ETF Investment Strategy

[GRADS]

Hi All,
As we are in lockdown I wanted to take the opportunity to ask other sharemarket investors some questions.. Note - I've worked in banking / finance sector and have been active property investor for ~2 decades, and have learned a lot being an active investor. I consider myself an expert on property, having owned residential property throughout NZ and commercial property. However when it comes to shares I'm no expert. I know that I don't want to invest in individual shares and I prefer and enjoy investing in ETF's.

Due to raising 3 young kids and with all the Gov't changes, I'm over tax changes and tweaks Govt will likely continue to make. I have been investing in Australasian and US share ETF via Smartshares since Covid hit last year. I'm going to continue to focus on passive path to building wealth. I'm very comfortable holding at least 80% of my wealth in shares and 20% cash long-term.

My kiwisaver is with Superlife high growth fund. As these funds are managed by Smartshares (owned by the NZX) it makes me think about the possible risks of investing more in Smartshare ETF (i.e. not diversifying providers in case something was ever to happen to the NZX?). ie Would you be comfortable having most of your wealth with 1 financial provider in Smartshares/Superlife?

I recently was recommended and read the book by Jim Collins (simple path to wealth) about investing solely in Vanguards VTI index long-term (I'm aware this is only US exposure). However the simple path really does resonate with me, in that I only want to invest in a few ETF funds for the long-term, ride out the bull and toughen up with the bear market hits. (I do currently own some Vanguard VTI and Smartshares US500 via Sharesies platform outside of Kiwisaver. I also have Hatch platform owned by Kiwi Wealth). Last week I attended Kernel Wealth seminar (low cost ETF provider) which was very interesting to consider as ETF provider.

That is the background. My questions are:
If you were to invest (next 10 years+) and you were to only choose 1-4 funds MAX in ETF what funds would you invest in, using what platform and what % percentage allocation in each?

Would you be comfortable investing only in Vanguards VTI and if so what provider / platform would you use?

Do you have a preference over owning the same ETF/shares on the ASX to the NYSE?

Are you comfortable investing in Smartshare Funds (paying 0.2% - 0.5%+) in management fees (which to be honest is a drag on your return over the long-term?)

OR would you invest Directly in likely Vanguard / iShares on ASX (e.g. Sharesies) or NYSE via Hatch where fund fees are as low as 0.3 over the long-term this adds up. (I am aware of the FIF / FDR rules for overseas investments for more than $50K etc).

I'm really wanting a simple set and forget investment strategy so I can continue regular investing while I'm working full time with no debt.

I would appreciate any thoughts on above queries.
Kind regards.

[Monarch]

I'm no expert and this isn't financial advice, I could be incorrect in my understandings and am open to being corrected.
If you want set and forget you don't want to exceed the FIF 50k de minimis exemption. FIF tax calculations can be a hassle. That 50k of FIF tax exempt investments is your most tax efficient way of investing in low dividend yield stocks/etfs that tend to be found in the USA. That's 50k NZD of cost not value, so long as your under that you just pay tax on dividends. I invest in ETFs also, and consider filling up that 50k limit to be my first priority.

As far as I'm aware ASX listed ETFs count towards that precious FIF amount. Additionally ASX ETFs must pay out any realised capital gains (from rebalancing etc) as dividends so some capital is paid out as dividends. They aren't very tax efficient so I personally avoid them altogether.

My allocation would be:

$49,990 NZD of VOO, VTI, QQQM or whatever USA etfs you like best. (I prefer QQQM as tech exposure is hard to get in NZ/AU markets)
Everything after that into NZX listed etfs and managed funds, eg NZG, USF.
The smart shares Australian funds are fine, but I avoid NZX:AUS as it holds 100% of assets as the etf ASX:IOZ and so pays FIF on its holdings. You lose 1.85% every year from tax + management fee, not including the fees and taxes incurred by holding IOZ.

Cheapest platform to buy NZX listed ETFs is Sharesies, fees are 0.5% for first $3000 of an order and 0.1% for everything after. If you want to hold them in your own name you can transfer out from their service for $5 per holding. For foreign investments (eg NYSE) I use Interactive Brokers, not certain if it is the cheapest but it is very cheap regardless especially on currency exchanges compared to Sharesies (who charge 0.4% fee for currency exchange).

[Norwest]

A lot of questions, I don't buy ETFs for a multitude of reasons, but I'll answer a couple with my 2 cents:

* If someone is clipping the ticket, I want them to add more value than I'm paying them (think Morrisons with IFT or Fisherfunds with MLN, BRM). A lot of "smartshares" funds, they are not adding any investing knowledge nor value e.g. e.g. US500 is just VOO with 0.34% added on!

* 10 years plus I absolutely 100% want the shares/ETF in my own name, not owned by someone else (e.g. you don't own the shares in your name with Sharesies!)

* Again, given the 10 year timeframe, I want some exposure to emerging markets rather than established markets as I see them performing better.

[JeffW]

Hi All,
As we are in lockdown I wanted to take the opportunity to ask other sharemarket investors some questions.. Note - I've worked in banking / finance sector and have been active property investor for ~2 decades, and have learned a lot being an active investor. I consider myself an expert on property, having owned residential property throughout NZ and commercial property. However when it comes to shares I'm no expert. I know that I don't want to invest in individual shares and I prefer and enjoy investing in ETF's.

Due to raising 3 young kids and with all the Gov't changes, I'm over tax changes and tweaks Govt will likely continue to make. I have been investing in Australasian and US share ETF via Smartshares since Covid hit last year. I'm going to continue to focus on passive path to building wealth. I'm very comfortable holding at least 80% of my wealth in shares and 20% cash long-term.

My kiwisaver is with Superlife high growth fund. As these funds are managed by Smartshares (owned by the NZX) it makes me think about the possible risks of investing more in Smartshare ETF (i.e. not diversifying providers in case something was ever to happen to the NZX?). ie Would you be comfortable having most of your wealth with 1 financial provider in Smartshares/Superlife?

I recently was recommended and read the book by Jim Collins (simple path to wealth) about investing solely in Vanguards VTI index long-term (I'm aware this is only US exposure). However the simple path really does resonate with me, in that I only want to invest in a few ETF funds for the long-term, ride out the bull and toughen up with the bear market hits. (I do currently own some Vanguard VTI and Smartshares US500 via Sharesies platform outside of Kiwisaver. I also have Hatch platform owned by Kiwi Wealth). Last week I attended Kernel Wealth seminar (low cost ETF provider) which was very interesting to consider as ETF provider.

That is the background. My questions are:
If you were to invest (next 10 years+) and you were to only choose 1-4 funds MAX in ETF what funds would you invest in, using what platform and what % percentage allocation in each?

Would you be comfortable investing only in Vanguards VTI and if so what provider / platform would you use?

Do you have a preference over owning the same ETF/shares on the ASX to the NYSE?

Are you comfortable investing in Smartshare Funds (paying 0.2% - 0.5%+) in management fees (which to be honest is a drag on your return over the long-term?)

OR would you invest Directly in likely Vanguard / iShares on ASX (e.g. Sharesies) or NYSE via Hatch where fund fees are as low as 0.3 over the long-term this adds up. (I am aware of the FIF / FDR rules for overseas investments for more than $50K etc).

I'm really wanting a simple set and forget investment strategy so I can continue regular investing while I'm working full time with no debt.

I would appreciate any thoughts on above queries.
Kind regards.

I have some funds with various Smartshare ETFs. The management fee is to some extent offset by the fact that these are all PIEs in NZ, subject to tax at a maximum rate of 28%. This is ordinarily both better and easier than the FIF tax rules

In your situation I'd be tempted to move my Kiwisaver to another provider for the sake of diversity

[GRADS]

hey guys, thanks for the replies so far! I will digest properly once the kids are tired out :)
yes sorry for lots of questions.. I'm passionate about personal finance and I suppose its like property investment you have to get the 'entity right first' so your foundation is sorted.

I have just found out that as my sharesies account is owned by 'family trust' that FIF rules apply now. so I will be selling these asap I think and put in personal account.

Jeff.. thank you.. that makes sense that I change my kiwisaver before most my wealth may be with superlife/smartshares ownership. I didn't even consider this.. i know simplicity has the lowest fund costs.

Just reading this forum today.. I have seen that holdings can be transferred out of sharesies.. I have an inactive 'asb securities' account that I just logged into.. so that's good to know that I can transfer holdings simply in the future thank you.

Monarch.. thank you I like that simple approach to invest most of the $50K into VOO / VTI etc. I think this year I have invested ~20K into foreign funds, so I will work out the balance and when right I will invest the balance e.g. $30K left into VTI or similiar

Does anyone own their shares in 'trust' entity.. I have always operated a trust (although it doesn't provide same protection as in past) it is still good for asset protection, tax minimisation succession planning etc.

and thanks for this tip!! The smart shares Australian funds are fine, but I avoid NZX:AUS as it holds 100% of assets as the etf ASX:IOZ and so pays FIF on its holdings. You lose 1.85% every year from tax + management fee, not including the fees and taxes incurred by holding IOZ.

Right back to kids.. Thanks again!

[SBQ]

Many have read my views in the forum about the gross inequity of NZ's taxation among different asset classes. I'm glad you've brought up the issue of taxation (PIE/KS/FIF RWT) because this is a VERY lacking subject when you walk into the office of a NZ financial advisor. They are quick to recommend a 'good tax accountant' so they can clip the ticket and pile on the charges. For 1 financial advisor I spoke to in Christchurch, her angle was to use all these expenditure (monthly financial advice fees, tax accountant fees, etc) as a tax write off deduction on the investment gains ; much like in a business sort of way. Certainly not something I would be comfortable with.

What Monarch has done by maxing out the $50K FIF exemption is what i've been giving as advice to my friends and neighbours. For a married couple that's nearly $100K that they can use to invest abroad directly and not be subjected to capital gains tax. If you have a 40 year time frame, that $100K initial capital investment could grow into something considerable into 7 figs easily. When you compare this approach to say Kiwi Saver, for eg., at the minimum one gets under KS that is earning $100K/year income is a measly $6K investment into the managed fund. Then you net off the fees and taxes in how these KS / PIE funds operate, it will go to show the net-tax return may not be so hot when you compare the $50K approach being exempted from FIF. Of course it's been argued that not many people have $50K to invest and most would rather use that as a deposit towards their 1st home.

[SBQ]

A lot of questions, I don't buy ETFs for a multitude of reasons, but I'll answer a couple with my 2 cents:

* If someone is clipping the ticket, I want them to add more value than I'm paying them (think Morrisons with IFT or Fisherfunds with MLN, BRM). A lot of "smartshares" funds, they are not adding any investing knowledge nor value e.g. e.g. US500 is just VOO with 0.34% added on!

* 10 years plus I absolutely 100% want the shares/ETF in my own name, not owned by someone else (e.g. you don't own the shares in your name with Sharesies!)

* Again, given the 10 year timeframe, I want some exposure to emerging markets rather than established markets as I see them performing better.

You got that right!!! Exactly the issue what i've expressed in this forum in the past around buying NZ based funds that buy nothing but Vanguard's ETF. As a matter of interest Vanguards entire family of ETFs has an average annual mgt fee of 0.08% So when a person sits in the office looking at this financial advisor, and they start discussing fees, are they really being 'transparent'? This would be a definite NO or they simply say that's how the funds present themselves and the NZ FMA doesn't do a good job enforcing such rip offs.

If you can find your way to establishing an overseas brokerage account, you can own the ETFs directly in your name. Don't let the haze of the FMA illusion you into thinking these brokerage firms are risky because they're not registered by the FMA. When these brokerage firms grow to $100B or $200B in size, you will know they are bigger than any bank in NZ/Australasia, that bankruptcy is less likely than any of the of the NZ banks or brokers going bust here.

Are ETFs great? They certainly are when you find the right ones. But don't my advice on it. You question Jack Bogle why he pioneered his Vanguard funds to have the lowest mgt fees in industry? You question why Warren Buffet tells the layman person that buying the S&P500 index will serve them better than using some fancy hedge fund manager. It amazes me how in NZ industry, the salesmanship selling financial packages to would be investors is no different to going to a car salesman. In order to be trusting you need to be transparent, in order to achieve the overall end return amount, you need to consider taxation, and equally important you also have to consider estate planning. Where I come from (Canada) all these issues are part of the CFP designation for providing financial advice.

So what kind of strategy we are going to have from now on? I've mentioned this before many years ago pre-Covid that the stock market is riding pretty high so it may be wise to wait and see for a pull back or a crash. Of course no one really know when the next crash will be but the DOW is at 35K, the S&P is under 4500. We are talking stellar record highs.

One think certain as I told my neighbour, you need to have the brokerage account ready and the fund there loaded. There's no point to watch a crash when it could take many weeks to get a fully funded brokerage account going.

[GRADS]

thanks SBQ! its makes sense that my partner and I first max out the $50K FIF rule first.

I'm wanting to stick with a simple diversified EFT strategy with only 3-4 funds that I will stick with long time.

I appreciate any comments! Cheers

[kiora]

"COPY LINK
OPINION REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Calling Out ‘Emperor’ Larry Fink
Charlie Munger says what many CEOs think but decline to say.
WSJ Opinion: Why Politicians Love ‘Sin’ Taxes
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

UP NEXT

WSJ Opinion: Why Politicians Love ‘Sin’ Taxes
WSJ Opinion: Why Politicians Love ‘Sin’ Taxes
Wonder Land: State legalizations of gambling and marijuana prove that the goal of governments today is mainly to take, rather than help. Images: Getty Images Composite: Mark Kelly
By The Editorial Board
Feb. 17, 2022 6:58 pm ET
PRINT
TEXT
856
When you’re 98 years old you can say things others can’t, so bravo to Charlie Munger for daring to speak an important but too muffled truth about today’s financial markets. “We have a new bunch of emperors, and they’re the people who vote the shares in the index funds,” Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway partner said Wednesday. “I think the world of Larry Fink, but I’m not sure I want him to be my emperor."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/calling-out-emperor-larry-fink-charlie-munger-financial-markets-berkshire-hathaway-11645136040?mod=itp_wsj

[SBQ]

@kiora: WSJ link blocked with a pay subscription popup.

He's referring to Larry Fink of the hedge fund Blackrock which has recently been buying up real estate all over the US. Because of their large status, Munger is saying that they've become too large that they no longer play the typical role of finding the best return for their shareholders. Hedge funds being so large that they continue to attract large amounts of capital, too much money to have such as SPAC funding, where the CEO's of companies they invest in, no longer play a simple role. They become the majority shareholder of the company and can undermine the CEO's job and direction of the company by ie. placing their own board of members into the invested company.

However, i'm not so fond of what Munger has been saying recently. I feel he's going to be wrong in many instances. For eg he's been wrong about Tesla, and I think he may be wrong on his massive investment in Alibaba. At his age, it probably doesn't matter. Another thing is the status he's achieve came mostly from being Warren Buffet's right hand man. I doubt he would achieve anything close to what Buffet alone has achieved as far as investment returns.

[kiora]

@ SBQ
"I think he may be wrong on his massive investment in Alibaba."
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/munger-kipling-investing-152046657.html
Maybe,
What his thinking seems to be
He would rather invest in China and would not invest in Russia
Alibaba 1/3 PE cf Amazon
Has a weight of money to invest
No investment is perfect, weighted risk vs reward

[SBQ]

@ SBQ
"I think he may be wrong on his massive investment in Alibaba."
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/munger-kipling-investing-152046657.html
Maybe,
What his thinking seems to be
He would rather invest in China and would not invest in Russia
Alibaba 1/3 PE cf Amazon
Has a weight of money to invest
No investment is perfect, weighted risk vs reward

Well if Putin attacks and takes over Ukraine, and the western world puts economic sanctions on Russia, Munger will have to realize that Russia will be using China as their main trading partner. So indirectly, it could easily end up Munger owning China based companies that have a huge involvement with the Russian economy.

As far as Alibaba's PE, it is not comparable to AMZN for the simple reason... I don't believe in their #s. I use to as I use to own BABA since IPO and unloaded it at $206. Are the financials GAAP checked? before you make any risk vs reward analysis, you have to find out if the data is real and i'm afraid for many Chinese companies (ie. Luckin Coffee) the figures are too easy to fudge.

[kiora]

No doubt easy to fudge but those are the figures Munger suggested.
Re Russia vs China he was making a business judgement not a political judgement

[epower]

You only need one fund.

Total world fund (TWF). We invest 100% in here outside of our own home and up front $1000 ‘play money’ that I stock pick on NZX via Sharesies

[Fred114]

One strategy for dividend yield might be to invest in US stocks that pay a consistently high yield. The higher the yield, the lower the capital investment needed. There are several types typically used by income investors namely, REITs, cc ETFs, BDCs, CEFs, ETNs, and MLPs.

By contrast, to take an example of a bluechip stock, J&J pay quarterly 1.06 USD. So the total amount of stock needed would be (3*$4000)/1.06 = 11,320 shares. At current price of $174.34 that would a total investment of around $1,970,000. That would be quite a bit of cash in one holding too.

An REIT such as Realty Income (NYSE:O) pays a monthly div of 0.2465 cents per share. Currently trading at USD 66.90, the total amount of investment to receive $4000 per month would be around half the investment in a bluechip stock, $1,086,000. There are many other types to choose from with higher yields and diversification would be essential.

In NZ, there doesn't appear to be companies dedicated to income generating assets, and therefore the US market appears attractive. There is of course, taxation to consider. For NZ residents, there would be capital gains tax under the FIF regime on an amount over NZD50K, but on balance, these funds don't appear to appreciate in capital, and therefore little capital gains tax would apply.

One idea would be to accumulate these types of shares as a saving strategy, that would eventually pay a liveable income.

Your thoughts.

[Snoopy]

In NZ, there doesn't appear to be companies dedicated to income generating assets, and therefore the US market appears attractive.


I don't know why you say that. There are plenty of NZX shares listed paying decent yields. And for NZ investors, our imputation credit system works to boost yields further



There is of course, taxation to consider. For NZ residents, there would be capital gains tax under the FIF regime on an amount over NZD50K, but on balance, these funds don't appear to appreciate in capital, and therefore little capital gains tax would apply.

One idea would be to accumulate these types of shares as a saving strategy, that would eventually pay a liveable income.

Your thoughts.

You misunderstand the FIF tax, with its optional FDR/CV implementation. For most NZ investors in listed companies it is a FDR (fair dividend rate) tax which is nothing to do with capital gains. The exception being that in poor years (returns <5%) , the CV (Comparative Value) method option can be used which is a tax on unrealised capital gains if it applies (if you lose money over the year, while including the dividend contribution, then there is no tax liability).

SNOOPY

[SBQ]

@Fred114: Snoopy is correct. NZX provides MANY listed companies that pay decent dividends. You forget that in the US market, the emphasis is more about capital gains and any ETFs that are in the dividend income stream are on most part 'out of favour'. This is due to the preferential tax treatment on capital gains vs interest from bonds vs dividend income.

Warren Buffet is very staunch about the issue of collecting dividends from a tax efficiency perspective. He says individuals should not focus on dividends whatsoever. If you want a decent return, own stock like BRKB and watch the capital gains over several years. He says WHEN you want an income, "You simply sell a portion of the shareholding". In Buffet's case,for the past 20 years he's been trying to gift away his stock in Berkshire, but what's happened is the share price value has increased far more than what he can gift out. This is a far better way than the corporation issuing dividends (which is taxed), and then taxed again when the shareholder receives it. Since NZ has no formal CGT, FIF was brought in purely to address this preference that in America, capital gains is the preferred approach to investing. When a company draws down it's cash reserves on the balance sheet, so does the Equity section gets drawn down, thus lowers 'book value per share'. This has a negative impact on the share price (a direct correlation). Berkshire Hathaway continues to grow it's cash and when it acquires new businesses or buys shares, the book value per share does not get hit; but dividends do nothing more than draws down what the company is worth.

When I invest in a company, I view it as a partner in the business. That means i want to preserve the equity in the business... not being forced in a tax situation when dividends are issued.

[DTC]

From Ryman Thread (Sideshow Bob 16/5):
As foreshadowed for a couple of months, Ryman Healthcare shares will fall out of the MSCI Standard Index after May 31.
Forsyth Barr estimates that will mean about $232.3m worth of shares will be sold by index funds and other fund managers hugging the index

So where does this fit into the debate on passive investing and ETFs?

The ETFs that use this index for passive investing, does this selling pressure benefit them and their investors?

Something similar happened with Contact and Meridian stock prices last year when their prices spiked because of large capital inflows into ETF/s (ICLN-maybe others?).

Maybe passive investing and ETFs are causing further chaos in an already chaotic system.

[Valuegrowth]

https://www.moneyhub.co.nz/shares-vs-etf.html

https://www.etf.com/sections/etf-strategist-corner/defining-quality-quality-etfs?nopaging=1

[kiora]

This bit lost to investors in the haystack?
"Whatever your investing goals, if you’re focused on growth, then shares are the most suitable investment."
Volatility just needed to weighed against time risk

[kiora]

This bit lost to investors in the haystack?
"Whatever your investing goals, if you’re focused on growth, then shares are the most suitable investment."
Volatility just needed to weighed against time risk. The longer the period the less is the time risk.

[SBQ]

https://www.moneyhub.co.nz/shares-vs-etf.html

https://www.etf.com/sections/etf-strategist-corner/defining-quality-quality-etfs?nopaging=1

I am not surprised of the same rhetoric financial advisors have (in both NZ and abroad) about investing. Buffet spells it very clearly that the new individual wanting a long term retirement plan should just simply buy the S&P500 ETF, such as the Vanguard VOO or VOOG (why both links make no mention of the Vanguard ETFs is beyond me). Anyways, Buffet says people should buy the lowest cost index ETF is not because it's a fully diversified asset, it's because the individuals are not likely to pick stocks in a successful way. Hell even actively managed funds do poorly and can't time markets either.

In the 1st link, if you adopt Peter Lynch's view, he believes every person can do better than the actively managed funds, when it comes to picking stocks. He points to individuals that are 'experts in their area of work'. For eg a cook working in the restaurant industry would know which up and coming restaurant is doing well and beating the competition. Likewise which hotel worker would know which ones are doing well in that industry getting all the customers. Or someone in automotive, etc. the list goes on. When the individual spends most of their time working in a specific industry, they will be better knowledged at buying stocks in those companies than the layman fund manager that sits in the office most of the time.

Charlie Munger has also been arrogant at managed funds saying their management skills in picking stocks are nothing more than doing what the others do. They use the argument to 'diversify risks' (he calls it diworsification) to achieve safe returns when all they are doing is text book stock picking that exhibits NO skill in how to beat the market index returns. That's because of 'mean reversion' ; when you behave like others through over-divisifying your portfolio by buying everything, the end results will automatically be the average of those results... and quite frankly in Munger's books, this method of portfolio diversification proves nothing in terms of skilled ability in when to buy or sell stocks.

But there's a whole can of worms to deal with when investing from a NZ perspective. Issues like taxation is rarely commented, issues like why dividend is preferred over capital gains, what is acceptable pay for these fund managers, who really serves in best interest to the investors?

[GTM 3442]

ETF Strategy?

ETFs are simply a tool to help realize your strategy.

Easy - passive funds, actively managed.

ETFs give you the ability to go as wide as you like (MSCI World Index) or as narrow as you like (the German mittelstand, physical platinum), and damn near every degree in between.

[DTC]

What about hedging? From my research, the answer is no, extra expense for basically a 50/50 chance of paying off. But with the US dollar so expensive at the moment, if you are going to transfer some money to hedged or unhedged Total World Fund or S&P 500, would it be worth hedging it?

[kiora]

Wrong thread

[GTM 3442]

What about hedging? From my research, the answer is no, extra expense for basically a 50/50 chance of paying off. But with the US dollar so expensive at the moment, if you are going to transfer some money to hedged or unhedged Total World Fund or S&P 500, would it be worth hedging it?

An asset allocation matrix will cover several strands. You can more or less end up with a job as a fund manager.

There will be the traditional asset classes - what proportion to hold by class - in shares, bonds, infrastructure, property, commodities and so on.

There will be currency - what proportion to hold in your "home" currency, and what proportion to hold in other currencies.

There will be geography - what proportion to hold in your "home" jurisdiction and what proportion to hold "offshore". And of course the composition and selection of "offshore" is a never-ending source of amusement.

There can also be domicile - where do your holdings live? In your "home" jurisdiction or somewhere else. Is there an advantage in holding asset class A in currency B in an ETF domiciled in C?

And of course timeframe - when do you envisage cashing out and using the money? And where?

And of course the perennial favourite - tax!

Taxes here,
Taxes there,
Taxes bl**dy everywhere!

[kiora]

Capitulation
"Doomed Stock Rally Burns Fewer Bulls After $10 Billion ETF Exit"
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/doomed-stock-rally-burns-fewer-201810307.html

[DTC]

Wrong thread

So... What Is The Right Thread?

[Champion]

Hi, does PE ratio or EPS apply to ETF? For example, the PE ratio of smartshare TWF is currently listed as 74.45, while USF is 7.89. Does it mean TWF is way overvalued? Thanks.

[justakiwi]

He meant he posted in the wrong thread by mistake.


So... What Is The Right Thread?