1
00:00:06,400 --> 00:00:07,080
Speaker 1: What can itellions.

2
00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:09,559
Speaker 2: I'm Joel Webber and I'm Eric Belchunos.

3
00:00:11,560 --> 00:00:13,920
Speaker 1: You know, we should talk about mar Eric in video

4
00:00:15,320 --> 00:00:17,959
Speaker 1: as a stock. Ever done anything like this.

5
00:00:18,920 --> 00:00:22,319
Speaker 2: No, I can't recall. I mean, Tesla Apples was a

6
00:00:22,320 --> 00:00:24,520
Speaker 2: little more of a slow build, and it's been on

7
00:00:24,560 --> 00:00:26,520
Speaker 2: the top of the mountain federal distinguishes in video.

8
00:00:26,560 --> 00:00:28,400
Speaker 1: It's like, it feels like it almost came out of

9
00:00:28,400 --> 00:00:31,240
Speaker 1: nowhere and just as larger than anything else.

10
00:00:31,400 --> 00:00:34,559
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's sort of even though it's happened over a

11
00:00:34,600 --> 00:00:37,040
Speaker 2: couple of years, that is a short amount of time

12
00:00:37,640 --> 00:00:41,319
Speaker 2: to grow as fast as this stock has and so on.

13
00:00:41,360 --> 00:00:45,280
Speaker 2: Our team as ETF analysts were sort of like scientists

14
00:00:45,320 --> 00:00:48,360
Speaker 2: in a way, and this stock provides such an interesting

15
00:00:48,880 --> 00:00:53,199
Speaker 2: way to analyze how indexes are reacting, how product is

16
00:00:53,240 --> 00:00:57,280
Speaker 2: being changed. It is there's so many little subplots because

17
00:00:57,320 --> 00:00:59,760
Speaker 2: of the rise of Navidia. And I was looking at

18
00:00:59,800 --> 00:01:01,959
Speaker 2: our notes and I'm like, wow, about half of our

19
00:01:01,960 --> 00:01:03,600
Speaker 2: notes have been on Navidia. And I think the only

20
00:01:03,680 --> 00:01:06,120
Speaker 2: other time we talked about this recently was with Will

21
00:01:06,200 --> 00:01:09,319
Speaker 2: Rind of the Navidia the double leverage Navidia ETF at

22
00:01:09,319 --> 00:01:12,039
Speaker 2: which we have covered. That's one of like six seven

23
00:01:12,080 --> 00:01:14,240
Speaker 2: angles that we've taken on the video, so I thought

24
00:01:14,280 --> 00:01:15,280
Speaker 2: we should cover the rest.

25
00:01:15,400 --> 00:01:19,320
Speaker 1: Yeah, you think you're really a scientist, I'm gonna I'm gonna.

26
00:01:19,160 --> 00:01:19,720
Speaker 2: Give a little bit.

27
00:01:19,959 --> 00:01:20,399
Speaker 1: Yeah.

28
00:01:20,400 --> 00:01:21,240
Speaker 2: I mean yeah, like.

29
00:01:21,200 --> 00:01:23,560
Speaker 1: There are I think actual scientists may take an issue.

30
00:01:23,720 --> 00:01:26,320
Speaker 2: You remember the scene it sounds the lamps when uh

31
00:01:26,920 --> 00:01:29,759
Speaker 2: Jodie Foster brings this sort of specimen bug to those

32
00:01:29,800 --> 00:01:32,280
Speaker 2: two guys with the thick glasses and they're like, oh,

33
00:01:32,360 --> 00:01:34,720
Speaker 2: look at this, and they and they get all excited.

34
00:01:35,160 --> 00:01:37,840
Speaker 2: That's us with stuff like this. I swear to God, Well.

35
00:01:37,880 --> 00:01:41,240
Speaker 1: We'll test that theory. Uh. On this episode, we're gonna

36
00:01:41,240 --> 00:01:45,160
Speaker 1: speak with Athanasio, Sarah Vegas, an ETF analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence,

37
00:01:45,480 --> 00:01:48,880
Speaker 1: as well as Emily Grefeo, a cross asset recorder with

38
00:01:48,920 --> 00:01:52,960
Speaker 1: Bloomberg News for first time on the podcast, this time

39
00:01:53,000 --> 00:01:58,520
Speaker 1: on trillions. The Nvidia Effect. Emily Athanasios, what can allians?

40
00:01:58,640 --> 00:02:00,600
Speaker 3: Yeah, nice to be back, Thank you for having me.

41
00:02:00,800 --> 00:02:04,360
Speaker 1: Okay, Emily, let's start with XLK. What is XLK. How

42
00:02:04,360 --> 00:02:06,400
Speaker 1: does Nvidia factor into it?

43
00:02:06,640 --> 00:02:12,679
Speaker 4: So? XLK is a technology sector ETF that investors used

44
00:02:12,720 --> 00:02:14,680
Speaker 4: to gauge. Okay, I want to invest in tech stocks,

45
00:02:14,919 --> 00:02:17,560
Speaker 4: they can buy the cues, but they can also buy XLK.

46
00:02:17,960 --> 00:02:21,800
Speaker 4: And due to the way that the index that XLK

47
00:02:22,040 --> 00:02:25,200
Speaker 4: tracks was constructed, it didn't really have a large weight

48
00:02:25,240 --> 00:02:28,119
Speaker 4: to Invidia. In the beginning of the year, it had

49
00:02:28,120 --> 00:02:31,680
Speaker 4: big weight to Microsoft and Apple, and then Nvidia's weight

50
00:02:31,800 --> 00:02:35,720
Speaker 4: was like only six percent, so it was actually underperforming

51
00:02:35,760 --> 00:02:38,920
Speaker 4: the S and P five hundred, the cues, and it

52
00:02:39,000 --> 00:02:41,799
Speaker 4: really wasn't a good gauge for Okay, how are tech

53
00:02:41,840 --> 00:02:44,840
Speaker 4: stocks doing because it only had this six percent weight.

54
00:02:45,280 --> 00:02:49,600
Speaker 4: So then it had to rebalance, which we've seen recently,

55
00:02:49,639 --> 00:02:52,400
Speaker 4: and the weights basically switched around. So now in Vidia

56
00:02:52,440 --> 00:02:55,480
Speaker 4: has a much higher weight and the fund.

57
00:02:55,600 --> 00:02:57,680
Speaker 2: What's weird about this index is you look, if you

58
00:02:57,720 --> 00:03:00,119
Speaker 2: were to pull it up before the reboundce, you'd see

59
00:03:00,200 --> 00:03:03,520
Speaker 2: Apple and Microsoft like twenty two percent waiting each. So

60
00:03:03,600 --> 00:03:05,440
Speaker 2: like half the fun is these two stocks. That's all

61
00:03:05,600 --> 00:03:08,440
Speaker 2: that's weird. First of all, then there's this huge drop off,

62
00:03:08,560 --> 00:03:10,920
Speaker 2: almost like a cliff in the ocean, and then Navidia

63
00:03:10,960 --> 00:03:14,920
Speaker 2: was six percent, and so now the question was will

64
00:03:15,320 --> 00:03:17,960
Speaker 2: because will Navidia get big enough and pass Apple by

65
00:03:17,960 --> 00:03:21,440
Speaker 2: the rebound state to be the second spot. It's the

66
00:03:21,480 --> 00:03:24,320
Speaker 2: difference between eleven billion dollars of buying. Basically, like, if

67
00:03:24,400 --> 00:03:28,239
Speaker 2: Navidia passed Apple by this Friday deadline, it got eleven

68
00:03:28,280 --> 00:03:31,520
Speaker 2: billion dollars in buying from the ETF because it would

69
00:03:31,520 --> 00:03:33,880
Speaker 2: go from six percent to twenty two percent. Just like that,

70
00:03:34,360 --> 00:03:37,320
Speaker 2: an Apple would have eleven billion of selling because it

71
00:03:37,320 --> 00:03:39,760
Speaker 2: would just fall off the cliff and it beat it

72
00:03:40,320 --> 00:03:42,680
Speaker 2: like that in the last hour of trading. It was

73
00:03:42,720 --> 00:03:45,480
Speaker 2: like a photo finish and a horse race. So Navidia

74
00:03:45,920 --> 00:03:49,000
Speaker 2: is now twenty two percent, Apple down to I think

75
00:03:49,160 --> 00:03:52,080
Speaker 2: five percent. And the rule I just talked to James,

76
00:03:52,080 --> 00:03:55,360
Speaker 2: who's covered this. The index has a rule that any

77
00:03:55,360 --> 00:03:58,280
Speaker 2: stock over five percent waiting five of them can't make

78
00:03:58,360 --> 00:04:01,480
Speaker 2: up over fifty percent. So what happens is the two

79
00:04:01,520 --> 00:04:04,520
Speaker 2: biggest stocks are so big Apple Microsoft at the time,

80
00:04:04,960 --> 00:04:07,240
Speaker 2: they took up all the budget of the five stocks,

81
00:04:07,240 --> 00:04:10,080
Speaker 2: so everybody else got like crumbs. So it's a really

82
00:04:10,200 --> 00:04:13,240
Speaker 2: quirky I think they should design it differently, they should

83
00:04:13,240 --> 00:04:16,839
Speaker 2: have it cascade more. And so this to me is

84
00:04:16,960 --> 00:04:22,120
Speaker 2: a fascinating index situation that Navidia shined a light on.

85
00:04:22,800 --> 00:04:26,320
Speaker 2: And now it's so funny that Apple, the great Apple

86
00:04:27,000 --> 00:04:29,920
Speaker 2: got kicked down to the bottom rung, the crumb level.

87
00:04:29,920 --> 00:04:31,200
Speaker 1: But when's the next rebalance.

88
00:04:31,800 --> 00:04:34,360
Speaker 3: I don't This would be in the next quarter or

89
00:04:34,400 --> 00:04:37,960
Speaker 3: so on the calendar quarter. But I mean Index's rebounds

90
00:04:37,960 --> 00:04:41,559
Speaker 3: all the time. I can't remember such a big deal, right,

91
00:04:41,680 --> 00:04:43,320
Speaker 3: There's been a few over the years, but this one

92
00:04:43,360 --> 00:04:45,400
Speaker 3: was a really big one. And I remember when someone

93
00:04:45,400 --> 00:04:47,719
Speaker 3: had brought it up. It was even our group chat.

94
00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:50,000
Speaker 3: Oh and video is only a five percent way. You

95
00:04:50,040 --> 00:04:51,800
Speaker 3: guys had mentioned how it came out of nowhere. I'm like, oh,

96
00:04:51,800 --> 00:04:53,960
Speaker 3: that sounds normal, like in videos still like really small,

97
00:04:54,120 --> 00:04:56,800
Speaker 3: Like no, it was like almost the same size as Apple.

98
00:04:57,960 --> 00:05:01,600
Speaker 3: So anyone who thinks that are passive should read through

99
00:05:01,600 --> 00:05:03,800
Speaker 3: this document. It is insane, like you need like a

100
00:05:03,839 --> 00:05:07,240
Speaker 3: PhD to figure out, like what is happening. But yeah,

101
00:05:07,279 --> 00:05:10,000
Speaker 3: this was a big deal, and so we'll see this

102
00:05:10,080 --> 00:05:12,720
Speaker 3: might all be in vain because if Invidia doesn't hold

103
00:05:12,720 --> 00:05:15,200
Speaker 3: this weight in the next quarter, it's going to reverse

104
00:05:15,240 --> 00:05:17,080
Speaker 3: this entire trade and just go back to the way

105
00:05:17,120 --> 00:05:18,640
Speaker 3: it was the beginning of the year.

106
00:05:18,600 --> 00:05:20,719
Speaker 1: Which speaks to what we want to talk about, which

107
00:05:20,760 --> 00:05:24,200
Speaker 1: is the effect in video is having within ETF says,

108
00:05:24,320 --> 00:05:26,280
Speaker 1: so what else is your research born out, so.

109
00:05:26,200 --> 00:05:30,000
Speaker 3: We actually covered something the opposite. So, as you can imagine,

110
00:05:30,040 --> 00:05:32,080
Speaker 3: some of the best performing ETFs all had a pretty

111
00:05:32,120 --> 00:05:34,800
Speaker 3: lofty weight ten video. We actually wanted to look at

112
00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:37,279
Speaker 3: the ones that weren't depending on in video, like who's

113
00:05:37,320 --> 00:05:38,400
Speaker 3: done well without it?

114
00:05:38,680 --> 00:05:41,039
Speaker 1: Oh, there's been products that have done that.

115
00:05:41,120 --> 00:05:43,960
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's not many, but there was some interesting finding.

116
00:05:44,080 --> 00:05:46,919
Speaker 3: So we looked at any ETF that's beat the SMP

117
00:05:47,560 --> 00:05:50,040
Speaker 3: since this in video run with a very low to

118
00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:51,120
Speaker 3: no weight within video.

119
00:05:51,760 --> 00:05:53,520
Speaker 2: This is like winning the Tour de France in the

120
00:05:53,600 --> 00:05:54,720
Speaker 2: nineties without doping.

121
00:05:56,120 --> 00:05:58,160
Speaker 1: Did that happen? I don't think it actually happened.

122
00:05:57,880 --> 00:06:01,800
Speaker 2: Though, That's what I'm saying. Yeah, yeah, that's how crazy.

123
00:06:01,839 --> 00:06:03,320
Speaker 1: This is really impressive.

124
00:06:04,560 --> 00:06:06,640
Speaker 3: I'm sure your you know, your listeners might be happy

125
00:06:06,640 --> 00:06:09,839
Speaker 3: about this one. But Crypto was at the top, very little.

126
00:06:09,880 --> 00:06:12,600
Speaker 3: I'm sure at one point maybe these worlds like converge,

127
00:06:13,080 --> 00:06:15,120
Speaker 3: but they don't. A lot of the Crypto funds don't

128
00:06:15,120 --> 00:06:18,080
Speaker 3: have in video exposure. The other one was and this

129
00:06:18,160 --> 00:06:20,479
Speaker 3: is a very kind of like pro America story, but

130
00:06:20,560 --> 00:06:25,000
Speaker 3: a lot of reshoring anything sort of American industrial revolution

131
00:06:25,640 --> 00:06:28,760
Speaker 3: bringing manufacturing back had done really well, and then it

132
00:06:28,800 --> 00:06:33,400
Speaker 3: was just a splattering of random countries. Japan, Greece, actually,

133
00:06:34,760 --> 00:06:37,239
Speaker 3: India had all done really really well without Nvidia.

134
00:06:37,480 --> 00:06:38,760
Speaker 2: Was it homebuilders on there too?

135
00:06:38,880 --> 00:06:39,680
Speaker 1: Yeah? And homebuildings.

136
00:06:39,720 --> 00:06:42,880
Speaker 2: That's interesting. Homebuilders beat in video beat, we'll beat the

137
00:06:42,880 --> 00:06:45,200
Speaker 2: market okay, well out the video, yes.

138
00:06:45,080 --> 00:06:47,120
Speaker 4: Yet, But it wasn't a lot of ETFs right now,

139
00:06:47,480 --> 00:06:49,920
Speaker 4: just ninety six out of a universe of more than

140
00:06:49,920 --> 00:06:50,520
Speaker 4: two thousand.

141
00:06:50,800 --> 00:06:53,600
Speaker 3: It's hard, it's impressive, like Eric's point, like trying to it.

142
00:06:53,760 --> 00:06:55,080
Speaker 1: So not many.

143
00:06:56,160 --> 00:06:58,080
Speaker 3: But the reason this came up is there was that

144
00:06:58,160 --> 00:07:00,520
Speaker 3: little correction about a month ago within d and they're

145
00:07:00,520 --> 00:07:03,000
Speaker 3: sort of dragging the market down. So you know, it's

146
00:07:03,000 --> 00:07:04,960
Speaker 3: a double edged sword, a lot of dependency on the

147
00:07:05,040 --> 00:07:07,080
Speaker 3: video and it could go the other way if it does.

148
00:07:07,279 --> 00:07:09,520
Speaker 2: And this is something David Cohene, who covers mutual funds

149
00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:12,760
Speaker 2: and active managers for US found also is that large

150
00:07:12,760 --> 00:07:15,600
Speaker 2: cap growth managers, if you outperformed, you probably had an

151
00:07:15,640 --> 00:07:18,480
Speaker 2: overweight to Nvidia. If you underperformed, it was less. So

152
00:07:18,800 --> 00:07:21,800
Speaker 2: it's funny that it's come down to Navidia plus maybe

153
00:07:21,840 --> 00:07:24,840
Speaker 2: the mag seven. Do you overweight or underweight? That is

154
00:07:24,880 --> 00:07:28,960
Speaker 2: the question, and who knows every time you've underweight because hey,

155
00:07:29,160 --> 00:07:32,440
Speaker 2: could they really go up more? You've lost, but at

156
00:07:32,440 --> 00:07:35,800
Speaker 2: some point you're going to overweight and lose. But when

157
00:07:35,840 --> 00:07:36,240
Speaker 2: will that be?

158
00:07:37,240 --> 00:07:40,600
Speaker 1: So another thing that you seem to have honed in on,

159
00:07:40,640 --> 00:07:44,320
Speaker 1: and you mentioned it here is how Nvidia and passive interacts,

160
00:07:44,360 --> 00:07:47,679
Speaker 1: because there's this, you know, ongoing debate about active and passive,

161
00:07:47,720 --> 00:07:51,480
Speaker 1: but like who's actually buying in Vidia and ETFs that

162
00:07:51,960 --> 00:07:52,640
Speaker 1: hold in video.

163
00:07:53,040 --> 00:07:56,360
Speaker 3: We've also been working on broader pieces about like the

164
00:07:56,360 --> 00:08:00,200
Speaker 3: effect that passive is having on the markets, right and

165
00:07:59,720 --> 00:08:01,680
Speaker 3: I and Video is a really great example, like it

166
00:08:01,760 --> 00:08:03,840
Speaker 3: just didn't decide that one day. Path was like, oh,

167
00:08:03,880 --> 00:08:06,400
Speaker 3: let's make in video like the top stock in the world,

168
00:08:06,440 --> 00:08:08,520
Speaker 3: and all of a sudden it moved up the rankings.

169
00:08:08,520 --> 00:08:12,160
Speaker 3: Like that's still hedge funds and retail and institutional buyers

170
00:08:12,520 --> 00:08:14,760
Speaker 3: decided they liked the stock, they bought it, and it

171
00:08:14,800 --> 00:08:16,880
Speaker 3: moved up. But you have to remember eight or so

172
00:08:17,000 --> 00:08:19,160
Speaker 3: years ago, and Video is like three hundred or so

173
00:08:19,200 --> 00:08:22,400
Speaker 3: in the SMP, like it's ranking and it just moved up, right,

174
00:08:22,440 --> 00:08:25,280
Speaker 3: and while Apple, Microsoft all stayed at the top, So

175
00:08:25,360 --> 00:08:28,200
Speaker 3: it wasn't you know, this is still very much active

176
00:08:28,280 --> 00:08:31,320
Speaker 3: setting the prices on these stocks. So I thought this

177
00:08:31,440 --> 00:08:34,760
Speaker 3: was a really perfect example that passive is not the

178
00:08:34,760 --> 00:08:38,320
Speaker 3: one deciding to move these stocks higher, artificially keeping these

179
00:08:38,360 --> 00:08:40,640
Speaker 3: stocks higher. So I thought this was like a really

180
00:08:40,640 --> 00:08:44,240
Speaker 3: really prime example of how interest in the stock in

181
00:08:44,360 --> 00:08:46,160
Speaker 3: active buying is what's going to move it up, not

182
00:08:46,559 --> 00:08:47,520
Speaker 3: just passive flows.

183
00:08:47,800 --> 00:08:49,760
Speaker 2: Let me break that down a little more. So, you

184
00:08:49,760 --> 00:08:53,760
Speaker 2: have an index. Active managers love Navidia, retail investors love Nvidia.

185
00:08:53,800 --> 00:08:55,720
Speaker 2: They start buying it, the price goes up, the market

186
00:08:55,720 --> 00:08:58,840
Speaker 2: cap goes up. The index, which has rules, is like, okay,

187
00:08:59,160 --> 00:09:02,160
Speaker 2: this thing is now a couple trillion dollars. It should

188
00:09:02,160 --> 00:09:05,079
Speaker 2: be second or third in the index. And it's just

189
00:09:05,160 --> 00:09:08,360
Speaker 2: simply a market cap decision that is made by active

190
00:09:08,760 --> 00:09:11,400
Speaker 2: on the flip what was it, General Motors or ge

191
00:09:11,520 --> 00:09:14,520
Speaker 2: ge ge they hate so they started selling it and

192
00:09:14,559 --> 00:09:16,640
Speaker 2: that went out of the top ten, top twenty. I

193
00:09:16,679 --> 00:09:19,480
Speaker 2: think it's not one to fifty or something. So you know,

194
00:09:19,760 --> 00:09:25,679
Speaker 2: active is it's ironic. Active controls the index waitings it's

195
00:09:25,800 --> 00:09:28,559
Speaker 2: it's ironic, but it's true. And I also what I

196
00:09:28,600 --> 00:09:31,520
Speaker 2: thought was interesting about yours was that those top stocks

197
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:34,040
Speaker 2: have been in the top ten for like seven years.

198
00:09:34,400 --> 00:09:38,520
Speaker 2: Only na Video has like broken through that, like, I

199
00:09:38,520 --> 00:09:41,520
Speaker 2: guess you'd call them like the studs, And it's hard

200
00:09:41,520 --> 00:09:44,280
Speaker 2: to break through, let alone go to number two. It's

201
00:09:44,280 --> 00:09:47,120
Speaker 2: easy to go from three seventy to like one fifty,

202
00:09:47,800 --> 00:09:50,200
Speaker 2: but to get to two from three seventy is crazy.

203
00:09:51,120 --> 00:09:52,800
Speaker 3: Yeah, if we see kind of the it's literally like

204
00:09:52,880 --> 00:09:55,440
Speaker 3: a parabolic chart since there's no stock. I think that's

205
00:09:55,440 --> 00:09:57,679
Speaker 3: ever sort of had a run from where it's been

206
00:09:57,760 --> 00:09:59,280
Speaker 3: to where it is now.

207
00:10:00,720 --> 00:10:03,760
Speaker 1: Emily, how is this born out in your reporting? Where

208
00:10:03,760 --> 00:10:05,960
Speaker 1: are some ways that you're seeing the effects show up?

209
00:10:06,280 --> 00:10:09,760
Speaker 4: Well, you can't really write a story about markets in

210
00:10:09,840 --> 00:10:13,240
Speaker 4: twenty twenty four without mentioning in video. So every time

211
00:10:13,320 --> 00:10:18,960
Speaker 4: we're writing about an ETF that's underperforming, the reason this

212
00:10:19,080 --> 00:10:21,520
Speaker 4: year has typically been that it doesn't have in Vidia,

213
00:10:21,960 --> 00:10:24,800
Speaker 4: and one that's outperforming the S and P five hundred

214
00:10:24,840 --> 00:10:29,600
Speaker 4: probably has an outsized weight to some AI name, typically

215
00:10:29,679 --> 00:10:32,160
Speaker 4: in Vidia. So that's kind of been what I've noticed

216
00:10:32,160 --> 00:10:35,240
Speaker 4: as a reporter. You literally like can't not mention it

217
00:10:35,280 --> 00:10:37,920
Speaker 4: and not think about it. And it has been interesting

218
00:10:37,960 --> 00:10:41,200
Speaker 4: too when we talk about the passive versus active, because

219
00:10:41,679 --> 00:10:43,880
Speaker 4: you know, I write a lot about like retail investors

220
00:10:43,880 --> 00:10:47,760
Speaker 4: who just buy these low cost index funds, and you

221
00:10:47,840 --> 00:10:51,400
Speaker 4: can pretty much get a really large weight to in Vidia,

222
00:10:51,600 --> 00:10:53,960
Speaker 4: the most important stock of the year, if you just

223
00:10:54,080 --> 00:10:57,760
Speaker 4: buy SPY or VU. I think a lot about like

224
00:10:57,800 --> 00:11:02,280
Speaker 4: portfolio construction, Like why would you buy an AI ETF

225
00:11:02,280 --> 00:11:04,920
Speaker 4: that has a big weight to Nvidia If you're already

226
00:11:04,960 --> 00:11:07,160
Speaker 4: buying the S and P five hundred, you already have

227
00:11:07,280 --> 00:11:08,560
Speaker 4: that big in video weight.

228
00:11:08,800 --> 00:11:11,600
Speaker 2: Yeah, and it's interesting. I agree with you. I think

229
00:11:12,080 --> 00:11:15,440
Speaker 2: the AI story is a little bigger. But personally that's

230
00:11:15,480 --> 00:11:17,720
Speaker 2: what's great about NEDEX investing. You don't have to worry

231
00:11:17,800 --> 00:11:20,320
Speaker 2: about whether you own something you do, so it's like

232
00:11:20,640 --> 00:11:22,400
Speaker 2: you can just be like walk around, but you don't

233
00:11:22,480 --> 00:11:24,839
Speaker 2: arn a lot of it now. One example I thought

234
00:11:24,920 --> 00:11:28,280
Speaker 2: that is interesting is robotics and AI ETFs. So Robotics

235
00:11:28,320 --> 00:11:31,079
Speaker 2: ETF's been around for like fifteen years and they had

236
00:11:31,080 --> 00:11:34,480
Speaker 2: this huge run up, then they fell, people left, then

237
00:11:34,520 --> 00:11:37,760
Speaker 2: actually came back, got some more money, but then they

238
00:11:37,760 --> 00:11:40,320
Speaker 2: fell again, and I was like, Okay, I think these

239
00:11:40,360 --> 00:11:42,319
Speaker 2: are just gonna die off. But then Navidia kind of

240
00:11:42,360 --> 00:11:44,600
Speaker 2: gave them a third bite of the apple. And so

241
00:11:44,679 --> 00:11:47,640
Speaker 2: I think I know from my personal experience, like people

242
00:11:47,679 --> 00:11:51,719
Speaker 2: I know have asked me about AI investing, and you know,

243
00:11:51,840 --> 00:11:54,320
Speaker 2: if you look at Chat, there are stocks outside of Navidia,

244
00:11:54,360 --> 00:11:57,880
Speaker 2: but Navidia clearly is is the big winner here right now.

245
00:11:58,400 --> 00:12:01,120
Speaker 2: And so the good news is most people already own it.

246
00:12:01,160 --> 00:12:03,600
Speaker 2: But people are a little greedy that they want more.

247
00:12:03,720 --> 00:12:05,880
Speaker 2: They want more, you know, to get deeper into AI

248
00:12:06,000 --> 00:12:09,199
Speaker 2: and not miss anything and kick themselves later. So I

249
00:12:09,200 --> 00:12:12,040
Speaker 2: think that's why Robotics ETFs got that rare third buddy

250
00:12:12,040 --> 00:12:13,679
Speaker 2: at the Apple, which we also wrote about.

251
00:12:14,240 --> 00:12:17,280
Speaker 1: Ethanasia is another thing that you wrote about that I

252
00:12:17,280 --> 00:12:20,040
Speaker 1: think was an interesting insight that I hadn't considered before.

253
00:12:20,160 --> 00:12:24,599
Speaker 1: Is the actual price of the ETF that holds in

254
00:12:24,679 --> 00:12:29,240
Speaker 1: video compared to maybe the stock itself, right, So what

255
00:12:29,280 --> 00:12:29,839
Speaker 1: does that look like?

256
00:12:29,920 --> 00:12:32,520
Speaker 3: Yeah, we don't think about this that often, but it

257
00:12:32,559 --> 00:12:35,080
Speaker 3: got up to like a thousand plus in video, did Yeah?

258
00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:37,199
Speaker 3: And video got up to a thousand or so a share.

259
00:12:37,920 --> 00:12:40,720
Speaker 3: And this just comes from text messages with my friends

260
00:12:40,720 --> 00:12:42,280
Speaker 3: sometimes like oh, I don't want to buy in Vidia

261
00:12:42,280 --> 00:12:44,720
Speaker 3: its one thousand dollars to share. It's expensive. So I

262
00:12:44,720 --> 00:12:47,280
Speaker 3: think sometimes retail has this association that if it's a

263
00:12:47,320 --> 00:12:50,840
Speaker 3: low price, handle it it's cheap, right, And then now

264
00:12:50,880 --> 00:12:53,360
Speaker 3: you have all these single stock ETFs, and something you

265
00:12:53,360 --> 00:12:55,520
Speaker 3: don't think about is they trade at a lower handle.

266
00:12:55,559 --> 00:12:58,000
Speaker 3: They're twenty five to thirty dollars to share. Yes, they

267
00:12:58,080 --> 00:13:01,160
Speaker 3: might be leveraged or whatnot. But I think before the

268
00:13:01,600 --> 00:13:04,160
Speaker 3: in video split, a lot of people were using single

269
00:13:04,160 --> 00:13:07,079
Speaker 3: stock ETFs just as like fractional trading in a way,

270
00:13:07,080 --> 00:13:09,320
Speaker 3: while you can do it on the platforms, didn't really

271
00:13:09,360 --> 00:13:11,160
Speaker 3: take off as much as just kind of buying a

272
00:13:11,160 --> 00:13:14,800
Speaker 3: single stock ETF or even white people buy bond ETFs, right,

273
00:13:14,800 --> 00:13:16,480
Speaker 3: you don't have to buy a full bonding, just buy

274
00:13:16,480 --> 00:13:17,959
Speaker 3: a fractional share of a bond. So I think that's

275
00:13:18,000 --> 00:13:22,240
Speaker 3: an unintended advantage of the ETF that doesn't get covered.

276
00:13:21,960 --> 00:13:25,960
Speaker 1: Enough because instead of paying even a fractional share of

277
00:13:26,160 --> 00:13:29,400
Speaker 1: say in video, there's this psychological effect that it's like, oh,

278
00:13:29,400 --> 00:13:33,000
Speaker 1: that feels expensive versus I can buy something that's in

279
00:13:33,040 --> 00:13:36,000
Speaker 1: an ETF wrapper in a fraction of the price totally.

280
00:13:36,120 --> 00:13:38,080
Speaker 3: Would you rather have one share of the queues or

281
00:13:38,120 --> 00:13:42,199
Speaker 3: like ten shares of QQM. I think psychologically that impacts people,

282
00:13:42,280 --> 00:13:45,600
Speaker 3: so I have ten shares versus just one. I don't

283
00:13:45,600 --> 00:13:47,400
Speaker 3: think it's the main reason why they would buy like

284
00:13:47,400 --> 00:13:49,360
Speaker 3: a two x leverte in video. But I think it's

285
00:13:49,440 --> 00:13:51,120
Speaker 3: it's something that is advantage.

286
00:13:51,160 --> 00:13:53,360
Speaker 1: I don't know. You guys call yourself scientists and you're

287
00:13:53,400 --> 00:13:55,480
Speaker 1: like talking about text messages with your friend. Is there

288
00:13:55,480 --> 00:13:57,760
Speaker 1: any real research or analysis here?

289
00:13:58,280 --> 00:14:01,120
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean a lot of there's been jail D

290
00:14:01,640 --> 00:14:03,320
Speaker 2: had a huge handle. I think it was like six

291
00:14:03,400 --> 00:14:06,600
Speaker 2: hundred bucks or something. Don't ding me if I'm wrong,

292
00:14:06,600 --> 00:14:09,240
Speaker 2: but it was high, and then the minime Gold came

293
00:14:09,280 --> 00:14:11,760
Speaker 2: out and purposely made its handle what like forty bucks.

294
00:14:12,520 --> 00:14:14,320
Speaker 2: So a lot of times when they do introduce a

295
00:14:14,360 --> 00:14:16,880
Speaker 2: new fund, first of all, all the handles are typically low,

296
00:14:17,200 --> 00:14:19,920
Speaker 2: but sometimes if somebody creates a minime of a large fund,

297
00:14:20,440 --> 00:14:23,840
Speaker 2: they do lower the handle. Now, a large price handle

298
00:14:24,160 --> 00:14:27,520
Speaker 2: can actually help institutions who sometimes pay per share, so

299
00:14:27,560 --> 00:14:30,200
Speaker 2: they actually like to have the big handles. That's why

300
00:14:30,240 --> 00:14:34,120
Speaker 2: there are these old stallwart kind of ETFs that keep

301
00:14:34,120 --> 00:14:36,640
Speaker 2: the high handles and then the minimes with the lower handles.

302
00:14:36,680 --> 00:14:39,440
Speaker 2: They can serve both worlds. But I'm with you. Retail

303
00:14:39,560 --> 00:14:42,720
Speaker 2: definitely likes that this probably is benefiting the bitcoin ETFs

304
00:14:42,720 --> 00:14:45,120
Speaker 2: to a degree. You can buy many shares of ibit,

305
00:14:45,440 --> 00:14:48,200
Speaker 2: but to buy one bitcoin would be what fifty four

306
00:14:48,240 --> 00:14:50,720
Speaker 2: thousand dollars, which is a lot. So I think people

307
00:14:50,760 --> 00:14:52,720
Speaker 2: do like to have that satisfaction of owning more than

308
00:14:52,760 --> 00:14:53,240
Speaker 2: one share.

309
00:14:53,480 --> 00:14:57,400
Speaker 1: By the way, we've said it like thirty times already.

310
00:14:57,640 --> 00:15:00,760
Speaker 1: How do you actually say Nvidia? That's how I say

311
00:15:00,760 --> 00:15:01,200
Speaker 1: it video.

312
00:15:01,280 --> 00:15:04,560
Speaker 2: I think I've said it wrong already. Katie Greyfield and

313
00:15:04,600 --> 00:15:08,360
Speaker 2: Scarlett correct me all the time. It's n video, yeah,

314
00:15:08,400 --> 00:15:12,040
Speaker 2: in video, but I tend to say in video like

315
00:15:12,360 --> 00:15:14,440
Speaker 2: en video, like too quick or something. I don't know.

316
00:15:14,120 --> 00:15:20,080
Speaker 2: I don't know. I've been correcting again, the the Eric

317
00:15:20,480 --> 00:15:23,760
Speaker 2: or the real way the Eric in video Okay. They

318
00:15:23,760 --> 00:15:27,200
Speaker 2: would say N video. Okay, it's almost like you're pronouncing

319
00:15:27,240 --> 00:15:30,520
Speaker 2: this capital N. Then you're going video N video.

320
00:15:30,920 --> 00:15:33,680
Speaker 1: Yeah, but I don't say it right. Yeah, no, I'm

321
00:15:33,720 --> 00:15:47,160
Speaker 1: self conscious. Thanks for that. Welcome, okay, Eric. We talked

322
00:15:47,160 --> 00:15:49,920
Speaker 1: about how in Nvidia felt like it almost showed up

323
00:15:50,120 --> 00:15:53,120
Speaker 1: out of nowhere even though it was actually kicking around,

324
00:15:53,120 --> 00:15:55,400
Speaker 1: but then it had this kind of super serge and

325
00:15:55,560 --> 00:15:58,240
Speaker 1: has become such a you know, integral part of the market.

326
00:15:58,680 --> 00:16:02,840
Speaker 1: What long termplations does this sound? Because one thing about

327
00:16:02,840 --> 00:16:06,040
Speaker 1: this company, it seems like it has a pretty deep moat.

328
00:16:06,160 --> 00:16:07,800
Speaker 1: There's not a whole lot of people who can do

329
00:16:07,840 --> 00:16:10,920
Speaker 1: it in Nvidia does. So what implications does that have

330
00:16:11,000 --> 00:16:14,880
Speaker 1: for the market indexes and ETFs as a whole.

331
00:16:14,920 --> 00:16:16,840
Speaker 2: It's a good question, you know, It's something we're watching.

332
00:16:16,880 --> 00:16:19,800
Speaker 2: I think the advent of single stock ETFs is really

333
00:16:19,840 --> 00:16:21,600
Speaker 2: one thing because you take a stock that trades a

334
00:16:21,600 --> 00:16:24,080
Speaker 2: lot and is huge, and you just add different ways

335
00:16:24,120 --> 00:16:26,760
Speaker 2: to bet on it. Let's go short, let's go double long,

336
00:16:26,880 --> 00:16:29,400
Speaker 2: let's add call options, and you're going to sell that.

337
00:16:30,080 --> 00:16:32,280
Speaker 2: So I think anytime a stock gets hot or big,

338
00:16:32,400 --> 00:16:34,840
Speaker 2: you're going to see an ecosystem build around it. The

339
00:16:34,840 --> 00:16:36,680
Speaker 2: ETF industry is going to give you one hundred ways

340
00:16:36,680 --> 00:16:38,600
Speaker 2: to play it, to bet on it, and that'll be

341
00:16:38,640 --> 00:16:41,960
Speaker 2: one thing. Now. I don't know if Navidia is that unique.

342
00:16:41,960 --> 00:16:43,720
Speaker 2: I mean apple Com went up and down, Tesla went

343
00:16:43,760 --> 00:16:47,560
Speaker 2: up and down. I think the mag seven though, and

344
00:16:47,640 --> 00:16:51,360
Speaker 2: these big megacaps are so big. I think like, if

345
00:16:51,360 --> 00:16:52,760
Speaker 2: you take a couple of them, they're bigger than the

346
00:16:52,880 --> 00:16:56,120
Speaker 2: entire stock market combined or something. Gina had some set.

347
00:16:56,160 --> 00:16:59,400
Speaker 2: I think the top five stocks in the SMP are

348
00:16:59,440 --> 00:17:03,120
Speaker 2: bigger than the the bottom two fifty. It's something ridiculous.

349
00:17:03,960 --> 00:17:06,719
Speaker 2: I think that the indexes I don't know, like XLK.

350
00:17:06,880 --> 00:17:08,879
Speaker 2: If I were it, I would make a change. I

351
00:17:08,920 --> 00:17:11,240
Speaker 2: would not do twenty two to twenty two and then five.

352
00:17:11,960 --> 00:17:16,640
Speaker 2: I would cascade that. So these megacaps I think does

353
00:17:16,760 --> 00:17:19,560
Speaker 2: pose some questions for index makers. That said, as much

354
00:17:19,600 --> 00:17:22,879
Speaker 2: as these index gets kind of like mocked on Twitter

355
00:17:22,960 --> 00:17:25,679
Speaker 2: sometimes for like being like dumb and not having these rules,

356
00:17:26,320 --> 00:17:28,960
Speaker 2: they still beat active because you can get them for free.

357
00:17:29,520 --> 00:17:33,359
Speaker 2: The cost factor well overwhelmed some of these dumb quirks

358
00:17:33,359 --> 00:17:36,359
Speaker 2: that you see. Yeah, those are all great points.

359
00:17:36,400 --> 00:17:38,800
Speaker 3: I think there's a lot of ways to play in

360
00:17:38,960 --> 00:17:42,600
Speaker 3: Vidia in AI companies. I think the next frontier is

361
00:17:42,600 --> 00:17:45,520
Speaker 3: going to be using AI to pick stocks right or

362
00:17:45,600 --> 00:17:48,800
Speaker 3: make make assy allocation decisions. There's a couple products out there,

363
00:17:49,920 --> 00:17:52,080
Speaker 3: AI EQ which is like one driven by AI. But

364
00:17:52,560 --> 00:17:55,080
Speaker 3: what's interesting about that it doesn't own in Vidia, Like

365
00:17:55,119 --> 00:17:56,360
Speaker 3: how does AI not know.

366
00:17:56,440 --> 00:17:57,320
Speaker 1: To own beck?

367
00:17:58,160 --> 00:18:00,760
Speaker 3: Like bet on me, Yeah, so she didn't figure that out.

368
00:18:00,800 --> 00:18:02,720
Speaker 3: But anyways, I think maybe the next frontier might be

369
00:18:02,760 --> 00:18:06,879
Speaker 3: AI powered ETFs. Why it doesn't it own Yeah, I

370
00:18:06,880 --> 00:18:09,160
Speaker 3: don't know, I gotta ask you algorithm.

371
00:18:09,240 --> 00:18:10,919
Speaker 1: Yeah, maybe just doesn't think.

372
00:18:10,920 --> 00:18:13,960
Speaker 2: They did come out with the one IBM Watson picking stocks,

373
00:18:14,520 --> 00:18:17,840
Speaker 2: which is aiish I guess, And it didn't do that well.

374
00:18:18,160 --> 00:18:21,200
Speaker 2: It traded too much. The turnover was intense, and yeah,

375
00:18:21,200 --> 00:18:23,520
Speaker 2: I think it returned half the S and P I think.

376
00:18:23,720 --> 00:18:26,879
Speaker 2: I think you're right. AI will be used to pick stocks,

377
00:18:26,880 --> 00:18:28,520
Speaker 2: but it's going to run the same problems human have,

378
00:18:28,560 --> 00:18:31,199
Speaker 2: which is when do you buy and sell how much

379
00:18:31,240 --> 00:18:33,440
Speaker 2: of your costs. I don't know if it'll be able

380
00:18:33,520 --> 00:18:34,959
Speaker 2: to AI out of that.

381
00:18:35,960 --> 00:18:40,520
Speaker 4: I think of that meme with DJ Khaled when he says, congratulations,

382
00:18:40,520 --> 00:18:43,720
Speaker 4: you played yourself, and that's kind of like when an

383
00:18:43,920 --> 00:18:49,040
Speaker 4: AI powered ETF is underperforming actual AI stocks.

384
00:18:49,440 --> 00:18:53,120
Speaker 2: That's good, that's pretty good. Yeah, it's it's because they're

385
00:18:54,400 --> 00:18:56,520
Speaker 2: not to pick on the IBM Watson one. But they

386
00:18:56,520 --> 00:18:58,240
Speaker 2: were like when they came out, they came out hard

387
00:18:58,240 --> 00:19:03,119
Speaker 2: with the marketing. They're like, we can analyze this, you know,

388
00:19:03,680 --> 00:19:08,400
Speaker 2: eight million pages of research that eight thousand analysts can

389
00:19:08,400 --> 00:19:12,800
Speaker 2: do in eight seconds, like it was something so crazy

390
00:19:14,200 --> 00:19:18,399
Speaker 2: and then you know, but my theory is the machine learning,

391
00:19:18,880 --> 00:19:20,760
Speaker 2: the computer is going to end up going wait a second,

392
00:19:20,760 --> 00:19:23,560
Speaker 2: It's going to end up into into getting into bogol land.

393
00:19:23,640 --> 00:19:26,000
Speaker 2: It's going to go, wait, what if we trade less

394
00:19:26,160 --> 00:19:28,920
Speaker 2: and lower our fees, that's how we win. And it's

395
00:19:28,920 --> 00:19:32,000
Speaker 2: going to end up the AI AI parwerd etff it

396
00:19:32,040 --> 00:19:34,919
Speaker 2: has a machine learning will end up being voo.

397
00:19:37,440 --> 00:19:41,280
Speaker 1: All right. On that note, Eimmling Athanasius, thanks for joining

398
00:19:41,320 --> 00:19:48,320
Speaker 1: us on Trillions, Thanks for having me, Thank you, Thanks

399
00:19:48,400 --> 00:19:51,280
Speaker 1: for listening to Trillions until next time. You can find

400
00:19:51,359 --> 00:19:55,960
Speaker 1: us on the Bloomberg Terminal, Bloomberg dot com, Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

401
00:19:56,600 --> 00:19:59,040
Speaker 1: or wherever else you'd like to listen. We'd love to

402
00:19:59,080 --> 00:20:02,400
Speaker 1: hear from you. We're on Twitter, I'm at Joel Webber Show.

403
00:20:02,800 --> 00:20:07,439
Speaker 1: He's at Eric Paulchuna's. This episode of Trillions was produced

404
00:20:07,440 --> 00:20:11,280
Speaker 1: by Magnus Hendrickson. Bye