WEBVTT - A Halloween-Inspired Stroll Through the ETF Graveyard (Which Is Getting Really Crowded) 0:00:05.960 --> 0:00:12.680 Well trillions. I'm Joel Webber and I'm Eric bell Tunis Eric. 0:00:13.200 --> 0:00:16.680 Halloween is almost upon us. Uh, my five year old 0:00:16.720 --> 0:00:19.520 is going to be a butterfly wearing a mask that 0:00:19.760 --> 0:00:23.400 may not be triggered treating. Well, we'll see as we 0:00:23.440 --> 0:00:27.720 get a little closer. Maybe how about how about your kids? Uh, well, 0:00:27.760 --> 0:00:29.960 the nine year olds excited. We got him a costume. 0:00:30.040 --> 0:00:32.320 He wants to be possessed pumpkin. We went to this 0:00:32.320 --> 0:00:34.560 store and that's when he picked out and uh, it 0:00:34.680 --> 0:00:37.000 is it's it's a good it's a good costume. He's 0:00:37.040 --> 0:00:39.320 now into the scary stuff. He wants to scare people. 0:00:39.360 --> 0:00:43.520 And um, whether we go out probably I think around 0:00:43.560 --> 0:00:45.720 here there's one street that closed that has a big 0:00:45.760 --> 0:00:48.440 deal every year. But if we do, usually when we 0:00:48.479 --> 0:00:50.280 go out with him, you just wear a mask and 0:00:50.280 --> 0:00:52.600 and that sort of gives us a sense of safety. 0:00:52.640 --> 0:00:55.480 But I think we'll probably try it. And you're younger guy, 0:00:56.840 --> 0:01:00.280 he's four, and he um, he just kind of isn't 0:01:00.320 --> 0:01:03.120 really there yet. He's just not into wearing anything. He 0:01:03.160 --> 0:01:05.440 doesn't wear a jacket like, so we have problem getting 0:01:05.480 --> 0:01:08.760 him out and winner let alone in a costume. He'll 0:01:08.800 --> 0:01:11.120 just tag along and chase Gabriel up and up and 0:01:11.160 --> 0:01:13.200 down the street, that that'll be his thing. He'll have 0:01:13.240 --> 0:01:15.160 a good time too. So bring this back to E 0:01:15.240 --> 0:01:18.800 t F s uh Eric. This year, like every year, 0:01:19.319 --> 0:01:22.320 there are closures, and so we're going to talk about 0:01:22.360 --> 0:01:28.160 the e t F Graveyard this episode. Yeah, it's a 0:01:28.200 --> 0:01:32.480 great term for it. There's over eleven ETFs that are 0:01:32.600 --> 0:01:36.080 dead rest in peace. That's one in every four launches, 0:01:36.520 --> 0:01:40.840 basically dies. This year has been particularly brutal. There's been 0:01:40.840 --> 0:01:45.840 about two d and twelve closures, um and that is 0:01:45.920 --> 0:01:49.480 already a record by about fifty, right, so this is 0:01:49.520 --> 0:01:52.000 more than ever. And really the difference this year was 0:01:52.040 --> 0:01:54.720 what we call exotics leverage e tps and e t 0:01:54.880 --> 0:01:57.880 n s, which normally make up a certain percentage, are 0:01:58.000 --> 0:02:00.600 really punching above their weight enclosures. And that's because March 0:02:01.040 --> 0:02:03.160 wiped a bunch of them out because the volatility was 0:02:03.240 --> 0:02:04.760 just too strong and so a lot of the issues 0:02:04.840 --> 0:02:06.840 like you know what, we gotta get out of here. Um. 0:02:06.920 --> 0:02:09.640 So that's really the difference maker this year. But there's 0:02:09.680 --> 0:02:11.800 always closures. I mean, this is an industry with a 0:02:11.800 --> 0:02:13.160 lot of cash coming in, so you get a lot 0:02:13.200 --> 0:02:15.120 of spaghetti, get thrown on the wall and a lot 0:02:15.200 --> 0:02:17.840 of the stuff doesn't make it and joining us to 0:02:17.880 --> 0:02:21.320 talk about the closures. Todd rosen Bluth, who's the director 0:02:21.360 --> 0:02:24.560 of et F Research at c f R, A also 0:02:24.639 --> 0:02:27.800 regular on the show, as well as Claire Balantine who's 0:02:27.840 --> 0:02:30.080 back with us as well. She's a cross s at 0:02:30.120 --> 0:02:46.359 reporter with Bloomberg. Does this time on Trillions lead Prave Todd, Claire, 0:02:46.400 --> 0:02:48.680 thanks for joining us on Trillians. Great to be with 0:02:48.720 --> 0:02:51.320 you guys. Thanks for having us. Todd, I want to 0:02:51.360 --> 0:02:55.200 start with you what jumps out to you about. I 0:02:55.240 --> 0:02:57.280 think there's a couple of key themes. Eric touched on 0:02:57.440 --> 0:02:59.960 leverage products and E t N s and we can 0:03:00.120 --> 0:03:03.400 come back to that, but the traditionally E t F products. 0:03:03.440 --> 0:03:05.639 I think there's two main things that were happening. One 0:03:05.760 --> 0:03:09.240 is Investco, which has made a number of acquisitions including 0:03:09.280 --> 0:03:12.600 Guggenheim and Oppenheimer Funds. In the last few years. They 0:03:12.680 --> 0:03:15.200 called their their lineup and there's a lot of overlap 0:03:15.320 --> 0:03:18.320 between what they acquired and what they had that was successful. 0:03:19.120 --> 0:03:21.440 So we saw a number of products earlier in the 0:03:21.520 --> 0:03:24.400 year UH get cut out of the overall lineup, and 0:03:24.400 --> 0:03:26.680 that's a good thing. I think for the overall industry. 0:03:27.080 --> 0:03:29.760 And then secondly, and we can dive deeper into all 0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:33.080 of this, is there was a wave of launching currency 0:03:33.120 --> 0:03:35.840 hedge e t f s a few years back. Uh. 0:03:35.880 --> 0:03:38.520 This was back when wisdom Tree was having success with 0:03:38.720 --> 0:03:42.240 d x J uh HAD Japan and h E d 0:03:42.440 --> 0:03:45.520 J the hedge Euro product. Everybody wanted a piece of 0:03:45.560 --> 0:03:48.520 that pie. Money didn't go in. It takes a couple 0:03:48.520 --> 0:03:51.320 of years later. Now the products are closing. I share 0:03:51.360 --> 0:03:54.760 his Wisdom Tree DWS. All those firms were closing a 0:03:54.840 --> 0:03:58.280 large number of these uh, currency hedge products. Yeah, and 0:03:58.360 --> 0:04:00.720 let me jump in and say also a minimum ball 0:04:01.440 --> 0:04:04.480 low low ball. And currency hedge became like this fad. 0:04:04.520 --> 0:04:06.680 I call it a craze. Todd doesn't like that term. 0:04:06.720 --> 0:04:08.760 But when like something that makes up two percent of 0:04:08.800 --> 0:04:11.840 the assets start taking the flows, what you have is 0:04:11.880 --> 0:04:14.000 a rush of products. And like here here's something I 0:04:14.040 --> 0:04:17.599 shares clothes this year. Listen this currency hedged Italy. I 0:04:17.640 --> 0:04:20.680 mean there's barely anybody buying the regular Italy et F 0:04:21.120 --> 0:04:25.400 currency hedged Australia. UM. They also had a minimum volve Japan. 0:04:25.560 --> 0:04:27.919 I mean some of these they just went one step 0:04:27.920 --> 0:04:30.120 too far. And they know it, and they've you know, 0:04:30.320 --> 0:04:32.160 reined it in a little bit. And I think that's 0:04:32.279 --> 0:04:35.080 you see that most years. I think, Claire, what's what 0:04:35.279 --> 0:04:38.280 jumped out to you as you sort of looked into 0:04:38.320 --> 0:04:41.159 everything here? Yeah, what was interesting to me is the 0:04:41.200 --> 0:04:44.279 fact that a lot of these bigger asset managers and 0:04:44.320 --> 0:04:47.760 issuers were closing funds. I think there's this narrative about, 0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:51.800 you know, smaller issuers really struggling against these bigger players, 0:04:51.839 --> 0:04:54.000 and so you know, one might expect that a lot 0:04:54.040 --> 0:04:57.039 of the smaller and more niche funds were closing, but 0:04:57.080 --> 0:04:59.680 when I'm looking at the list of funds that closed, 0:05:00.040 --> 0:05:04.039 a lot of it is these these bigger players, Um. 0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:06.159 That seems like they can sort of, you know, try 0:05:06.160 --> 0:05:08.600 out these strategies and if it doesn't work, then they 0:05:08.600 --> 0:05:13.880 can close them, especially with Investco closing so many of them. Um. 0:05:13.920 --> 0:05:16.120 And then the other thing that I thought was interesting 0:05:16.480 --> 0:05:19.360 was really those leverage products in the E T N s. 0:05:19.640 --> 0:05:22.920 And you know, this year has just been so volatile 0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:25.320 and crazy in general, and it seems like after what 0:05:25.360 --> 0:05:28.400 we saw in March that really, um, you know, put 0:05:28.400 --> 0:05:30.720 in a stark relief what some of these funds actually 0:05:30.760 --> 0:05:34.279 did and their performance. It's interesting you say that because 0:05:34.600 --> 0:05:39.200 we did notice, and I think it was um when 0:05:39.240 --> 0:05:41.640 black Rock closed their first fund. I believe it was 0:05:41.680 --> 0:05:45.560 called ALT it was an alternative fund. Ever since then, 0:05:45.720 --> 0:05:49.159 the number of closures just jumped up. I think people saw, well, 0:05:49.200 --> 0:05:51.600 if black Rock will close a fund, then there's no 0:05:51.640 --> 0:05:54.080 shame in it anymore. There's no stigma. And I think 0:05:54.080 --> 0:05:56.440 that's a great point, I think, and there really shouldn't 0:05:56.440 --> 0:05:58.640 be if you if you have no assets and no 0:05:58.680 --> 0:06:02.280 one cares and the spreads wide and out, just just 0:06:02.360 --> 0:06:04.440 get rid of it. Although on the flip side, the 0:06:04.440 --> 0:06:07.160 other voice would say, well, sometimes you need to hang 0:06:07.200 --> 0:06:09.080 on for three or four years for your moment in 0:06:09.120 --> 0:06:11.159 the sun, because we've seen a couple of times where 0:06:11.480 --> 0:06:13.240 an E T F that is in the graveyard, like 0:06:13.279 --> 0:06:16.040 the short Squeeze et F for example, would have been 0:06:16.040 --> 0:06:17.920 having a great year this year if it had just 0:06:18.000 --> 0:06:22.080 hung on. So there's two conflicting messages there with when 0:06:22.120 --> 0:06:24.040 to throw in the towel. Yeah, I remember we used 0:06:24.040 --> 0:06:27.040 to have another airline ETF that's out there, f A 0:06:27.040 --> 0:06:29.599 A that would have been a good product. Given you 0:06:29.600 --> 0:06:33.159 guys have covered how J E T S has performed, 0:06:33.200 --> 0:06:35.120 and got the assets. It would have been nice to 0:06:35.120 --> 0:06:37.440 have a competitor in that space, but we no longer 0:06:37.480 --> 0:06:39.960 have that. So actually, I want I want to add 0:06:40.000 --> 0:06:43.200 a little context here, which is, and you kind of 0:06:43.279 --> 0:06:45.320 hinted at it a little bit there, Eric, let's just 0:06:45.360 --> 0:06:49.240 be clear for clear about it for people, how many 0:06:49.279 --> 0:06:52.080 closures have we had this year and how does that 0:06:52.160 --> 0:06:57.880 compare in context to previous years? Anomaly or is this 0:06:58.240 --> 0:07:01.160 part of the trend that there's just more calling every year? 0:07:01.839 --> 0:07:04.040 So if you look at the chart, it's a trend. 0:07:04.080 --> 0:07:07.119 I mean it's been building up, and the spread between 0:07:07.200 --> 0:07:11.120 launches enclosures have has been coming down. In other words, 0:07:11.240 --> 0:07:15.040 closures has made that spread smaller. That said, this year 0:07:15.120 --> 0:07:17.880 is is an outlier. I mean you're already way past 0:07:17.920 --> 0:07:22.360 the record. I mean, what are your past the record already? 0:07:22.440 --> 0:07:24.920 So to me, this year is an outlier, but it 0:07:25.080 --> 0:07:27.520 also is part of the trend of more closures every 0:07:27.600 --> 0:07:30.880 year starting in about two thousand thirteen fourteen. Um, Like 0:07:30.920 --> 0:07:32.480 I said, I think that I share is et F 0:07:32.520 --> 0:07:34.800 closing kind of kicked off a lot. Plus the industry 0:07:34.880 --> 0:07:37.680 is getting older, and how many of the closures this 0:07:37.760 --> 0:07:41.440 year are pandemic related? Do you think I would say 0:07:41.480 --> 0:07:45.880 in all time, leverage ETFs make up about nine eight 0:07:46.080 --> 0:07:48.800 percent of all closures, even they only make up like 0:07:48.840 --> 0:07:51.280 two percent of the assets, so they definitely punch above 0:07:51.320 --> 0:07:54.960 their weight enclosures. But this year they made up e 0:07:55.120 --> 0:07:57.120 t n is normally make up about fifteen percent of 0:07:57.120 --> 0:07:59.840 the closures. They made up nineteen percent this year. So 0:08:00.120 --> 0:08:03.880 I think those were really busted up in March. I 0:08:03.920 --> 0:08:06.840 think March, these leverage ETFs have to reset every day, 0:08:06.880 --> 0:08:10.200 and when the markets limit up limit down, resetting really 0:08:10.200 --> 0:08:12.160 messes up their math. It messes up what they're trying 0:08:12.240 --> 0:08:14.680 to do. And I think if you took March out 0:08:14.720 --> 0:08:16.560 and you made in March never happened and it was 0:08:16.600 --> 0:08:19.200 like a normal year, I don't think those would have closed, 0:08:19.200 --> 0:08:20.800 and I think we would be more at the one 0:08:20.880 --> 0:08:24.200 fifty level. But there's been about fifty leverage GTF that 0:08:24.320 --> 0:08:26.880 I think specifically closed because of the pandemic and what 0:08:26.920 --> 0:08:31.880 it did in March with the volatility. Yeah, I totally agree, 0:08:31.920 --> 0:08:34.400 and I think especially from those issuers like Direction and 0:08:34.480 --> 0:08:38.040 pro Shairs, you know, there wouldn't really be an impetus 0:08:38.120 --> 0:08:40.719 or a reason to close these funds. You know, at 0:08:40.720 --> 0:08:43.240 a certain time but after the March volatility that we 0:08:43.280 --> 0:08:47.080 saw that really you know, led to that I think 0:08:47.080 --> 0:08:49.800 we're also seeing is that the firms that are not 0:08:49.920 --> 0:08:53.200 closing the leverage and the et N products, firms like 0:08:53.280 --> 0:08:57.920 Global x, U firms like Wisdom Trade, Direction that's doing 0:08:57.960 --> 0:09:00.760 it for their non leverage products is what they're also launching. 0:09:01.000 --> 0:09:03.760 So we've seen Global x increase the number of thematic 0:09:03.840 --> 0:09:06.760 oriented etf so it's not surprising that they closed some 0:09:06.800 --> 0:09:09.640 of their smart data products that haven't been as popular. 0:09:10.360 --> 0:09:13.480 Um you know, we've we've seen it with other firms 0:09:13.480 --> 0:09:15.840 that are doing this as well. Direction has had success 0:09:15.840 --> 0:09:18.560 with their work from home et F and thematic products, 0:09:18.600 --> 0:09:20.280 so that you know, they closed the suite of these 0:09:20.320 --> 0:09:23.520 relative weight products a little bit faster than we had expected. 0:09:24.120 --> 0:09:26.640 But it's it's just hard to be able to compete 0:09:26.679 --> 0:09:29.880 and have a broad line up without enough assets in them. 0:09:30.000 --> 0:09:32.360 And so we're seeing asset managers called the herd a 0:09:32.440 --> 0:09:35.400 little bit to focus on where their priorities are going 0:09:35.440 --> 0:09:40.400 in the future instead of where it was three years ago. Okay, Todd, 0:09:40.400 --> 0:09:42.160 I have a really basic question for you, which is, 0:09:42.480 --> 0:09:46.160 say I own something and it closes what happens to 0:09:46.320 --> 0:09:50.920 my money, So it's really not that big a deal. 0:09:51.000 --> 0:09:52.760 It's a it's a little bit of a big deal 0:09:53.000 --> 0:09:56.360 in that you are forced into the sale and there's 0:09:56.400 --> 0:10:00.800 a capital gain implication and a tax implication. Basically it 0:10:00.920 --> 0:10:03.960 was sold, and that if you held on until the 0:10:04.040 --> 0:10:06.480 last trading day then you actually will get the money 0:10:06.679 --> 0:10:09.720 that's there. It's probably not a good decision when you 0:10:09.880 --> 0:10:13.760 hear that your et F is closing. It's probably worthwhile 0:10:13.880 --> 0:10:18.000 to just exit the position so that you're trading when 0:10:18.040 --> 0:10:22.000 they're actually is other people that might be trading as well, 0:10:22.040 --> 0:10:26.000 and there's redemptions that can take place. And thankfully in 0:10:26.000 --> 0:10:29.040 the ETF industry there's often two or three or four 0:10:29.120 --> 0:10:32.000 other products that are in the broad style. They may 0:10:32.040 --> 0:10:34.160 not be the same, and we certainly it's see if 0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:37.200 they think it matters what's inside. But there are other 0:10:37.320 --> 0:10:39.200 products that are out there. Yes, you couldn't buy a 0:10:39.200 --> 0:10:41.840 currency hedge Italy product, but you could still buy Italy 0:10:41.920 --> 0:10:44.600 where you could buy a currency hedge Europe product in 0:10:44.600 --> 0:10:47.360 the case of that I Shares example that Eric offered 0:10:48.840 --> 0:10:52.480 Um and Todd. Though we should also mention let's say 0:10:52.520 --> 0:10:54.800 you don't do anything like you you don't even get 0:10:54.800 --> 0:10:57.440 the notice that your et F is closing. You know, 0:10:57.440 --> 0:11:00.599 you're out to lunch. What Howen says, the e t 0:11:00.720 --> 0:11:02.920 F will then redeem the the assets and then send 0:11:03.000 --> 0:11:07.200 you a check. Basically, now you could have capital gains 0:11:07.440 --> 0:11:09.760 to deal with. I think that's probably the worst case scenario. 0:11:09.800 --> 0:11:13.560 Would you agree, Yeah, it's that's the worst case scenario 0:11:13.600 --> 0:11:16.800 is that if you've held this for a while, UM, 0:11:17.120 --> 0:11:19.160 you will get a capital gain implication and then you'll 0:11:19.160 --> 0:11:21.839 have to find something else to do with your money. 0:11:21.960 --> 0:11:24.080 But there'll be other choices that are at there. But 0:11:24.440 --> 0:11:28.199 I think we as an industry fear these uh e 0:11:28.360 --> 0:11:29.920 t f that are closing that get a lot of 0:11:30.000 --> 0:11:33.200 attention from a closure rate, but they're closing for the 0:11:33.240 --> 0:11:36.520 reasons that there's just not a lot of money. So 0:11:36.559 --> 0:11:40.280 it's not impacting that many investors. As you mentioned, most 0:11:40.280 --> 0:11:42.520 of the products that are closing are under twenty five 0:11:42.600 --> 0:11:47.080 million in assets overall. Yeah. Well, on on the topic 0:11:47.120 --> 0:11:50.200 of finding other options for your money. UM, I think 0:11:50.200 --> 0:11:52.760 it's interesting too that this year we still have seen 0:11:53.160 --> 0:11:56.600 a ton of e t F launches. UM. The data 0:11:56.679 --> 0:12:00.640 that we have is two eighteen funds that started trading, 0:12:00.720 --> 0:12:04.079 and so you know, if one of these funds closes. 0:12:04.120 --> 0:12:06.160 There really are so many more options, and I think 0:12:06.160 --> 0:12:09.320 that also points to you know, maybe the future of 0:12:09.400 --> 0:12:13.360 closures is if so many more funds are launching. You know, 0:12:13.400 --> 0:12:16.160 the e t F rule has made it easier than 0:12:16.360 --> 0:12:18.719 you know. I think that the rate of closures could 0:12:18.760 --> 0:12:22.360 even continue to be, you know, move up and locksed 0:12:22.400 --> 0:12:24.880 up with how many launches there are. Yeah, I mean 0:12:24.920 --> 0:12:26.600 I think so too, And I think it's fine. I 0:12:26.720 --> 0:12:30.360 once sort of static of apps that are launched clothes, 0:12:31.360 --> 0:12:34.480 so E t F it's not as bad as apps 0:12:34.520 --> 0:12:38.079 at least yet. Okay, So I want to talk about 0:12:38.080 --> 0:12:44.840 other notable closures, Eric with another one that that you noticed, well, 0:12:45.280 --> 0:12:47.040 you know, we went over to load the n C 0:12:47.240 --> 0:12:50.440 seventeen crowd is what I call the Velocity Shares t 0:12:50.679 --> 0:12:54.440 vix u w T. I mean, these are beloved by 0:12:54.480 --> 0:12:56.599 the robin Hood crowd, and they lost a lot of 0:12:56.640 --> 0:12:58.679 their playthings, but they found other ones in like t 0:12:58.840 --> 0:13:01.280 q q Q and those kind of e t s. 0:13:01.600 --> 0:13:04.079 But t VIX was probably, if I could be wrong, 0:13:04.120 --> 0:13:07.440 but the biggest DTF efort to delist and probably the 0:13:07.480 --> 0:13:10.960 most traded. I mean, the thing was very very robust. 0:13:10.960 --> 0:13:14.360 The news I have a feeling. Janice was just like, 0:13:14.800 --> 0:13:16.520 we don't really want to be involved in this all 0:13:16.520 --> 0:13:19.760 the time anymore, and they closed that out. Janice also 0:13:19.840 --> 0:13:22.679 closed too theme ETFs, which I thought was interesting, slim 0:13:22.679 --> 0:13:24.800 and organ the obesity e t F S and the 0:13:24.920 --> 0:13:28.760 organic CTF And I don't think that was really Janice's personality. 0:13:28.800 --> 0:13:31.480 When you think Janice, do you really think like like 0:13:31.640 --> 0:13:34.840 themes and fads. So I think Janice this year they've 0:13:34.840 --> 0:13:36.400 seen a lot of money into v n l A, 0:13:36.520 --> 0:13:40.400 which is the their bond e TF. I think it 0:13:40.520 --> 0:13:44.920 really speaks to when an issuer goes against who they are, 0:13:45.440 --> 0:13:46.880 and I don't think they you find a lot of 0:13:46.880 --> 0:13:48.720 success doing that. I think you kind of have to 0:13:48.760 --> 0:13:50.320 stick to your d n A, what you're good at, 0:13:50.360 --> 0:13:52.960 when you're comfortable with. And I think Janice this year 0:13:53.080 --> 0:13:58.200 closing their wild NC seventeen products as well as these 0:13:58.240 --> 0:14:01.880 wacky themes, knows that they probably had a conversation of 0:14:01.960 --> 0:14:03.920 like who they want to be, and they're like, let's 0:14:03.920 --> 0:14:05.840 just be us, and I think that will happen more 0:14:05.840 --> 0:14:11.720 and more. Janice this past in October, UH launched a 0:14:11.840 --> 0:14:18.240 CLO Collateralized Loan Obligation et F J and then triple a. Um, 0:14:18.440 --> 0:14:21.000 so you know, piggybacking off of what you said with 0:14:21.120 --> 0:14:23.840 the v n L A product that they're focuses more 0:14:24.000 --> 0:14:27.240 within fixed income with their lineup and using some of 0:14:27.240 --> 0:14:30.800 their in house capabilities. So yes, we're certainly seeing asset 0:14:30.840 --> 0:14:35.480 managers refocus their priorities like we saw with global Ax earlier. 0:14:35.800 --> 0:14:40.560 It's frustrating though, because the themes and the crazy stuff 0:14:40.560 --> 0:14:43.480 gets a lot of the press attention. You know, Um, 0:14:43.560 --> 0:14:47.760 the short duration BONDYTF is just you know, the thirty 0:14:47.800 --> 0:14:49.920 six version, you know, one of them. It just puts 0:14:49.920 --> 0:14:52.360 you to sleep. But if that's who you are, I 0:14:52.400 --> 0:14:54.120 think that these firms are going to continue to be 0:14:54.120 --> 0:14:57.000 who they are, especially the new ones coming in with active, 0:14:57.000 --> 0:15:01.000 non transparent ETFs and such. Fixed income also viewed as 0:15:01.040 --> 0:15:05.200 a growth opportunity by most of the industry too. So well, 0:15:05.240 --> 0:15:09.080 I think on the topic of of these funds closing, 0:15:09.240 --> 0:15:11.520 I think it really is. It seems like Eric had 0:15:11.720 --> 0:15:14.080 had a good point about a lot of them are 0:15:14.080 --> 0:15:16.520 closing kind of early, and that when I was looking 0:15:16.560 --> 0:15:19.160 at the list of funds that had closed this year, Um, 0:15:19.160 --> 0:15:23.160 there's a good portion that had launched only and so 0:15:23.800 --> 0:15:26.520 you know, maybe not quite giving them a chance. Um. 0:15:26.600 --> 0:15:28.680 And then I also think sort of the wild card, 0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:32.120 especially this year is the robin Hood crowd and kind 0:15:32.160 --> 0:15:35.760 of what products they could launch or could latch onto. 0:15:35.840 --> 0:15:39.800 And you know who can predict that almost So it's um, 0:15:39.840 --> 0:15:41.680 I think that's a big factor this year that's sort 0:15:41.680 --> 0:15:44.880 of thrown into the mix. Yeah, that's a good point, Claire. 0:15:44.920 --> 0:15:47.480 And you know, I believe the record holder for the 0:15:47.520 --> 0:15:51.400 shortest lifespan ever was about six months, um the Trade 0:15:51.400 --> 0:15:53.520 War ETF. Remember that came out to a lot of 0:15:53.600 --> 0:15:59.320 press attention. It launched in June, closed by Christmas. Um. 0:15:59.480 --> 0:16:03.080 So I'm you know, it's possible we'll see something with 0:16:03.160 --> 0:16:06.560 a shorter lifespan than that, But that is really short. 0:16:06.600 --> 0:16:10.400 I mean, this thing only gave itself a couple of months. Um. 0:16:10.440 --> 0:16:12.440 So yeah, I don't know, it would be interesting to 0:16:12.440 --> 0:16:14.840 see if we see more of that. Yeah. And to me, 0:16:14.960 --> 0:16:17.360 that seems like that must point to a change in 0:16:17.520 --> 0:16:19.880 issue or strategy. I mean, I can't imagine it just 0:16:20.040 --> 0:16:23.240 you know, didn't get enough demand within six months. It 0:16:23.280 --> 0:16:26.080 definitely seems like, you know, you would I wanted to 0:16:26.120 --> 0:16:29.120 have more of a chance to to you know, come 0:16:29.160 --> 0:16:32.640 to life By the way, remember the trade war. It 0:16:32.680 --> 0:16:35.760 does seem like a lifetime ago that that was really relevant. 0:16:35.880 --> 0:16:38.280 I've gotta say this is not to self why you 0:16:38.280 --> 0:16:40.240 don't want to launch ant F based on a news cycle. 0:16:40.320 --> 0:16:50.600 I think Todd, we brought up robin Hood a second ago. 0:16:51.320 --> 0:16:54.520 Are there e t f s that either the robin 0:16:54.560 --> 0:16:56.960 Hood crowd to help drive out of existence that that 0:16:57.000 --> 0:17:00.480 stood out to you, or that we're calm calm pounded 0:17:00.520 --> 0:17:04.960 by their interest in various fads, I'll call them. Sure, 0:17:05.320 --> 0:17:08.920 So we don't we don't think that, you know, the 0:17:09.280 --> 0:17:11.800 trading crowd is actually driving products out, they're actually keeping 0:17:11.800 --> 0:17:14.760 some of the products afloat. Uh So a product like 0:17:14.880 --> 0:17:17.960 J E. T S that I touched on earlier found 0:17:17.960 --> 0:17:21.840 investor interest through this more retail trading audience. I think 0:17:21.880 --> 0:17:26.800 these more tactical and thematic and higher risk by reward 0:17:27.119 --> 0:17:29.680 products likely had a chance to succeed, and so we 0:17:29.760 --> 0:17:32.959 probably still have some of these leverage and inverse products 0:17:32.960 --> 0:17:36.840 that are hanging on because of a trading crowd. It's these, 0:17:37.040 --> 0:17:39.440 you know, products that they really just don't that aren't 0:17:39.440 --> 0:17:43.119 performing well, that fit into a niche that makes sense 0:17:43.160 --> 0:17:45.640 to that audience that just had a challenge, and particularly 0:17:45.680 --> 0:17:50.280 international investing products. You know, US retail investors just don't 0:17:50.280 --> 0:17:54.200 really want to touch a narrowly focused you know, Japan 0:17:54.480 --> 0:17:58.680 or or single country product. Okay, so we've talked about 0:17:58.800 --> 0:18:03.159 some issuers Janice for instance, Investco who called more than 0:18:03.200 --> 0:18:08.200 anybody else who's not contributing to the graveyard Todd. Yeah. 0:18:08.240 --> 0:18:12.440 I mean Vanguard and Schwab are the number two and 0:18:12.440 --> 0:18:16.200 and number five largest et F providers. They perennially don't cut. 0:18:16.240 --> 0:18:19.080 I don't think Vanguard or Swab has actually cut any 0:18:19.119 --> 0:18:23.240 of their et F s. Certainly Vanguard hasn't. They obviously 0:18:23.280 --> 0:18:26.760 have more assets in in a concentrated number of products, 0:18:26.800 --> 0:18:30.439 but they're more prudent in their overall strategy. So I 0:18:30.480 --> 0:18:32.920 think that's logical that we haven't seen them this year 0:18:33.040 --> 0:18:36.199 or in prior years. Um. So those are two that 0:18:36.240 --> 0:18:39.120 come to mind. You know, we saw Wisdom Tree that 0:18:39.119 --> 0:18:42.800 that made some cuts. We saw DWS, we saw Global 0:18:43.040 --> 0:18:45.520 X that made some cuts. Just rounding out the rest 0:18:45.520 --> 0:18:47.119 of the top ten that I can think of, and 0:18:47.160 --> 0:18:49.399 then you know, JP Morgan made a couple of them. 0:18:49.440 --> 0:18:51.720 And you know, Eric, I think it was something you 0:18:51.760 --> 0:18:54.760 wanted to touch on, you know, JP Morgan. That's relatively 0:18:54.800 --> 0:18:57.000 new to the e t F market. You know, cut 0:18:57.160 --> 0:19:00.320 not their cheap data products and not their smart beta products. 0:19:00.359 --> 0:19:03.840 Put something in more of the alternative world. Yeah, this 0:19:03.880 --> 0:19:05.720 is a space, the alternative world where you take a 0:19:05.760 --> 0:19:11.800 hedge fund strategy like long short um or UH multi strategy. 0:19:11.840 --> 0:19:14.359 I think they had an event driven and you try 0:19:14.359 --> 0:19:16.159 to democratize it in an e t F. When they 0:19:16.240 --> 0:19:18.520 launched these, the JP Morgan, head of et F said, 0:19:18.520 --> 0:19:21.080 we want to democratize hedge funds. This has been said 0:19:21.080 --> 0:19:23.040 over and over, like every three years, and it just 0:19:23.119 --> 0:19:27.520 can't happen. My theory is UH beta it works too well. 0:19:27.560 --> 0:19:29.639 In other words, just investing in the SNP is just 0:19:29.720 --> 0:19:33.199 too good. Nobody needs alts. Why would you need that 0:19:33.240 --> 0:19:35.680 when the market is just so on fire bonds and 0:19:35.800 --> 0:19:38.639 stocks And the other thing is I think they're pretty pricey. 0:19:38.720 --> 0:19:41.679 I think the hedge fund category, I would like to 0:19:41.720 --> 0:19:44.600 see a vanguard come in and vanguard it with like 0:19:44.600 --> 0:19:47.080 a twenty bit hedge fund e t F or a 0:19:47.200 --> 0:19:49.919 rock star manager like a Cliff ast Nous launched like 0:19:49.960 --> 0:19:52.920 an a K a q R version or e t 0:19:53.040 --> 0:19:55.920 F version of his fund. I think that could Jack 0:19:56.000 --> 0:19:58.359 up or beta just stops working and people all of 0:19:58.359 --> 0:20:01.439 a sudden look for alternatives but that category, and no 0:20:01.480 --> 0:20:02.960 one has to be able to crack the code on 0:20:03.000 --> 0:20:06.639 that really in ten fifteen years, and including JP Morgan 0:20:06.720 --> 0:20:09.639 with all their might, power and pocketbook. Well, I think 0:20:09.720 --> 0:20:13.320 it's interesting you talk about how they're trying to democratize 0:20:13.320 --> 0:20:14.879 it for the masses, because I think it points to 0:20:14.920 --> 0:20:18.119 the fact that having a narrative in terms of these 0:20:18.119 --> 0:20:21.399 strategies and these products is really important now. And you 0:20:21.440 --> 0:20:24.280 know that narrative obviously wasn't didn't work out that well, 0:20:24.280 --> 0:20:26.760 but I think you know, we've seen a huge growth 0:20:26.920 --> 0:20:30.560 in thematic funds this year that kind of have that narrative. 0:20:30.840 --> 0:20:34.040 So I think as the market becomes more crowded and 0:20:34.080 --> 0:20:36.240 as it's harder to you know, have these funds to 0:20:36.280 --> 0:20:38.840 be successful, what kind of narrative you're pushing out as 0:20:38.840 --> 0:20:43.560 you launch can really make or break you. Speaking of narratives, Eric, 0:20:43.600 --> 0:20:46.359 there's another ticker on your list here, H, Y and 0:20:46.600 --> 0:20:51.400 D that was almost built for an era that never came. 0:20:51.440 --> 0:20:54.000 Can you talk more about what happened with that one? Yeah, 0:20:54.119 --> 0:20:57.280 I'm I'm thinking of calling this type of situation the 0:20:57.359 --> 0:21:01.320 waiting for godot problem, which is when you you you 0:21:01.359 --> 0:21:03.159 think this thing is going to happen, and it just 0:21:03.240 --> 0:21:05.320 never does. So there was a whole bunch of ets 0:21:05.440 --> 0:21:08.639 lunch called rate hedge dtfs, and they were designed to 0:21:08.720 --> 0:21:10.960