11–20 of 38 posts
Also worth your consideration: The Rise of ETF Slop - Ben Felix https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14V7q4gHKFo
i cannot wait for the word "slop" to leave the zeitgeist.
It's an irrelevant point because ETFs incorporate more than just US stocks. You have global stocks (tens of thousands), options (a million expirations), bonds (3 million cusips) , crypto, futures, and the list goes on. And it becomes a combinatorial exercise... The article is pointing out the lack of publicly listed companies in the USA. But we also have private stock in ETFs now. And not to mention a handful of bloc…
It also just seems like a bizarre thing to care about. "There are more user playlists on Spotify than songs!" Well yeah, of course there are?
It's an irrelevant point because ETFs incorporate more than just US stocks. You have global stocks (tens of thousands), options (a million expirations), bonds (3 million cusips) , crypto, futures, and the list goes on. And it becomes a combinatorial exercise... The article is pointing out the lack of publicly listed companies in the USA. But we also have private stock in ETFs now. And not to mention a handful of bloc…
It's an irrelevant point because ETFs incorporate more than just US stocks. You have global stocks (tens of thousands), options (a million expirations), bonds (3 million cusips) , crypto, futures, and the list goes on. And it becomes a combinatorial exercise... The article is pointing out the lack of publicly listed companies in the USA. But we also have private stock in ETFs now. And not to mention a handful of bloc…
I hope to god "investors" don't fall for the "blockbuster" IPO of SPCX. Remember in 2008 when Standard and Poors was giving AAA ratings to junk CDOs at the investment banks behest? SPCX isn't going to collapse the global financial markets, but the exact same shady rules changes and suspect IPO structure reeks of banks trying to pull the wool over retail's eyes.
Elon would never leave that to chance, he made sure it doesn't matter if investors "fall" for it or not by bullying the indexes into suspending their 1-year rules specifically to get SPCX (and everyone's 401k) bought in within 15 days. If you use indexes you're buying SPCX right out of the gate whether you like it or not.
You can make arbitrarily random ETFs with all kinds of weird positions. Crypto, bonds, derivatives of all kinds, international stuff.
Plus you can give them funny names like $NANC.
Sure they are similar in that they are collections of words, but the significance of the total is not the count of how many there are, but rather their sum worth.
The number of ETFs isn't as relevant as the total % of funds invested in passive funds as opposed to single stocks or active funds. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5259427 > Passive capitalization-weighted index funds now surpass active management in aggregate investor allocations. Flows into passive strategies cause unrelated stocks to move synchronously, undermining diversification and potential…