|
John
Bogle, perhaps the most ardent proponent of low-cost investing and routinely
referred to as the father of indexing, recently labeled exchangetraded funds
as "mutant" index funds. His latest book, The Little Book of Common Sense
Investing: The Only Way to Guarantee Your Fair Share of Stock Market Returns,
tags the exchange-traded fund as a "wolf in sheep's clothing" which threatens
traditional indexing by facilitating speculation, encouraging excessive trading
and endorsing a risk-taking investment culture.
What may surprise readers is that we agree with much of Bogle's analysis.
Many ETFs have indeed encouraged speculation, led to performance chasing and
ultimately harmed investors. And many more investors will make imprudent decisions
through an investment in an ETF.
But Bogle's criticisms against ETFs center around longer running problems
within investing in general - excessive trading, ignoring risk,
inadequate diversification and inappropriate asset allocations. In other words,
Bogle simply highlights common pitfalls that have always plagued investors.
ETFs themselves can hardly be blamed.
ETF Misuse Not Harmful for Long Term Investors. Bogle indicates that
although ETFs were originally created for the long-term investor, most users
today are hedge funds, active money managers or traders. In fact, he estimates
that long term investors only hold about 20% of assets in the more broadly
diversified ETFs.
Annual turnover often exceeds thousands of percent (turnover for the popular
NASDAQ Qubes is reported to exceed 6,000% per annum). State Street's flagship
ETF, the "Spider" (AMEX: SPY), typically has a daily turnover of more than
$10bn ... likely the world's most actively traded security.
In general, higher trading has been associated with lower returns. But does
turnover really harm the long term ETF holder (i.e. a holding period of
longer than a few months)? Certainly turnover within the ETFs' underlying
securities may cause undesirable tax consequences. However, most (certainly
the traditional market capitalization based ETFs) have very little underlying
turnover
- tax efficiency is one of ETFs' core benefits.

But another key benefit is that ETF unitholders are actually insulated from
the trading activities of other shareholders since they are exchange listed.
Another investor's buy or sale does not trigger tax consequences for existing
unitholders. Pooled and mutual funds, on the other hand, face negative tax
consequences both when the portfolio manager trades in the underlying securities
and when existing shareholders make redemptions from the fund.
Not All ETFs are Created Alike. Bogle points out the latest ETF launches
have been dominated by leaders in the most recent bull market - small-caps,
resources, real estate and emerging markets. He further criticizes ETF providers
for creating narrowly-based ETFs that lack diversification and betray their
claim of low fees. Recent issues of ETFocus have voiced similar criticisms.
There have been some opportunistic ETFs which have clearly violated the low-fee,
diversified traditional ETF structure.
But at what point does the central message of ETFs become diluted? Without
question, the arrival of ETFs has dramatically altered the investing landscape
for the better and leveled the playing field for individual investors - a
few ill-advised ETFs should not detract from the positive benefits of this
radical shift.
In a February 9, 2007 Wall Street Journal piece, Bogle highlighted
only 12 of the then 690 ETFs as useful investment instruments, as the others
did not track broadbased segments of the market (he accuses approximately
$390 billion of the $410 billion in US ETF assets as speculative investments...
a "vast departure" from the original benefits of the traditional broad index
fund).
On this point, we flatly disagree of course. One of the revolutionary aspects
of ETFs has been accessibility to sophisticated markets traditionally reserved
for high networth or institutional sized portfolios. Investors now have access
to a larger set of worldwide investable opportunities at a far lesser cost.
Witness recent launches granting investors the opportunity to divert holdings
from conventional investments into asset classes with more attractive valuations
and greater growth prospects (with access to the important non-correlated
investment categories).
Behavioural Biases Still Prevalent, But Don't Fault ETFs. One of Bogle's
sharpest criticisms is that since ETFs trade intraday (unlike index mutual
funds), they are ripe for abuse and encourage short-term speculation. But
doesn't the same hold true for all available investment classes? Can an investor
not equally speculate on Google stock versus a single country ETF?
In fact, speculation based on a broad, diversified ETF may be less tempting
than single stock securities, where individual company news often leads investors
to be overly active. History shows that investors continue to repeat the same
behavioural errors they have always made. The usual suspects are chasing hot
trends and trading more frequently than prudent.
Mounting evidence from the field of behavioural finance confirms that investors
are often their own worst enemies. In a 1989 study, Robert Shiller and John
Pound found that investors monitored recent individual stock purchases for
more than a half-hour per day. One can only imagine the increase in monitoring
time (and, hence, trading activity) since the online trading revolution
of the 1990s. Another study in 1998, by Brad Barber and Terrance Odean, analyzed
the trading habits of over 60,000 investors over a six year period. They concluded
that there was a direct correlation between trading volumes and performance:
those who traded the most fared the worst. Specifically, the investor group
with the highest trading volumes underperformed the index by 500 basis points.
That is not to say that trading positions or rebalancing will not add value.
But ETFs can mitigate many of these behavioural errors and introduce a more
disciplined framework for the implementation and rebalancing process. Holding
a diversified basket of securities -- where single company risk is reduced
-- can decrease monitoring and trading frequency, and will help investors focus
on more important drivers of long term performance such as asset mix. ETFs
also achieve instant diversification, remedying another typical investor snare
of holding too few stocks (and underestimating the individual stock's beta
with the broader market).
Vintage Bogle ... Remixed. John Bogle has had an immeasurable positive
impact on the investment industry. In true form, he is correct to highlight
important disclaimers when using ETFs, emphasizing maintenance of low fees
and avoidance of excessive turnover and performance chasing.
But his view of ETFs misses the mark on many counts. In his recent Wall
Street Journal article, Bogle confesses that, if used appropriately,
ETFs are "solid competitors" to index mutual funds and will provide the same
diversification at lower costs.
Bogle created the world's first index mutual fund in 1975. Over thirty years
later, with ETF providers innovating and gaining market share, he protests, "what
have they done to my song, ma?" Mr. Bogle: you didn't lose your song -- they
just came out with a better remix. And out of due respect, Mr. Bogle, we promise
to "stay the course" and use ETFs appropriately for client portfolios.
|