The word “index” in an ETF label does not always mean that investors are getting the specific exposure they seek. Diligence on ETF holdings is necessary despite what the providers might have you believe. Below I dispel the following myths concerning index ETFs.
As the Chairman of the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, from 2002 to 2010, Robert Herz has had a much larger influence on financial markets than the average investor appreciates.
This article provides some empirical evidence behind my putting Apple (AAPL) in the Danger Zone last week because its return on invested capital (ROIC) is outrageously high. That fact underscores why valuing this company or any other with the expectation that such a high ROIC was sustainable would be a mistake.
Picking from the multitude of sector ETFs is a daunting task. In any given sector there may be as many as 43 different ETFs, and there are at least 171 ETFs across all sectors.
I believe the US economy is undergoing a restructuring where we, as a society, are becoming radically more productive. I think that we are entering a new economic paradigm of productivity in both our corporate and labor markets. In this new paradigm, we achieve enough gains in productivity to offset the inflationary forces of QE.
The belief that Internet retail is or will be more profitable than traditional retail is untrue. Amazon is in a competitive, low margin business that cannot justify the profit growth implied in its valuation.
Fund holdings affect fund performance more than fees or past performance. A cheap fund is not necessarily a good fund. A fund that has done well in the past is not likely to do well in the future. Yet, traditional fund research focuses only on low fees and past performance.
If you bought Cisco Systems Inc (CSCO) last August when I recommended it to investors, or when I recommended it again in January, or any time between May 10, 2012 and now when the stock has had my Very Attractive rating, then today has been a good day for you.
The Small-cap Value style ranks twelfth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my Style Rankings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 14 ETFs and 276 mutual funds in the Small-cap Value style as of May 3, 2013.
The Small-cap Blend style ranks eleventh out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my Style Rankings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 22 ETFs and 643 mutual funds in the Small-cap Blend style as of May 3, 2013.
The Small-cap Growth style ranks tenth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my Style Rankings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 10 ETFs and 432 mutual funds in the Small-cap Growth style as of May 3, 2013.
Too many investors are looking at AAPL through the rear view mirror and assume that its sky-high profits and return on invested capital (ROIC) are sustainable. As I detail in my CNBC interview, Apple is not cheap and investors should not underestimate the impact of losing Steve Jobs.
The Mid-cap Value style ranks ninth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my Style Rankings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 12 ETFs and 189 mutual funds in the Mid-cap Value style as of May 3, 2013.