take to sell the assets without greatly affecting their market price, and disclose those risk assessments to investors. The SEC also proposed to strengthen and clarify an existing guideline that no more than 15% of a fund’s assets should be held in securities that would take more than seven days to convert to cash.

Several ETF issuers, as well as the Investment Company Institute, a fund industry trade group, have said in comment letters that the SEC’s proposals aren’t relevant to most ETFs, because the funds are structured differently from mutual funds.

Mutual-fund investors buy and sell their shares directly from or to the fund. So mutual funds regularly need to sell assets on the open market to pay investors who are redeeming their shares. But ETF shares are traded among investors, not between investors and the fund. So most ETFs usually don’t have to sell assets when investors sell their shares, because the shares are being bought by other investors, not being redeemed by the fund.

ETF shares are only created or redeemed, and the underlying assets bought or sold, when doing so is necessary to keep the market price in line with the net asset value of the fund’s holdings. Those transactions are done between the funds and financial institutions called authorized participants, or APs, which often also serve as market makers in the ETFs and other securities.

Here is how it works in most cases: If heavy selling is driving an ETF’s market price below the fund’s net asset value, a market maker, acting through an AP or acting as an AP itself, will buy up shares and deliver them to the fund in the form of a so-called creation unit—taking them off the market—in return for an equal value of the underlying assets held by the fund. It’s then up to the trading firm to decide if it wants to hold those assets or sell them.

The argument ETF issuers are making to the SEC is essentially that this process insulates ETF investors from the dangers of a fund having to sell illiquid securities on the open market.

The opposing argument, made by the SEC and those who favor the proposed new rules, is that there is a risk that the AP might not be willing to take on assets that are very hard to sell quickly, throwing a wrench into the whole process of keeping the fund’s net asset value in line with its share price. That would be reflected in a widening of the bid-ask spread for the ETF—the difference between the price investors can get for selling shares and the higher price they would have to pay to buy the shares.

The concern that this could happen to a fixed-income ETF is based in part on changes in recent years in the fixed-income markets. Financial institutions in general are more averse to the liquidity risk that some debt securities pose, in part because of increased regulation governing the institutions’ risk exposure. Investment banks, for instance, hold 80% less corporate bond inventory than a decade ago.

Ultimately, according to many traders and market participants, concerns around ETFs and fixed-income holdings will only be mitigated when there is more transparency in the market, as more securities are quoted and traded electronically. Currently, only about 10% to 25% of the secondary trading in corporate bonds—depending on the amount of each bond in the market and the issuer’s credit quality—is electronic. The rest is done via online messaging and phone calls.

Continue reading Ari Weinberg’s dissertation directly via the WSJ

 

TradeWeb Muscles Into ETF Execution Space

Fixed Income trading platform TradeWeb, best known for its dominant role administering OTC government securities trading between global banks and institutional customers is muscling into the world of ETFs. Tradeweb has just launched an electronic over-the-counter marketplace for trading exchange traded funds using a “request-for-quote” aka “RFQ”- based platform that is modeled after a platform Tradeweb successfully launched in Europe in 2012.

Tradeweb’s new U.S. platform is designed to be a fully-automated alternative to phone- and chat-based over-the-counter ETF trading of institutional-sized or less liquid orders. Tradeweb clients can use the platform to send RFQs to up to five dealers at a time, using either one- or two-way price quotes. The platform offers aggregated pre-trade price transparency from liquidity providers and National Best Bid and Offer exchange pricing. The platform can also seamlessly connect to third-party and proprietary order management systems, and risk management systems to enable market participants to fully automate workflows. There are now 11 leading liquidity providers on the platform, according to a company announcement.

In Europe, where ETF liquidity is relatively fragmented, Tradeweb’s platform has become one of the largest pools of ETF liquidity. The European platform supports more than 45 percent of OTC electronic trading and the platform’s daily volume exceeds €500 million (approximately $5.6 million) per day. In the U.S., ETF liquidity that trades on exchanges is more centralized, but Tradeweb’s platform is the first fully-electronic platform for trading institutional-sized or less liquid orders through dealers.

chris hempstead
Chris Hempstead, KCG

“The Tradeweb ETF platform offers a new channel for liquidity and enhances our suite of execution capabilities,” said Chris Hempstead, head of ETF sales for KCG. “The platform represents a novel approach to improving price discovery as well as an innovative way to execute larger-size trades, while reducing the risk of materially impacting pricing.”

Institutions were early adopters of ETF and now hold about 34 percent of U.S. ETF assets, according to November data from State Street Global Advisors and Broadridge. As institutional OTC trading of ETFs continues to grow, market participants say pre-trade transparency into institutional-sized liquidity, and more streamlined, automated workflows are a next step.

“Leveraging electronic solutions to streamline over-the-counter trade workflows is an important step forward for the ETF industry. The combination of a robust exchange traded marketplace with an electronic, transparent OTC market delivers institutional investors choice in how they access liquidity,” said Leland Clemons, managing director at BlackRock iShares.

Tradeweb clients in the U.S. will be able to use the new platform to access all U.S.-listed ETFs, including fixed income ETFs, as well as European-listed ETFs.

nyse-etf-marketshare-slipping

NYSE Hold on ETF Business Slipping?

(Bloomberg LP)-NYSE Group Inc. may still be the king of exchange-traded funds among U.S. stock markets, but their hold on the ETF business might be slipping as Issuers, including BlackRock seek other listing venues and challengers to the throne are gaining ground.

Last year, a record 23 ETFs left the company’s NYSE Arca exchange, shifting their listing to rival markets, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. BlackRock Inc., the world’s largest asset manager, this month said it was diversifying by moving 11 iShares ETFs away from NYSE Arca, the first time it’s yanked funds from the exchange.

While the vast majority of ETFs still list at NYSE Arca — its funds amount to about 94 percent of the total market value of all U.S. ETFs — other exchanges are making inroads as investors increasingly use the products. Bats Global Markets Inc. handles about a quarter of U.S. ETF trading, more than any other exchange operator, and Bats has listed 10 new funds this year, versus one at NYSE Arca and one at Nasdaq Inc.

“The growth in ETFs in terms of assets and trading volume has obviously caught the attention of exchanges looking to build their listing businesses,” said Eric Balchunas, a Bloomberg Intelligence analyst.

Among the ETFs BlackRock will relocate are the $13.9 billion iShares MSCI Eurozone ETF and the $8.1 billion iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF. “A big issuer and a big ticker moving over, that’s really helpful for these exchanges to build their credibility and make other issuers feel comfortable,” Balchunas added. “Having a few of those studs can go a long way.”

The wild trading session in the U.S. stock market on Aug. 24 has drawn attention to ETFs, and may factor into listing decisions. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said trading rules on NYSE Arca exacerbated volatility that day. In its 88-page analysis of Aug. 24, the SEC pointed out that NYSE Arca’s allowable price bands limited how quickly ETF prices could recover after trading halts. The bands, which NYSE Arca later proposed to widen, may have caused additional delays by limiting faster price adjustments, the regulator said. BlackRock expressed its support for NYSE Arca’s rule change in a letter to the SEC.

Bats Global Markets has been edging into ETF listings by paying issuers to choose its platform. The company launched the Bats ETF Marketplace last year, charging no listing fees to issuers and offering to pay them up to $400,000 per year for their listings, based on average daily volume. The exchange also poached Laura Morrison, an executive from NYSE’s ETF division, in April.

For the full story from Bloomberg reporter Annie Massa, click here
HEDJ

European ETF Strategy Unraveling

(Bloomberg) — A European stock trade that deployed the use of ETF products as a means of hedging currency exposure is one that enamored global investors throughout 2015 and drew more money than practically anything else in equities is blowing up in people’s faces.

As the moves in the the WisdomTree Europe Hedged Equity Fund (NYSE:HEDJ) show, the strategy of going long the region’s shares while hedging to mute the euro’s swings is unraveling. The exchange- traded fund has plunged a record 14 percent in December, erasing annual gains that swelled to as much as 23 percent in April and were still above 18 percent in July. Hit by withdrawals, its market value has fallen to $17 billion from more than $22 billion as recently as August.

Investors are pulling money from the fund like never before after Mario Draghi’s increase in European Central Bank stimulus failed to live up to expectations, triggering a decline in the region’s stocks and a strengthening of its currency.

“A lot of investors have been protecting themselves against a weaker euro, aiming for European equity returns which have been very strong this year as long as you hedged the euro,” said Ewout van Schaick, head of multi-asset portfolios at NN Investment Partners in The Hague. His firm oversees 180 billion euros ($198 billion). “That story seems to be over after the recent central bank actions. Investors are positive on European equities but are less sure it has to be on a hedged basis.”

The fund’s popularity grew earlier this year, when its hedge became of paramount importance as the ECB started its bond-buying program, triggering a weakening of the euro to levels not seen since 2003 and a 22 percent surge in the region’s stocks. In the first four months of the year, traders poured $13 billion in the ETF, making it the favorite vehicle to bet on European equities.

NYSE FEZ
Euro Stoxx 50 Index NYSE:FEZ

FEZ Fizzles. Fast forward to December, and things don’t look as good. The Euro Stoxx 50 Index, whose ETF tracker is NYSE:FEZ is down 7.1 percent through yesterday’s close, heading for its worst ending to a year since 2002, while the euro is set for its biggest monthly advance since April against the dollar.

Forecasters don’t see the currency moving much from now. It’ll weaken to $1.05 and stay at that level for the first three quarters of next year, before starting to rebound, according to projections. It’s hovered around $1.09 for most of December.

That doesn’t mean the consensus is turning bearish on European equities. Even without a significant weakening of the currency, strategists expect euro-area equities to climb another 12 percent by the end of next year, aided by a recovering economy, ECB stimulus and low valuations. The Euro Stoxx 50 rose 1.2 percent at 11:47 a.m. in London. At 14.2 times estimated earnings, companies on the gauge are cheaper than those on the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index or MSCI All-Country World Index.

“We still believe in European equities,” Van Schaick said. “The European economic recovery is in the earlier stage, so all the lights are green for Europe. They’re going to do a lot better than U.S. equities next year.”

leveraged ETFs

The Big Short: Leveraged ETFs, By David Miller

The Big Short is coming to a theater near you soon, but the hedge fund industry’s cool kid of the year David Miller has traded ahead of his peers by exploiting and being short of the popular ETF industry product: leveraged ETFs  and “inverse ETFs”; products that are typically powered by futures contracts so as to magnify returns of a move in a particular index.

Exchange-traded funds that employ derivatives or futures contracts have [rightfully so] been the subject of increasing scrutiny of late, a topic discussed more than once by MarketsMuse. As tweeted earlier today by our curators, the SEC which is notorious for chasing horses after they’ve left the barn, is now taking an even deeper dive towards determining the efficacy and credibility of these testosterone-charged ETFs—albeit putting the Genie back in the bottle will prove non-trivial for regulators. That said, one macro strategy-centric hedge fund manager is exercising his fund’s trade strategy options by leveraging the short-comings of these products by systematically shorting a laundry list of the so-called 2x and 3x return products, and he’s been smiling all the way to the top of the list of 2015’s best performing HF managers.

As reported by Reuters’ David Randall, the $155mil AUM Catalyst Macro Strategy fund, run by 35-year old David Miller is the cool kid of the year for using exchange-traded options to short leveraged exchange traded funds that offer two or three times the daily positive or negative return of an index and which have become increasingly popular among hedge funds and other traders as the broad U.S. market has flatlined. Leveraged ETFs have seen inflows of $9.5 billion this year, according to Lipper data.

Here’s the opening excerpt from Reuters’ reporting..

david miller catalyst macro…. Miller’s $155.6 million Catalyst Macro Strategy fund, has posted returns of nearly 47 percent over the last year by focusing on the flaws of levered exchange-traded funds. That performance makes Miller’s fund the best performer among all actively-managed equity funds tracked by Morningstar this year, and nearly 20 percentage points greater than the next-best performing fund.

The average hedge fund, by comparison, gained 1.1 percent over the same time, the lowest return since the average loss of 5.4 percent in 2011, according to BarclayHedge.

At the heart of Miller’s strategy is a bet against what he calls “structurally flawed” ETFs. He has a list of approximately 100 such ETFs, nearly all of them leveraged, that he uses as the basis for his trades.

Miller’s base case is that most leveraged ETFs are poorly designed because the nature of compounding wipes out their gains over time.

An investor who puts $100 into a two-times leveraged fund realizes a gain of 20 percent if the index it tracks goes up 10 percent in one day. Yet if the same index goes down 9.1 percent the next day to fall back to its starting point, the same investor who had $120 will realize a loss of 18.2 percent – or $21.84 – and be left with just $98.16.

Miller uses options to hedge his holdings, focusing on making bets that an ETF will have choppy trading rather than sprinting off in any direction, a strategy that he says limits his losses.

For example, he has a net short position on both an ETF that offers a triple positive return of an index of Russian stocks and one that offers a triple negative return of the same index based on the idea that Russian stocks tend to be volatile.

Indeed, both funds are down this year significantly, while their underlying index, the Market Vectors Russia ETF index (NYSE:RSX), is up 22 percent. The bullish fund down 27.6 percent while the bearish fund is down 66.9 percent.

To be sure, the strategy is not foolproof and carries risks of its own, including high trading costs incurred from frequent options trading and the risk that a leveraged ETF goes on a prolonged run beyond Miller’s strike price, leaving him on the hook for theoretically unlimited losses.

At the same time, the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission proposed a rule on Friday that would force ETFs to limit their derivatives exposure, potentially forcing most leveraged ETFs to shut down [L1N1401IW]. In that case, Miller said he would be forced to pivot his options strategy to focusing on “inconsistencies” in the futures market for commodities.

So far, Miller has been able to hedge away most of his losses. He has a net short position on the ProShares Ultra VIX Short-Term Futures ETF (NYSE:UVXY), a fund that returns two times the daily performance of the S&P VIX Short-Term Futures index.

The fund shot up more than 11 percent on December 9 of this year. Yet Miller is willing to look past such daily losses and focus on the long-term tendency of leveraged ETFs to “decay,” he said. The same fund he has a net short position on, for instance, has a 78 percent decline for the year to date.

Fund experts say that Miller’s strategy of using options to short leveraged ETFs is unique, but does not have a long enough track record to be judged as anything more than a fluke.

“This is quite rare to find any fund that is using this as part of their strategy,” said Todd Rosenbluth, director of mutual fund research at S&P Capital IQ.

At the same time, Miller’s short track record is its own risk, he said. His strategy “has worked out excellently this year for this fund, but it’s still only one year of performance,” he added.

Miller, meanwhile, says that he has such a long list of what he calls poorly thought-out ETFs that he feels no need to hope that the fund industry keeps introducing more of them.

“There are so many terribly designed products out there already,” he says.

(Reporting by David Randall, with additional reporting by Saquib Ahmned; editing by Linda Stern)
Read more at Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/us-catalyst-fund-etf-idUSKBN0TW0TX20151213#mdFJfVOuVEKxhbSp.99

BATS ETF exchange

BATS Scoring New Listing Runs Via Payment To ETF Issuers

(ETF.com)-BATS Global Markets has been aggressively taking on well-established NYSE and Nasdaq exchanges in the battle for ETF listings.  MarketsMuse.com ETF news curators found the BATS exchange is apparently scoring runs via new listings courtesy of paying ETF Issuers to list their products vs. the old-school exchange model that has Issuers paying an exchange an annual fee to have their products listed.

The latest move by the Kansas City-based exchange was the introduction of an incentive program that pays ETF issuers to list funds on BATS. That payment, which is based on consolidated average daily volume exceeding 1 million shares a day, ranges from $3,000 to $400,000 a year per ETF. And the incentive grows as volume grows.

To put that incentive in perspective, consider that, typically, ETF issuers pay between $5,000 and $55,000 to have their funds listed on an exchange, according to the Wall Street Journal. BATS not only offers free listings, it now pays for volume.

ETF Launches Jump

The idea seems to be working. Since the inception of the program on Oct. 1, known as the BATS ETF Marketplace, the number of ETF launches have jumped at the exchange. According to our data, in the past two months, about 25% of new launches took place on BATS—that’s 11 new listings in about eight weeks, and one in every four new ETFs coming to market.

By comparison, the exchange had welcomed only seven new ETFs in the nine months prior between Jan. 1 and Sept. 30 when more than 200 new funds had been listed. In 2014, when total ETF launches totaled 202 new funds, BATS saw only five new listing that year.

At the time of the program’s inception, Laura Morrison, senior vice president, global head of exchange traded products at BATS, said the idea was to allow issuers to benefit from their listings.

For the full story from ETF.com click here

race-to-zero blackrock

ETF Fees-BlackRock Leads Race To Zero

Unless you are Rip Van Winkle, you don’t need to be a MarketsMuse to know that the primary value proposition put forth by the ETF industry has always been: “Lower Fees Vs. Mutual Funds!” Yes, the secondary ‘advantage’ is “liquidity,” given that investors can move in and out of exchange-traded-funds throughout the trading day, whereas mutual funds are priced on an end-of day basis.

Well, Issuers of exchange-traded funds are now eating their own lunches, as competing Issuers are now pursuing a “race-to-zero” path when it comes to administration fees—adding a further crimp to the mutual fund industry’s marketing complex—which is being rocked by allegations from PIMCO’s former top honcho Bill Gross who has alleged in a recent lawsuit that PIMCO’s administrative fees are equal to the management fees the firm charges (but, that’s another story!)

Courtesy of today’s column by WSJ’s Daisy Maxey ETF Fees: “The Arms Race to Nothing”, the story at hand is worth two in the bush…here’s an excerpt:

 

Daisy Maxey, WSJ
Daisy Maxey, WSJ

BlackRock Inc. exchange-traded fund can now claim the title of the lowest-cost stock exchange-traded fund—but it probably won’t have that distinction to itself for long.

BlackRock, the largest global provider of ETFs, on Tuesday cut fees on seven of its iShares Core ETFs. That included trimming the annual expenses of the $2.7 billion iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF to 0.03% of assets from 0.07%, bumping a pair of Charles Schwab Corp. ETFs from the lowest-cost spot.

Within hours, Schwab vowed to match the cut on its $4.9 billion Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF, which currently has expenses of 0.04%.

“Our intention has always been to be the price leader in the ETF space, and we’re going to maintain that,” said a spokesman for Schwab, who didn’t give an exact time frame for the company’s planned move.

Low fees have been one of the big attractions of ETFs and providers have competed fiercely to whittle down their charges by additional hundredths of a percentage point. The latest cuts by BlackRock are being viewed as a challenge to Vanguard Group, the No. 2 in ETF assets, as well as a sign of the success of BlackRock’s iShares Core ETF lineup, launched three years ago.

The giants of the ETF business are BlackRock, with $818 billion in U.S. ETF assets under management; Vanguard, at $479 billion; and State Street Global Advisors, the asset-management business of State Street Corp. , at $418 billion, according to Thomson Reuters Lipper. Schwab is a distant No. 7, with $38 billion in U.S. ETF assets, according to Thomson Reuters Lipper.

BlackRock’s iShares Core ETFs, which now number 20, are marketed as simple and low-cost portfolio building blocks.

The lineup has grown to $160 billion in assets as of Sept. 30, according to BlackRock.

For the full story from WSJ, click here

ICE plan active ETFs

ICE Plans for More Active-Traded ETFs Put On Ice

The NYSE, a  division of Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) has encountered a slippery slope in the exchange’s effort to secure a bigger role in the ETF marketplace through a scheme that would expedite the creation of so-called actively-traded ETFs, which some MarketsMuse followers have dubbed ‘exchange-traded funds on testosterone.’

WSJ-The New York Stock Exchange this month withdrew a proposal to the Securities and Exchange Commission that would have expedited the regulatory approval of some exchange-traded funds, a setback for the fast-expanding ETF industry.

What the Intercontinental Exchange Inc. unit sought is known as a generic listing standard, which would have cut months off the process to list actively managed ETFs. Listing currently requires a fund-by-fund evaluation by the SEC that can take several months. The SEC reported the withdrawal on Oct. 19.

Generic listing standards for many index-based products, which seek to mimic the performance of a particular index, have slashed the time and cost of getting an exchange-traded fund to market, helping fuel a record number of new issuers this year.

The setback for efforts to secure similar standards for actively managed products highlights the limits facing the industry after years of rapid and broad growth.

The SEC declined to comment on the withdrawal. A person familiar with the process said there were concerns at the SEC about the open-ended use of derivatives that could occur if the rule were approved. A narrower proposal could limit the types of new funds or tools they use should the SEC eventually approve the listing standards.

For its part, NYSE still sees value in a faster approval process for these funds, an exchange spokeswoman said.

A person familiar with the matter said NYSE would tweak and refile the proposal.

“I think it’s the SEC being extra cautious,” said Todd Rosenbluth, head of ETF research at S&P Capital IQ. “I think they want to fully understand the risks that investors take on with these products.”

Exchange-traded funds hold baskets of stocks, bonds or other assets and trade on an exchange like a stock. Most are passive, with holdings dictated by the rules and weightings of the index they are designed to track. Actively managed products, in which a fund manager can change the holdings, account for only about 130 of the 1,787 exchange-traded products in the U.S., according to ETFGI, a London-based consulting firm. They have about $21.6 billion in assets, a fraction of the some $1.98 trillion in all exchange-traded products in the U.S.

But actively managed funds represent a frontier for ETFs, and exchanges are eager to speed up the process of listing them, particularly as the competition for listings heats up.

For the full story from WSJ, please click here.

nomura suspends leveraged ETF new creations

Nomura Says Sayonara to New Leveraged ETF Creations

Sayonara City As Japan Getting Crash Course in Leveraged Returns With Nikkei ETF

MarketsMuse ETF update courtesy of Bloomberg LP Oct 15–Nomura Asset Management Co. said it would suspend on Friday the creation of new shares in a large leveraged exchange-traded fund, as well as two others, citing liquidity concerns.

The move applies to the Next Funds Nikkei 225 Leveraged Index Exchange Traded Fund (BBRG Ticker: 1570 JP Equity <GO>), which has about ¥734 billion ($6.2 billion) in assets. The fund’s shares are up about 8.7% this month. Nomura said shares will continue to trade.

“The temporary suspension has been determined, considering the current situations of fund management including the liquidity of the underlying Nikkei 225 futures and the total assets under management of three ETFs,” Nomura posted on its website. The firm will continue to receive redemptions, it said.

A Nomura representative wasn’t available to comment.

The decision highlights an increasingly warned-about side effect of exchange-traded products’ growing popularity: a mismatch between the liquidity of some funds and their holdings.

The Nomura decision also highlights concerns about leveraged products, which provide investors with outsize exposure to certain asset classes, employing tactics such as borrowed money and derivatives. The $6.2 billion fund provides investors with two times the exposure to the Nikkei 225.

The products have been popular in the U.S., but the size of Nomura’s Next Funds Nikkei 225 Leveraged Index ETF is larger than any such leveraged exchange-traded product in the U.S., said Dave Nadig, director of ETFs at financial-data provider FactSet. There are close to 1,800 exchange-traded products listed in the U.S., and about 230 of them are leveraged, he said.

Regarding how leveraged funds operate, Mr. Nadig said: “The math makes people’s heads hurt.”

It’s not the first time an exchange-traded product has run into obstacles because of its own popularity. Credit Suisse Group AG had to suspend the creation of new stock in the VelocityShares Daily 2x VIX Short-Term ETN in February 2012, after demand for the security hit a limit set when the product was created in 2010. Barclays Plc also halted issuance in its iPath Dow Jones-UBS Natural Gas Total Return Sub-Index ETN in August 2009.

For the full story from Bloomberg LP, please click here

Sell This Rumor: Hedge Funds Exploit ETF Ecosystem

The battle between business news pontificaters across the 4th estate is in full season, as evidenced by a smart article yesterday by Bloomberg LP’s Eric Balchunas and suggests that MarketsMuse curators are apparently not the only topic experts who noticed and took aim at a recent WSJ article that proclaimed savvy hedge fund types are increasingly exploiting exchange-traded funds by arbitraging price anomalies between the underlying constituents and the ETF cash product that occur in volatile moments.

That original WSJ article, “Traders Seek Ways to benefit from ETF woes …At the Expense of Investors” was misleading, and as noted by MarketsMuse Sept 30 op-ed reply to the WSJ piece, one long time ETF expert asserted that WSJ’s conclusions was “much ado about nothing.” Bloomberg’s Balchunas has since reached a similar conclusion; below are extracted observations from his Oct 12 column..

Hedge funds may need to get back to the drawing board if they’re planning to turn around their performance struggles by capitalizing on “shortcomings in the ETFs’ structure” via some unusual trade ideas, as highlighted in this recent Wall Street Journal article. Most funds do nothing of the sort.

Eric Balchunas, Bloomberg LP
Eric Balchunas Bloomberg LP

The vast majority of ETF usage by hedge funds is very boring. They love to short ETFs to get their hedge on and isolate some kind of risk. For example, they may short the Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) and then make a bet on one of the health-care stocks in the basket in order to quarantine a single security bet. Hedge funds have about $116 billion worth of ETF shares shorted, compared with only $34 billion in long positions, according to data compiled by Goldman Sachs last year.

The $34 billion in long positions is them using ETFs like everyone else — as a way to get quick and convenient exposure to a particular market. For example, the world’s largest hedge fund, Bridgewater Associates, has a $4 billion position in the Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO), which it has held for six years now.  There’s also Paulson & Co.’s famous $1 billion position in SPDR Gold Trust (GLD), which it has been holding for almost seven years. Like anyone else, they like the cheap exposure and liquidity VWO and GLD serve up.

With that context in place, yes, there are a tiny minority of hedge funds that engage in some complex trades like the ones highlighted in the article. But each trade comes with at least one big problem.

Before anyone tries any of these at home, it’s important to deconstruct them.

Trade #1: Robbing Grandma

How it works: During a major selloff, try and scoop up shares at discounted prices put in by small investors using market orders.

The problem: It’s super rare. Aug. 24, which saw hundreds of ETFs trade at sharp discounts amid a major selloff, was basically an anomaly. At best, a day like that happens once every two years. Thus, to capitalize on discounts of the 20-30 percent variety is like standing on a beach waiting for a hurricane to hit. And you won’t be the only one, so you may wait two years only to find you can’t get your order filled on the day the big one hits. In addition, no large institutional investors are putting in market orders. So this low-hanging fruit is sell orders for tiny amounts put in by unknowing small investors. Essentially this is the white-collar equivalent of robbing Grandma for some loose change in her purse.

Moreover, Aug. 24 may never happen again, at least the way it unfolded. ETF issuers are working with the exchanges, the regulators, and the market makers — and even making significant recommendations — to make sure those kinds of small investors aren’t exposed again like that.

It should be noted, though, that arbitrage between the ETF price and the value of the holdings happens day in and day out with ETFs — that’s how ETFs work. They rely on a network of market makers and authorized participants to arbitrage away the discrepancy between the ETF’s underlyings and its net asset value (NAV).

Trade #2: The Double Short

To continue reading the straight scoop from Bloomberg columnist Eric Balchunas, click here

Is an ETF for Equity Crowdfunding Far Off?-Global Directory Announces Launch

For followers of the global equity crowdfund movement and fintech aficionados who are fluent in ‘what’s next?’, this is a big news week from the crowdfund world. Yesterday, MarketsMuse curators spotlighted a just-launched trading exchange that brings billions of dollars worth of private shares into the wacky world of secondary market trading. While there are rumored to be various efforts to package equity-crowdfunded ‘equity stakes’ into exchange-traded fund structures, which is arguably the “next great idea, “the first ETF for Equity Crowdfunding” has yet to be formally announced.

Before that announcement actually happens, today’s announcement from the multi-billion crowdfunding space (see link below) might be the data foundation such an initiative. and could very well be the vision spearheaded by this new portal, RaiseMoney.com.

MarketsMuse editor note: fully-disclosed, one of our favorite staff members was cited in this news story with the following comment

“Noted Pete Hoegler, senior analyst for financial industry blog, MarketsMuse.com, “The RaiseMoney.com platform has three critical elements in its favor. Firstly, they have a really compelling domain name that inspires immediate brand recognition.” Added Hoegler, “Secondly, this group has the benefit of not having “first-mover disadvantage” and most important, RaiseMoney.com is providing a much-needed service for a still nascent industry that is capturing the attention of millions of people and billions of dollars.”

Click below for the formal announcement distributed by NASDAQ’s GlobeNewswire

Wall St Ex-Pats Launch Global Directory for Crowdfunding Industry”

BATS Exchange Goes Bats Again;Pay For Orders, Now Pay For ETF Issuer Listings

MarketsMuse ETF Curators debated on the title to this story, and first suggested the headline “Has BATS Gone Bats?!” While market structure experts continue to debate the topic of pay-to-play, i.e. payment for order flow schemes, BATS Global Markets, the youngest and arguably, now one of the largest electronic exchanges in the global marketplace based on trade volume across equities, ETFs and options is proving again Donald Trump’s moto: “Controversy Sells!”

According to the firm’s announcement last night, BATS is upending the traditional fee model for companies to list on an exchange-one that had Issuers paying the Exchange for the privilege of listing the company’s securities in consideration for the respective exchange’s brand integrity and financial ecosystem integrity. Instead, BATS, in effort to capture a lead role in the Exchange-Traded Fund space is now offering to reverse the business model and will pay ETF Issuers to list their products on the BATS exchange platform.

The way in which ETF products trade has recently come under close scrutiny by market regulators and institutional investors in the wake of both disconnected NAV prices of the cash product v. the underlying constituents during volatile periods and in connection with leveraged ETF products performing in unanticipated ways v. the way in which respective marketing materials proclaim those products can be expected to perform.

As noted in today’s WSJ story by Bradley Hope and Leslie Josephs..

The Lenexa, Kan.-based exchange operator on Thursday plans to launch what it calls the BATS ETF Marketplace, which will pay ETF providers as much as $400,000 a year to list on BATS. Payments will vary depending on average daily volume.

Traditionally, ETF providers have paid between $5,000 and $55,000 a year to list on a stock exchange. BATS previously offered firms the option to list on its exchange for free. Besides the monetary incentive, the marketplace is also changing the way it rewards market makers for continuously offering to buy or sell ETFs, a move it said will help reduce volatility.

“We are redefining the relationship between ETF sponsors, investors and market makers,” CEO Chris Concannon said in an interview.

ETFs have come under greater scrutiny after they faced trading issues on Aug. 24, including prices of ETFs being far out of whack compared with the prices of the underlying holdings. Exchanges, market makers and ETF sponsor firms are in discussions about how to make wider changes to rules to help prevent similar problems from happening.

“August 24 obviously makes us go back and say: ‘Are our decisions the right ones?’ ” said William Belden, managing director of ETF strategies at Guggenheim Investments LLC.

For the full coverage from the WSJ, please click here

How Savvy Hedge Funds Exploit ETF Products-Supposedly

While equities markets have zig-zagged since late summer with lots of volatility,  leading to pretty much no change in major indices since late August, news media outlets have put their cross hairs on the ETF industry, which has been battered with criticism consequent to out-0f-context pricing that has riddled opening bell markets during recent spikes in volatility.  CNBC pundits have invited an assortment of geniuses to explain, defend or attack ETFs for days, including 30 minutes dedicated to the topic mid-day yesterday.  The industry print publications have been repurposing each other’s copy with similar themes for days, and the SEC and other alphabet agencies are purportedly ‘investigating’ the ETF industry as a consequence of the recent disruptions.

For equities market experts who are fluent in exchange-traded funds, which are nothing more placeholders for bespoke basket trading strategies–you know that the notion of disruptions in pricing of the cash product aka the ETF could easily happen whenever there is a dislocation in the underlying constituents. Its a caveat emptor type of product. But, somehow, this simple concept has been lost on everyone, except of course by ‘savvy hedge fund managers’..and what a surprise, one HF name now being mentioned for exploiting ETF products is none other than Steve Cohen.

Here’s an excerpt from today’s WSJ “Traders Seek Ways to Benefit From ETFs’ Woes…In some cases, gains come at expense of individual investors”….–which is arguably best suited for college freshman taking elementary classes. According to one trader interviewed by the MarketsMuse Curator, “If there is any SEC-certified RIA or any institutional investor who doesn’t understand this product and the related nuances [and believes the WSJ article was informative], your license should be stripped.”

Here’s an excerpt from today’s WSJ story by Rob Copeland and Bradley Hope Continue reading

ProShares’ Burger King Idea: “Ex-Sector” ETF Menu

Hold the pickles, and hold the lettuce…Just when MarketsMuse curators and an assortment of ETF market enthusiasts thought there might already be enough themes, toppings and twists to the growing number of exchange-traded funds, ProShares is taking a page straight out of Burger King’s 1970’s branding campaign via a newly-launched menu of “ex-sector ETFs.”  The new, S&P-centric menu enables investors to have it their way and to express bets in the S&P 500, but “ex” specific sub sectors. Confused as to why? According to a report by CNBC’s Alex Rosenberg, so are select industry professionals who view this innovation as convoluted. Below is an excerpt from Rosenberg’s juicy bytes..

proshares bk have it your wayA new set of exchange-traded funds offered by ProShares allows investors to get exposure to the entire S&P 500, save for one or another given sector. Specifically, the company now offers ETFs tracking the S&P 500 ex-energy (trading under the ticker symbol SPXE), ex-financials (SPXN), ex-health care (SPXV) and ex-technology (SPXT).

In a Thursday interview with CNBC’s “Trading Nation,” ProShares’ head of investment strategy, Simeon Hyman, highlighted two anticipated uses for the ETFs: diversification and tactical decision-making.

Hyman provides the example of an investor who already has high exposure to a given sector—such as an executive compensated in a company’s stock, or an inheritor who has received a large number of shares—and does not want to take on excess exposure.

“Previously you’d have to maybe call up a trust company or find someone to run a custom strategy for you to avoid that sector, and here it’s just very straightforward: Buy an ETF. The sector’s out, it’s redistributed across the other names on a market-cap-weighted basis, you don’t have to worry about it,” Hyman said.

Second, the ETFs are designed for those who believe a given sector, such as energy, is set to underperform the rest of the market. “If you have that conviction, this is a very straightforward and easy way to effect that view,” he said.

Yet given that retail investors are often considered to be best served by buying into the overall market and avoiding tactical calls, some say these ETFs might be an inferior play compared to, say, SPDR’s popular S&P 500 ETF (SPY).

“As a core holding, you are far less diversified,” Eric Mustin, vice president of ETF trading solutions at WallachBeth Capital, wrote to CNBC. “You are implicitly overweight the other sectors versus the S&P 500 weightings.” The expense ratio, at 0.27 percent, also irks Mustin.

“You are paying nearly 200 percent to 300 percent the management fees” compared to a product like the (SPY), he pointed out. “I think it’s a product that may find some success among a retail audience, but sophisticated investors probably won’t have an appetite for it.”

When there is a “pronounced discrepancy in attractiveness,” such as the clear unattractiveness of energy at the beginning of the year given dismal earnings expectations and high valuations, “it would seem logical to exclude that sector,” S&P Capital IQ’s equity chief investment officer, Erin Gibbs, wrote to CNBC.

“However, these clear-cut unattractive sector events do not happen that often, and therefore these products could have limited appeal,” she added. Here’s what Hyman has to say:

And, as a special treat to MarketsMuse readers who are “of age”, here’s a dandy clip that adds flavor to this story:

Robo Adviser Beat:Betterment Claims Better ETF Construct for 401ks

MarketsMuse curators note that “there is always a better way, until its not better. ..”But that isn’t stopping Betterment LLC, the startup robo-adviser that claims to offer a solution for investors who seek an automated approach to stuff ETFs into their401k portfolios.

Betterment, a leading robo-adviser, announced last week that it will launch a 401(k) platform for employers starting early next year. Portfolios will be made up of exchange-traded funds.

Jon Stein, Bettterment CEO
Jon Stein, Bettterment CEO

According to Betterment CEO Jon Stein.. “Current 401(k) offerings—and we have examined them all—have poor user experiences, high costs, and a clear lack of advice. Not anymore. Betterment for Business will bring our smarter technology to the workplace and the millions of Americans who badly need it to meet their retirement needs. “It’s time that all Americans have low-cost, unconflicted advice and smarter technology for retirement planning.”

Betterment says it currently has 100,000 retail customers and $2.6 billion in assets under management in its diversified mix of exchange-traded funds.

Fast-growing ETFs remain a tiny part of the 401(k) market. Anne Tergesen at The Wall Street Journal notes that two key benefits of owning ETFs — intraday trading and tax-efficiency — are sound much less exciting in reference to 401(k)s:

“A couple of ETFs’ biggest selling points don’t give them an edge in the 401(k) market. ETFs trade all day long like stocks, but that typically isn’t a feature that employers want to offer in retirement plans. Employers want employees “to take a long-term perspective—not to be day trading,” Ms. Lucas said.  “ETFs are also tax-efficient, but that doesn’t matter in tax-sheltered retirement plans,” said Brooks Herman, head of data and research at BrightScope.”

In offering an ETF-only menu for its 401(k), Betterment joins Charles Schwab Corp. , which last year launched an all-ETF version of its Index Advantage 401(k) platform. Other companies that offer ETFs within 401(k) plans include Vanguard Group and Capital One Financial Corp.’s ShareBuilder 401(k).

For the full story from the WSJ, please click here