WEBVTT - The Situation With Midsize Banks

0:00:05.800 --> 0:00:08.200
<v Speaker 1>Welcome a trillions. I'm Joel Webber and I'm Eric. I'll

0:00:08.240 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 1>tunis Eric. I think three banks have collapsed in one week.

0:00:18.239 --> 0:00:22.360
<v Speaker 1>That's pretty historic. Yeah, reminds me of what is it

0:00:22.440 --> 0:00:25.120
<v Speaker 1>fifteen years ago at this point, although I gotta say

0:00:25.200 --> 0:00:28.960
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't feel as crazy, and it feels more isolated,

0:00:29.320 --> 0:00:31.960
<v Speaker 1>and the FED stepped in very quickly and that feels good.

0:00:32.120 --> 0:00:36.080
<v Speaker 1>But yeah, this is a situation and we have to

0:00:36.240 --> 0:00:41.239
<v Speaker 1>push aside our scheduled agenda and lineup to cover this

0:00:41.880 --> 0:00:44.880
<v Speaker 1>for this so people understand what this means as ETF

0:00:44.920 --> 0:00:47.120
<v Speaker 1>investors when you have some companies kind of blow up.

0:00:47.120 --> 0:00:50.680
<v Speaker 1>I like that you said situation because maybe not a crisis.

0:00:50.720 --> 0:00:54.920
<v Speaker 1>Situation seems for real, let's consider it that. What are

0:00:55.200 --> 0:00:59.120
<v Speaker 1>the ETFs of note that we should be talking about today? Yeah,

0:00:59.120 --> 0:01:01.400
<v Speaker 1>we're going to explore them. So I know we have

0:01:01.440 --> 0:01:04.200
<v Speaker 1>Katie from Bloomberg News and some people from my team

0:01:04.240 --> 0:01:07.240
<v Speaker 1>on the show today. We all have tried to cover

0:01:07.280 --> 0:01:11.839
<v Speaker 1>this from different angles. And the situation that's not a crisis.

0:01:11.840 --> 0:01:15.880
<v Speaker 1>This situations from the Jersey Shore anyway. That aside, we've

0:01:15.880 --> 0:01:17.880
<v Speaker 1>been trying to cover this from all angles, both Bloomberg

0:01:17.920 --> 0:01:20.479
<v Speaker 1>News and Bloomberg Intelligence. And if I to pick one

0:01:20.520 --> 0:01:22.759
<v Speaker 1>ETF that's just in the crosshairs of this whole thing,

0:01:22.760 --> 0:01:27.240
<v Speaker 1>it's KRI, which is the Regional banking ETF. It's interesting

0:01:27.280 --> 0:01:30.560
<v Speaker 1>like every now and then, when there is a situation

0:01:30.760 --> 0:01:33.520
<v Speaker 1>or a crisis, you do tend to find there's an

0:01:33.520 --> 0:01:37.160
<v Speaker 1>ETF or two that just hits the spot. For this

0:01:37.200 --> 0:01:39.399
<v Speaker 1>crisis isn't in the middle of it. And this ETF

0:01:39.840 --> 0:01:44.080
<v Speaker 1>broke all kinds of volume records. It went down dramatically,

0:01:44.480 --> 0:01:48.240
<v Speaker 1>the short interest, the options activity. It became the focal

0:01:48.320 --> 0:01:50.840
<v Speaker 1>point for all kinds of big and small investors who

0:01:50.840 --> 0:01:55.000
<v Speaker 1>needed to quickly position to deal with this situation. And

0:01:55.200 --> 0:01:57.440
<v Speaker 1>KRE was just fascinated to watch. There are many other

0:01:57.480 --> 0:01:59.440
<v Speaker 1>angles to this, but I think we should sort of

0:01:59.440 --> 0:02:03.880
<v Speaker 1>explore what the ripple effects are when you have a

0:02:04.320 --> 0:02:07.560
<v Speaker 1>company like this completely just disappear. I mean, it went

0:02:07.600 --> 0:02:10.640
<v Speaker 1>to zero. And how does that work, How do ETFs adapt,

0:02:10.840 --> 0:02:13.560
<v Speaker 1>how do people use them, how does it affect the returns?

0:02:14.440 --> 0:02:17.960
<v Speaker 1>There's definitely ETF angles all over the place for this. Okay,

0:02:18.000 --> 0:02:21.799
<v Speaker 1>So to walk us through this mail storm, we've got

0:02:21.919 --> 0:02:26.440
<v Speaker 1>James Sabert with Bloomberg Intelligence as well as Athanasios Saraphagus

0:02:26.919 --> 0:02:37.320
<v Speaker 1>and Katie G. Bloomberg News, this time on Trilliance the situation. James,

0:02:37.400 --> 0:02:40.960
<v Speaker 1>Katie Athanasius, Welcome back to Trilliance. You're glad to be back.

0:02:41.000 --> 0:02:43.519
<v Speaker 1>Welcome back to the situation. Thanks for having me. We've

0:02:43.560 --> 0:02:45.840
<v Speaker 1>all been talking about the situation for a while, and

0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:47.280
<v Speaker 1>we're going to talk about it a little bit more

0:02:47.360 --> 0:02:50.239
<v Speaker 1>now because what I haven't actually talked about with any

0:02:50.240 --> 0:02:53.160
<v Speaker 1>of you is the what's happening in ETFs. So let's

0:02:53.160 --> 0:02:56.480
<v Speaker 1>start with kar which we teased at the top. James,

0:02:57.600 --> 0:03:00.360
<v Speaker 1>what the hell has happened? Yeah, so Eric, Eric did

0:03:00.400 --> 0:03:02.880
<v Speaker 1>a good job of teasing what happened, but essentially Kerry

0:03:02.960 --> 0:03:05.840
<v Speaker 1>became the center of like everything in the financial universe.

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:09.240
<v Speaker 1>I mean, Kry itself had seventeen stocks and portfolio that

0:03:09.280 --> 0:03:12.200
<v Speaker 1>traded down over twenty percent on Monday, March thirteenth in

0:03:12.240 --> 0:03:14.799
<v Speaker 1>the morning. Tons of them were halted, About eleven names

0:03:14.800 --> 0:03:18.040
<v Speaker 1>were halted. The options activity on this thing went through

0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:20.320
<v Speaker 1>the roof. Tons of people were buying calls and puts,

0:03:20.480 --> 0:03:22.960
<v Speaker 1>selling calls and puts, what have you, and the volume

0:03:23.000 --> 0:03:25.880
<v Speaker 1>broke all kinds of records. And Kry isn't the only

0:03:25.919 --> 0:03:27.440
<v Speaker 1>regional banking e TF. We're going to get into some

0:03:27.520 --> 0:03:29.760
<v Speaker 1>of them. There's a lot of bank ETF, there's a

0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:33.280
<v Speaker 1>lot of financials ETFs, but there's like about six that

0:03:33.360 --> 0:03:36.120
<v Speaker 1>I really looked at that we're regional banking or banking

0:03:36.160 --> 0:03:39.680
<v Speaker 1>specific that even all of them saw massive increases in volume.

0:03:39.880 --> 0:03:41.720
<v Speaker 1>There was even a leverage version, which we can dive

0:03:41.760 --> 0:03:43.760
<v Speaker 1>into a little bit too. But KRY was definitely at

0:03:43.800 --> 0:03:46.720
<v Speaker 1>the center of this whole storm. Katie, When did you

0:03:46.800 --> 0:03:50.520
<v Speaker 1>learn about KRI? I learned about KRI. I mean it's

0:03:50.520 --> 0:03:52.520
<v Speaker 1>always it's one of those ETFs that I know of,

0:03:52.600 --> 0:03:56.760
<v Speaker 1>But how many times in my normal working life do

0:03:56.800 --> 0:04:00.000
<v Speaker 1>I need to like look at the regional bankst midside

0:04:00.200 --> 0:04:04.360
<v Speaker 1>banks being like, yeah, out of nowhere, who are these players? Yeah,

0:04:04.400 --> 0:04:07.800
<v Speaker 1>Like I'm much more familiar with XLF for example. And

0:04:07.840 --> 0:04:10.360
<v Speaker 1>then I mean the big brother of KRI k b E,

0:04:11.360 --> 0:04:14.480
<v Speaker 1>which are just broad banking ETF. So I mean KAR

0:04:14.920 --> 0:04:17.200
<v Speaker 1>sort of like what we've been talking about, Like it

0:04:17.240 --> 0:04:21.440
<v Speaker 1>feels like when these situations happen, or when you have

0:04:21.560 --> 0:04:24.400
<v Speaker 1>crisis moments, some sort of big moment of up people

0:04:24.440 --> 0:04:27.520
<v Speaker 1>in the market, there's like one ETF that becomes the

0:04:27.520 --> 0:04:30.320
<v Speaker 1>poster child that everyone is just constantly checking in for

0:04:30.360 --> 0:04:33.400
<v Speaker 1>whatever reason. It's KR even though I mean I know

0:04:33.440 --> 0:04:36.279
<v Speaker 1>that I Shares, for example, has a regional banking ETF

0:04:36.279 --> 0:04:40.400
<v Speaker 1>as well, but it feels like KRI is as we're

0:04:40.400 --> 0:04:42.880
<v Speaker 1>trying to figure this out on the fly, how much

0:04:42.920 --> 0:04:46.480
<v Speaker 1>anxiety there actually is. This is sort of the risk

0:04:46.520 --> 0:04:50.000
<v Speaker 1>appetite monitor. Yeah. One thing to add to what Katie

0:04:50.000 --> 0:04:52.400
<v Speaker 1>was saying was that one of the reasons think KAR

0:04:52.640 --> 0:04:55.120
<v Speaker 1>became such the focal point is that all the stocks

0:04:55.120 --> 0:04:58.320
<v Speaker 1>are equal weighted. So SVB had a nice juicy waiting

0:04:58.320 --> 0:05:00.920
<v Speaker 1>at two percent, and so it could be used as

0:05:00.920 --> 0:05:03.440
<v Speaker 1>a surrogate not only for all the regional banks, but

0:05:03.600 --> 0:05:07.120
<v Speaker 1>SVB itself, So a lot of institutions and hedge funds.

0:05:07.160 --> 0:05:10.440
<v Speaker 1>I think we're using this to hedge themselves from this situation.

0:05:10.920 --> 0:05:13.760
<v Speaker 1>And secondly, though on the flip side, the fact that

0:05:13.800 --> 0:05:16.000
<v Speaker 1>it was only a two percent waiting, I think speaks

0:05:16.040 --> 0:05:21.080
<v Speaker 1>to why people like ETFs is that you're diversified. So

0:05:21.320 --> 0:05:25.080
<v Speaker 1>SVB was down it looks like sixty three percent in

0:05:25.080 --> 0:05:28.080
<v Speaker 1>that you know, in March basically, but the ETF was

0:05:28.120 --> 0:05:31.000
<v Speaker 1>down twenty six percent, so you weren't down near I

0:05:31.000 --> 0:05:33.279
<v Speaker 1>mean twenty six is really bad for this product, but

0:05:33.360 --> 0:05:36.400
<v Speaker 1>still you are protected a bit from single stock risk.

0:05:37.080 --> 0:05:40.240
<v Speaker 1>So I think those are two also points to you know,

0:05:40.520 --> 0:05:43.960
<v Speaker 1>put put out there in terms of how stocks that

0:05:44.120 --> 0:05:49.159
<v Speaker 1>go crazy can impact ETFs. The one thing that we

0:05:49.200 --> 0:05:51.000
<v Speaker 1>haven't really touched on is there were you said there

0:05:51.000 --> 0:05:52.560
<v Speaker 1>was multiple banks that went down, there was also a

0:05:52.600 --> 0:05:54.920
<v Speaker 1>Signature bank that went down. So one of the things

0:05:54.960 --> 0:05:56.760
<v Speaker 1>I looked at is as the one that Katie mentioned,

0:05:56.760 --> 0:06:01.080
<v Speaker 1>the I Shares Regional Banking ETF ticker IAT and KARE,

0:06:01.240 --> 0:06:04.279
<v Speaker 1>they both had both of them had exposure to both

0:06:04.480 --> 0:06:07.680
<v Speaker 1>Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank. So I actually had

0:06:07.720 --> 0:06:09.600
<v Speaker 1>a higher rating at four point six percent for both

0:06:09.600 --> 0:06:11.479
<v Speaker 1>of them, and KRE had four point one percent. And

0:06:11.560 --> 0:06:14.760
<v Speaker 1>both of those, I mean, they're their equities are worthless now,

0:06:14.800 --> 0:06:17.520
<v Speaker 1>so they're both gone to zero. So if you look

0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:21.400
<v Speaker 1>at the bonds, they're Signature Bank is trading at about

0:06:22.279 --> 0:06:24.880
<v Speaker 1>nineteen cents on the dollar for the bonds, and then

0:06:25.000 --> 0:06:29.760
<v Speaker 1>if you look at the Silicon Valley Bank, they're trading

0:06:29.760 --> 0:06:32.039
<v Speaker 1>near fifty cents in the dollar. But still that means

0:06:32.080 --> 0:06:34.039
<v Speaker 1>that the equity is wiped out, so it's one hundred

0:06:34.040 --> 0:06:39.720
<v Speaker 1>percent loss in March essentially, And yeah, you know, this

0:06:40.040 --> 0:06:42.680
<v Speaker 1>actually reminded us of an episode Joel that we did

0:06:42.960 --> 0:06:46.719
<v Speaker 1>about a year ago, and Athanasius and Rebecca brought this

0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:49.279
<v Speaker 1>up in that it felt like Russia in that you

0:06:49.360 --> 0:06:53.159
<v Speaker 1>have this whole, this exposure in and fun that's just gone,

0:06:53.360 --> 0:06:57.680
<v Speaker 1>like basically it's worthless. Even though it's a completely different situation,

0:06:57.880 --> 0:07:01.960
<v Speaker 1>it's kind of the same, Athanasio. One thing that stuck

0:07:01.960 --> 0:07:07.000
<v Speaker 1>out to me has been the volumes that have kind

0:07:07.000 --> 0:07:09.720
<v Speaker 1>of hit this, Like obviously there were some noteworthy investors.

0:07:10.680 --> 0:07:12.720
<v Speaker 1>The lackman comes to mind, saying like, hey, there's a

0:07:12.760 --> 0:07:16.760
<v Speaker 1>fire sale happening here that had all of the shares

0:07:16.800 --> 0:07:19.320
<v Speaker 1>had already tanked by that point. Was there a buying

0:07:19.360 --> 0:07:23.240
<v Speaker 1>opportunity there? Yeah, I think people want it to step in.

0:07:23.400 --> 0:07:25.920
<v Speaker 1>Maybe not on SVB specifically because it was halted, but

0:07:25.960 --> 0:07:27.840
<v Speaker 1>I think they were using the ETF as a proxy.

0:07:27.960 --> 0:07:31.720
<v Speaker 1>But while KRE is the focal point now, I'll be honest,

0:07:31.760 --> 0:07:33.920
<v Speaker 1>I didn't know a lot about SVB before this, Like

0:07:33.960 --> 0:07:36.400
<v Speaker 1>did you know it's an SMP five hundred company? So

0:07:36.440 --> 0:07:38.600
<v Speaker 1>I think you're gonna have a situation where it's going

0:07:38.680 --> 0:07:40.800
<v Speaker 1>to start popping up in these ETFs that people didn't know.

0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:42.560
<v Speaker 1>You're like, oh my god, it's in that ETF two.

0:07:42.920 --> 0:07:45.560
<v Speaker 1>There's probably one hundred two hundred plus ETFs that hold

0:07:45.600 --> 0:07:49.000
<v Speaker 1>it just because it was so well spread out. So um, yeah,

0:07:49.000 --> 0:07:51.040
<v Speaker 1>I think we're going to be surprised to see how

0:07:51.080 --> 0:07:52.880
<v Speaker 1>far the reach is because it's going to be touching

0:07:52.920 --> 0:07:57.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of different ETFs. I mean to the point

0:07:57.480 --> 0:08:01.200
<v Speaker 1>on sort of buying opportunities and what you do actually

0:08:01.200 --> 0:08:04.600
<v Speaker 1>on et F i Q. On Monday, Eric and I

0:08:04.680 --> 0:08:09.840
<v Speaker 1>spoke to Eduardo Ripetto, who's the CIO over at Avantis Investors.

0:08:10.200 --> 0:08:13.720
<v Speaker 1>He manages the advantis US small cap value ETF. It

0:08:13.720 --> 0:08:16.280
<v Speaker 1>has five and a half billion dollars. A lot of

0:08:16.280 --> 0:08:19.880
<v Speaker 1>that is in banks. That's their top industry waiting. It's

0:08:19.880 --> 0:08:22.960
<v Speaker 1>an actively managed fund. So we talked to him on Monday,

0:08:23.040 --> 0:08:25.760
<v Speaker 1>and my question to him was are you shifting around

0:08:26.480 --> 0:08:30.120
<v Speaker 1>your allocations at all? Are you doubling down or you

0:08:30.240 --> 0:08:32.440
<v Speaker 1>de risking or you riding this out? And the answer

0:08:32.440 --> 0:08:35.200
<v Speaker 1>that I got was just riding it out. You know,

0:08:35.280 --> 0:08:39.480
<v Speaker 1>if you're managing a portfolio right now, you want to

0:08:39.480 --> 0:08:43.160
<v Speaker 1>be you know, somewhat committed to your view and that

0:08:43.280 --> 0:08:45.960
<v Speaker 1>was what he said. And you look at what happened

0:08:45.960 --> 0:08:47.280
<v Speaker 1>the rest of the week, it seems like that was

0:08:47.320 --> 0:08:51.440
<v Speaker 1>an okay call. This situation reminded me of a mini

0:08:51.600 --> 0:08:53.439
<v Speaker 1>version of two thousand and eight. As I said earlier,

0:08:53.920 --> 0:08:56.760
<v Speaker 1>and I'll never forget when when I was writing my

0:08:56.840 --> 0:09:00.320
<v Speaker 1>first book on the ETFs and I talked to Rob

0:09:00.320 --> 0:09:04.320
<v Speaker 1>are not PRF is a rafi ETF that's fundamentally weighted,

0:09:04.800 --> 0:09:08.079
<v Speaker 1>and it's not. It's a smart BADTF. So it uses rules,

0:09:08.400 --> 0:09:11.280
<v Speaker 1>and the rules saw that banks were cheap in early

0:09:11.320 --> 0:09:14.360
<v Speaker 1>two thousand and nine, so this ETF rotated and had

0:09:14.400 --> 0:09:17.520
<v Speaker 1>fifty percent bank stocks. In two thousand and nine, no

0:09:17.640 --> 0:09:20.959
<v Speaker 1>active managers would buy bank stocks. They were radioactive at

0:09:20.960 --> 0:09:25.560
<v Speaker 1>that point. But that one trade produced alpha for that

0:09:25.640 --> 0:09:29.240
<v Speaker 1>ETF for like ten years, and some like I think

0:09:29.240 --> 0:09:31.560
<v Speaker 1>Ben Johnson from Morning Star, I think he's the one

0:09:31.600 --> 0:09:34.520
<v Speaker 1>credited with this, called it the immaculate rebalance. So to

0:09:34.880 --> 0:09:38.520
<v Speaker 1>Eduardo's point, you know, not only if, especially as a

0:09:38.600 --> 0:09:41.440
<v Speaker 1>quant as he is, you know, rotating into some of

0:09:41.440 --> 0:09:43.839
<v Speaker 1>these really rough situations is where you pick up your

0:09:43.880 --> 0:09:47.280
<v Speaker 1>return over the average. So it's just the question of

0:09:47.440 --> 0:09:50.400
<v Speaker 1>is it done, And that's obviously the big question. But

0:09:50.559 --> 0:09:54.160
<v Speaker 1>certainly I think opportunity is here, especially if the Fed

0:09:54.280 --> 0:09:56.559
<v Speaker 1>and Biden have been pretty much vocal that they're not

0:09:56.600 --> 0:09:59.520
<v Speaker 1>going to let any anything go wrong. We mentioned two

0:09:59.559 --> 0:10:02.440
<v Speaker 1>banks here, I think we neglected to mention that third,

0:10:02.440 --> 0:10:04.920
<v Speaker 1>which is silver Gate, which was actually first and had

0:10:04.960 --> 0:10:07.960
<v Speaker 1>a lot of crypto exposure, too many as all SI.

0:10:08.080 --> 0:10:11.720
<v Speaker 1>Funny enough, right, so silver Gate Silicon Valley Bank, and

0:10:11.760 --> 0:10:16.200
<v Speaker 1>then don't run a bank that starts with S or SI.

0:10:16.480 --> 0:10:20.240
<v Speaker 1>But uh, that was the silver Gate was the smallest

0:10:20.280 --> 0:10:24.400
<v Speaker 1>of this was that in the ETS James silver Gate

0:10:24.520 --> 0:10:26.680
<v Speaker 1>was also an ETS but a little bit less. But

0:10:26.720 --> 0:10:28.480
<v Speaker 1>that's that's still trading. So you can still trade the

0:10:28.480 --> 0:10:31.400
<v Speaker 1>equity on silver Gate. Um, it's it's winding down, but

0:10:31.520 --> 0:10:33.120
<v Speaker 1>you can still you can still trade the equity on

0:10:33.160 --> 0:10:43.719
<v Speaker 1>silver Gate. Okay, I think if we have one one

0:10:43.760 --> 0:10:45.760
<v Speaker 1>area that saw a black eye here, it has to

0:10:45.760 --> 0:10:48.400
<v Speaker 1>be esg Um. When you look at this, I looked

0:10:48.440 --> 0:10:50.719
<v Speaker 1>at the holders of I'm shocked, as you're coming out

0:10:50.720 --> 0:10:54.480
<v Speaker 1>of your mouth. I know I'm getting a reputation as

0:10:54.720 --> 0:10:58.520
<v Speaker 1>ESG hater, but again I'm not anti Eesg. I'm anti nasty, surprised,

0:10:58.640 --> 0:11:00.880
<v Speaker 1>and this is a great teachable moment. I looked at

0:11:00.880 --> 0:11:04.720
<v Speaker 1>the holders of SVB, and the number one fund was

0:11:04.720 --> 0:11:07.800
<v Speaker 1>a sustainable fund. And then I looked and fifty ESG

0:11:08.080 --> 0:11:11.000
<v Speaker 1>ETFs and mutual funds hold this stock. So clearly this

0:11:11.040 --> 0:11:14.600
<v Speaker 1>stock checked all the right boxes for ESG. The bigger

0:11:14.640 --> 0:11:19.000
<v Speaker 1>point isn't that ESG messed up. This stock really satisfied

0:11:19.000 --> 0:11:23.200
<v Speaker 1>its metrics. The bigger point is ESG metrics and scoring

0:11:23.280 --> 0:11:28.280
<v Speaker 1>high there doesn't necessarily mean the companies doing well on

0:11:28.480 --> 0:11:31.520
<v Speaker 1>in their books or is profitable. Those are two entirely

0:11:31.520 --> 0:11:34.880
<v Speaker 1>different things. So it's I think maybe a little bit

0:11:34.920 --> 0:11:36.840
<v Speaker 1>of a wake up call if you are an ESG investor.

0:11:36.960 --> 0:11:40.000
<v Speaker 1>Just know that there's a difference and that ESG might

0:11:40.040 --> 0:11:42.320
<v Speaker 1>not catch this and it doesn't really look at some

0:11:42.360 --> 0:11:44.920
<v Speaker 1>of these metrics that that this company had. It was

0:11:44.920 --> 0:11:49.160
<v Speaker 1>really more concerned with those again ESG metrics, and they man,

0:11:49.200 --> 0:11:52.480
<v Speaker 1>this company was like highly highly rated on the SG front.

0:11:52.880 --> 0:11:55.240
<v Speaker 1>I mean, we debated this. I see his point. I

0:11:55.280 --> 0:11:57.760
<v Speaker 1>don't you know. I think it's a loose connection ESG

0:11:57.920 --> 0:12:00.560
<v Speaker 1>to you know, the visions management of the But to

0:12:00.679 --> 0:12:04.440
<v Speaker 1>Eric's point, esg's an active decision, right, So it's really

0:12:04.480 --> 0:12:07.160
<v Speaker 1>a teachable moment in that you know it's going to

0:12:07.240 --> 0:12:08.760
<v Speaker 1>pop up in a lot of these ets. It's an

0:12:08.760 --> 0:12:12.479
<v Speaker 1>active decision to besg or rate it based on these metrics.

0:12:12.320 --> 0:12:15.280
<v Speaker 1>It's got climate tech exposure. This is great. Yeah, you know, so,

0:12:15.400 --> 0:12:17.520
<v Speaker 1>like you said, it's a teachable moment. But to the

0:12:17.559 --> 0:12:19.559
<v Speaker 1>point I was making before it was in the SMP,

0:12:19.760 --> 0:12:21.640
<v Speaker 1>it's going to get shoved into a lot of them

0:12:21.679 --> 0:12:24.080
<v Speaker 1>because I think that's a bigger teachable moment than just

0:12:24.280 --> 0:12:29.160
<v Speaker 1>DSG eric but point ticking. That's why we say it.

0:12:29.240 --> 0:12:31.280
<v Speaker 1>For like the second half of the conversation I said

0:12:31.280 --> 0:12:33.880
<v Speaker 1>it was it was less of an important point. But

0:12:34.200 --> 0:12:36.560
<v Speaker 1>it's a story that Bloomberg News wrote. It's a story

0:12:36.600 --> 0:12:39.440
<v Speaker 1>that I saw Investment News. Another thing that was brought

0:12:39.520 --> 0:12:41.480
<v Speaker 1>up here was, you know, last week we had we

0:12:41.520 --> 0:12:45.800
<v Speaker 1>talked about the inverse. Jim Kramer ETF Kramer said people

0:12:45.840 --> 0:12:48.520
<v Speaker 1>should buy this at three hundred and forty dollars about

0:12:48.520 --> 0:12:51.160
<v Speaker 1>a month ago. I was waiting. I couldn't wait for

0:12:51.240 --> 0:12:54.040
<v Speaker 1>us to talk about this because what when we did

0:12:54.080 --> 0:12:58.400
<v Speaker 1>our our segment, our last segment, which was one of

0:12:58.440 --> 0:13:02.240
<v Speaker 1>my favorites, I was like, oh my, this is like

0:13:02.400 --> 0:13:08.000
<v Speaker 1>perfectly timed. But here's the thing though, was SBB SBB

0:13:08.160 --> 0:13:10.280
<v Speaker 1>came out of his mouth at a moment that they

0:13:10.320 --> 0:13:14.080
<v Speaker 1>could invest. No, it was too early. It was a

0:13:14.120 --> 0:13:17.959
<v Speaker 1>month before the ETF launched, so it was too back

0:13:18.040 --> 0:13:20.199
<v Speaker 1>in the rear view mirror. So unfortunately it missed that.

0:13:20.280 --> 0:13:23.920
<v Speaker 1>Had it caught, that SGIM would have started life on

0:13:24.000 --> 0:13:25.680
<v Speaker 1>third base. I mean that this would have been a

0:13:25.679 --> 0:13:30.199
<v Speaker 1>great moment. That said, even without that bet, SGIM is

0:13:30.200 --> 0:13:32.720
<v Speaker 1>still out performing the S ANDP by about five percentage

0:13:32.760 --> 0:13:34.880
<v Speaker 1>points in the first eight days of trading. It's off

0:13:34.880 --> 0:13:36.880
<v Speaker 1>to a pretty good start. But yeah, that would have

0:13:36.880 --> 0:13:38.840
<v Speaker 1>been an epic call. And that's why that ETF exists,

0:13:38.880 --> 0:13:41.000
<v Speaker 1>is to try to catch a few of those grand

0:13:41.040 --> 0:13:44.720
<v Speaker 1>slams that he's capable of. So that's another sort of

0:13:44.760 --> 0:13:47.560
<v Speaker 1>minor ETF angle on this. I wish this was in

0:13:47.600 --> 0:13:49.520
<v Speaker 1>it because I think it'd be such a great case

0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:51.800
<v Speaker 1>study because they would have them so little. They would

0:13:51.800 --> 0:13:54.200
<v Speaker 1>have shorted it right, and then I'm assuming they would

0:13:54.200 --> 0:13:56.360
<v Speaker 1>have shorted it and then the ETF was halted, so

0:13:56.400 --> 0:13:58.640
<v Speaker 1>you'd have this situation where like they were right, they

0:13:58.679 --> 0:14:02.080
<v Speaker 1>couldn't actually realize the position because it got halted to covers.

0:14:02.080 --> 0:14:05.040
<v Speaker 1>You have like this amazing case study that it may

0:14:05.040 --> 0:14:07.200
<v Speaker 1>have worked out even better because it's like you get

0:14:07.240 --> 0:14:09.440
<v Speaker 1>like the you know, the press off of it, but

0:14:09.520 --> 0:14:11.800
<v Speaker 1>not yet exactly, and they would be sitting on this

0:14:11.880 --> 0:14:14.000
<v Speaker 1>like massive gain in not being able to realize it.

0:14:14.040 --> 0:14:16.080
<v Speaker 1>I think it'd just be like such an amazing case study.

0:14:17.080 --> 0:14:20.560
<v Speaker 1>There's one more, very minor e ETF angle in the

0:14:20.880 --> 0:14:25.160
<v Speaker 1>leveraged area, so Ethanasios pointed this out. There's two leverage

0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:28.720
<v Speaker 1>triple leveraged regional bank ETFs. If you're looking for some excitement,

0:14:29.120 --> 0:14:31.800
<v Speaker 1>these things are jacked up. But one of them, the

0:14:31.840 --> 0:14:35.640
<v Speaker 1>one that goes negative three x closed, and it's one

0:14:35.680 --> 0:14:37.440
<v Speaker 1>of those cases. We see this a lot where an

0:14:37.440 --> 0:14:40.400
<v Speaker 1>ETF is out for say five, six, seven years, and

0:14:40.480 --> 0:14:43.400
<v Speaker 1>it just liquidates and then its moment arrives like two

0:14:43.440 --> 0:14:46.720
<v Speaker 1>years later or six months later even And I gotta

0:14:46.760 --> 0:14:49.680
<v Speaker 1>imagine directions kicking themselves because that would have been a

0:14:49.760 --> 0:14:51.760
<v Speaker 1>great ETF to play it. That said, the three x

0:14:51.840 --> 0:14:56.320
<v Speaker 1>long version, which is dpst deposit is still up, and

0:14:56.440 --> 0:14:59.640
<v Speaker 1>people the volume on that spiked and people were shorting

0:14:59.640 --> 0:15:03.520
<v Speaker 1>it to recreate a negative three x position. So when

0:15:03.560 --> 0:15:07.280
<v Speaker 1>you have a stock like this create waves and volatility,

0:15:07.280 --> 0:15:10.400
<v Speaker 1>you attract the gambling trading crowd. Like crazy. It's like

0:15:10.520 --> 0:15:12.800
<v Speaker 1>chum in the water. And so I'm not surprised the

0:15:12.880 --> 0:15:17.080
<v Speaker 1>leveraged world got like some love too. I am surprised

0:15:17.080 --> 0:15:21.320
<v Speaker 1>that those ever existed though, like they do seem too specific,

0:15:21.400 --> 0:15:24.360
<v Speaker 1>but I guess this is why they thought a moment

0:15:24.360 --> 0:15:27.360
<v Speaker 1>like this could happen. Eric, I'm curious. I know how

0:15:27.440 --> 0:15:30.320
<v Speaker 1>much your dad loves leverage gtfs. Were these ones that

0:15:30.360 --> 0:15:35.000
<v Speaker 1>he reached at you about. No, No, he's he's really

0:15:35.040 --> 0:15:38.480
<v Speaker 1>really just into bedding on college basketball and stuff. I

0:15:38.480 --> 0:15:42.320
<v Speaker 1>don't think he's doing ets. It's a good times. Yeah.

0:15:42.360 --> 0:15:44.160
<v Speaker 1>The one thing we didn't talk about is the tickers.

0:15:44.280 --> 0:15:46.440
<v Speaker 1>So I mean, I must I must say I love

0:15:46.480 --> 0:15:49.080
<v Speaker 1>the pairing of tickers. Oftentimes you get these leverage ETFs

0:15:49.120 --> 0:15:51.120
<v Speaker 1>and they have really good tickers. And the three X

0:15:51.160 --> 0:15:54.040
<v Speaker 1>bowl one is DPST a play on the word deposit,

0:15:54.520 --> 0:15:57.560
<v Speaker 1>and the three X inverse was w d RW, a

0:15:57.640 --> 0:16:00.760
<v Speaker 1>play on withdrawal. So it was so they were very

0:16:00.760 --> 0:16:02.680
<v Speaker 1>they were very good tickers. The other thing I'm saying

0:16:02.720 --> 0:16:06.160
<v Speaker 1>is I don't think Direction wanted to close w DRWM.

0:16:06.600 --> 0:16:09.040
<v Speaker 1>They it would. W DRW was part of that, Like

0:16:09.080 --> 0:16:11.520
<v Speaker 1>there was like eighty leverage funds that had to close

0:16:11.600 --> 0:16:15.000
<v Speaker 1>during March twenty twenty because volatility thresholds were broken. There

0:16:15.080 --> 0:16:17.600
<v Speaker 1>was issues with like Evil even being able to operate

0:16:17.640 --> 0:16:22.520
<v Speaker 1>the ETFs, so like this was part of that whole scenario.

0:16:23.720 --> 0:16:25.960
<v Speaker 1>But I'm sure they wished they had relaunched if they

0:16:25.960 --> 0:16:30.040
<v Speaker 1>could have. Was part of the March twenty twenty wipe

0:16:30.040 --> 0:16:33.360
<v Speaker 1>out of leveraged. That said, though, I would think the

0:16:33.440 --> 0:16:35.800
<v Speaker 1>negative would have done better and not been a risk,

0:16:35.840 --> 0:16:38.080
<v Speaker 1>whereas I don't know. I don't they probably could have

0:16:38.120 --> 0:16:40.600
<v Speaker 1>lowered this inverse one to negative two x and it

0:16:40.600 --> 0:16:42.720
<v Speaker 1>would have satisfied. But I'm guessing there just wasn't enough

0:16:42.720 --> 0:16:44.240
<v Speaker 1>interest at the time and they were just like this one,

0:16:44.280 --> 0:16:46.120
<v Speaker 1>we're just going to close. Because a lot of them

0:16:46.160 --> 0:16:48.920
<v Speaker 1>they either lowered the leverage from three x to two

0:16:49.080 --> 0:16:51.400
<v Speaker 1>x or even one x in some cases, or or

0:16:51.480 --> 0:16:53.440
<v Speaker 1>they just closed them. And it looks like they closed

0:16:53.440 --> 0:16:57.000
<v Speaker 1>the withdrawal ETF because, like you said, it might have

0:16:57.040 --> 0:16:59.200
<v Speaker 1>been too niche. So they left the bullish one open

0:16:59.280 --> 0:17:02.640
<v Speaker 1>for whatever reason. It had enough assets and interest, but

0:17:02.680 --> 0:17:06.680
<v Speaker 1>they had to close this one. And Athanasios, one note

0:17:06.720 --> 0:17:08.560
<v Speaker 1>you wrote which I thought is interesting, which is sort

0:17:08.600 --> 0:17:11.879
<v Speaker 1>of a pivot from this, is that it wasn't just

0:17:12.000 --> 0:17:15.680
<v Speaker 1>volume and carry volume and ETFs in general spiked on

0:17:15.800 --> 0:17:18.600
<v Speaker 1>March tenth in a way that suggested a lot of

0:17:18.640 --> 0:17:21.440
<v Speaker 1>fear out there. And you just talk about your note

0:17:21.720 --> 0:17:24.520
<v Speaker 1>where you say that this what you think is happening

0:17:24.600 --> 0:17:27.439
<v Speaker 1>is bears or back in control of the market. Yeah,

0:17:27.920 --> 0:17:30.520
<v Speaker 1>I mean, it's just that's where everyone goes towards the

0:17:30.520 --> 0:17:33.199
<v Speaker 1>ETF first. But if you look at just ETFs as

0:17:33.280 --> 0:17:34.960
<v Speaker 1>or percentage of total volume, we shout up to like

0:17:35.000 --> 0:17:37.760
<v Speaker 1>forty percent, which is really really high. I mean that's

0:17:37.800 --> 0:17:41.199
<v Speaker 1>what we saw again during March. So yeah, and for

0:17:41.280 --> 0:17:44.040
<v Speaker 1>the you know, for the first time, you know, we

0:17:44.080 --> 0:17:46.480
<v Speaker 1>started knowing this slash year. It was always been in

0:17:46.520 --> 0:17:49.160
<v Speaker 1>favor of the inverse ETFs. They've always sort of outpaced

0:17:49.200 --> 0:17:52.080
<v Speaker 1>long and the lungs are actually starting to come back slowly,

0:17:52.119 --> 0:17:54.320
<v Speaker 1>but this completely put it back into the favor of

0:17:54.359 --> 0:17:57.120
<v Speaker 1>the short So this was probably the biggest freak out

0:17:57.160 --> 0:17:59.520
<v Speaker 1>moment we saw on a probably since the Russia invasion

0:17:59.560 --> 0:18:02.199
<v Speaker 1>of last year. So yeah, definitely just led to a

0:18:02.200 --> 0:18:04.879
<v Speaker 1>lot of trading and all ETFs, not just the bank ones.

0:18:05.480 --> 0:18:08.119
<v Speaker 1>So a freak out that became a situation, what is

0:18:08.119 --> 0:18:10.760
<v Speaker 1>it going to be now? I mean just looking at

0:18:10.800 --> 0:18:13.640
<v Speaker 1>flows and trading, people are still a little nervous. They've

0:18:13.680 --> 0:18:15.240
<v Speaker 1>been like that for a year. I don't think I've

0:18:15.520 --> 0:18:19.320
<v Speaker 1>haven't seen really people jump in aggressively. But I think

0:18:19.400 --> 0:18:21.680
<v Speaker 1>the bigger issue is why does all the bad stuff

0:18:21.720 --> 0:18:24.560
<v Speaker 1>happen in March? Yes? Right, I was talking about this

0:18:24.600 --> 0:18:28.240
<v Speaker 1>with someone yesterday. It seems like COVID this we're almost

0:18:28.240 --> 0:18:32.320
<v Speaker 1>at the anniversary of the fed's liftoff hike. Is Mars

0:18:32.320 --> 0:18:35.119
<v Speaker 1>and retrograde? It might be. I mean, yes, this is

0:18:35.160 --> 0:18:37.880
<v Speaker 1>almost to IDEs of March episode. And on that note,

0:18:37.920 --> 0:18:41.480
<v Speaker 1>we will wrap. Katie Ethanasius James, thanks very much for

0:18:41.680 --> 0:18:43.879
<v Speaker 1>running us in Trillions, Thanks for having us to be aware,

0:18:50.680 --> 0:18:53.240
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for listening to Trillions until next time. You can

0:18:53.280 --> 0:18:57.639
<v Speaker 1>find us on the Bloomberg Terminal, Bloomberg dot com, Apple Podcast, Spotify,

0:18:57.800 --> 0:19:00.600
<v Speaker 1>and wherever else you like to listen. We hear from you.

0:19:00.840 --> 0:19:04.000
<v Speaker 1>We're on Twitter, I'm at Joel Wepper Shows, He's at

0:19:04.160 --> 0:19:08.639
<v Speaker 1>Eric Calcuna's. This episode of Trillions was produced by Magnus Hendrickson.

0:19:09.240 --> 0:19:16.320
<v Speaker 1>Bye