On December 6th I am moderating a panel at the Super Bowl of Indexing called Where Are We Now? ETF Industry Review. The panelists as of now are Deborah Fuhr from Blackrock, Scott Burns from Morningstar, Joanne Hill from ProShares and Mariana Bush from Wells Fargo.
My idea on how to frame the panel is that they are the industry and we, the audience, me and you if you comment with a question, are the end users of the products. What sorts of things do you want to know about in terms of new product innovation, how people are reacting to relatively new products, different ways to analyze the funds, what needs to change completely, what is working very well, what about fixed income, what about the flash crash, what about the Kauffman report what about whatever else you would want to ask industry bigwigs.
I've solicited input along these lines quite a few times in the past and it yields some good questions so hopefully you can contribute this time as well. Thank you.
Proud Member Of
Random Roger
© 2009 | Gadget Theme Blogger Template
Original WPtheme By Blogger Template | Converted By Gadget Lover
| Distributed by eFree Blogger Help
Original WPtheme By Blogger Template | Converted By Gadget Lover
| Distributed by eFree Blogger Help
14 comments:
As you know there are a multitude of ETFs available but so many are simply "me too" replicas. One area that is not well covered, and one I'd like to have available, is single country fixed income. I'd like to have multiple duration options within individual country fixed income ETFs as well.
thank you for the comment. are there countries you think are more important than others?
MORE CLARITY ON ACTIVELY MANAGED ETFS
can you elaborate on what you mean by more clarity?
HOW WILL THE TRANSPARENCY DURING THE TRADING DAY BE RESOLVED IF A TRADER CANNOT PROPERLY ACCOUNT FOR WHATS IN THE ETF THIS WILL HURT LIQUIDITY AND WIDTH OF BID ASK ALSO IN LIGHT OF THIS KAUFMAN REPORT MAYBE THE PANELISTS COULD PUT IN LAYMANS TERMS THE PROCESS OF HOW THE SPONSOR IS SEPARATE FROM THE SECONDARY MARKET
ok, thanks
I'd like to see single country fixed income ETFs from pretty much the same places as you often mention here: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Chile, Switzerland, and Peru. Small retail investors like me, on our own without a manager, cannot participate in those markets for fixed income except through (in my opinion) overly broad-based ETFs or mutual funds. We can now in equities, thanks to the ETFs, but not fixed income.
I agree about the single country bond etf. Today I was looking at the NZ equity country etf and found many comments suggesting the NZ bonds. Not easy to do now.
Also, I would be interested i a "permanent portfolio" etf similar to PRPFX. I realize you can do much of this with individual ETFs, but still, why not.
Maybe we should have some indexed equity ETFs that lighten up when necessary. That is, include a "stop big losses " feature.
Chuck Carnevale has created a collection of stocks based on rising earnings and dividend yield, with a value orientation for timing of purchasing and sale. It has low volatility, no top down exit strategy, and limited international exposure. I would like to see a fund using the Nussbaum strategy for top down country picking, and the rising earnings/ increasing dividend for bottoms up stock picking, with about thirty to forty holdings, internationally. I looked and could not find anything like this a few weeks ago.
Sam
Sam GTAA might come close to that but i hear on the rules based
Anon 4:52: I second your idea on equity ETF with the "stop big loss" provision. Isn't that what John Hussman tries to do with his two equity funds? He doesn't lighten up on equities, though, he hedges them.
A Hussman-type ETF perhaps?
Bill66
Roger,
This is off the topic, but you may be interested in this clip that involves countries that are part of your investing platform.
http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2010/11/12/n_jim_chanos_china.fortune/
I may be a little late to the party, but I do have a message on this topic:
EQUAL WEIGHT.
I'm so tired of every ETF being overweight the same big companies because, um, everyone already owns them?
A small company has just as good a chance to be profitable as a big one. So if I want, say, oil companies, why do I need to have more XOM than anything else? I'd rather have 4% each of the top 25, or 2% each of the top 50, depending on the sector or region.
Rydex has one broad based equal weight fund and also domestic sector funds that are equal weight.
Post a Comment