≡ Menu

The 22 maxims of Sir John Templeton

Sir John Templeton was a great investor, and a paradox.

When it comes to legendary investors, Sir John Templeton was a legend’s legend.

Templeton is immortalised as the man who brought international investing to North Americans. Touring the world in his twenties – still a racy thing to do eight decades ago, at least out of uniform – Templeton was one of the first to see the potential of Japan. He backed its firms to the hilt.

Later he did the same with the tiger economies of South East Asia.

Templeton’s winning career as a fund manager and stock picker in foreign markets is immortalized in names like the Templeton Emerging Markets Investment Trust.

But there are plenty of other reminders from John Templeton’s life that can teach us about finding success as an investor.

Templeton did things differently

The most famous of Templeton’s contrarian actions happened in 1939.

On the eve of the Second World War, when Templeton was all of 26-years old, he borrowed a then-massive $10,000. He had decided to buy 100 shares in each of 100 companies whose beaten-up stocks cost less than a $1.

Templeton judged the market was in headless chicken mode due to fears about the upcoming conflict. He wasn’t sure which shares would prosper. But he was convinced they were all trading out of whack.

The profits he banked when the markets recovered initiated a lifetime of running money.

Templeton had learned to read the emotional moods of markets by visiting cattle auctions during the Depression Era with a bargain-hungry older uncle. Perhaps economists would have quicker to get to behavioural economics if they’d spent less time with mathematical models and more time watching farmers yelling at each other!

Even with today’s knowledge though, it takes a rare mindset like Templeton’s to see opportunity on the cusp of a life-or-death conflagration.

Popping the bubble

Fast-forwarding 60 years, and Templeton was actively shorting the Dotcom Bubble. In his 80s! He was no perma-bullish Warren Buffett.

I’ve wondered before about the return sheets of the greatest old investors. Often there’s a presumption that their out-sized success comes courtesy of time and compound interest.

But to be actively betting against your grandkids’ smartest peers on Wall Street by shorting the most popular stocks – and winning – is something else.

What’s more, Templeton chose his targets in a cunning fashion. He studied the Dotcoms that had recently IPO-d, and looked for when the lock-in deals that restricted their freshly-minted founders from selling up would expire. Thus he anticipated who’d first dump their shares on the market. Kerching!

Man of mystery

Passing on little stories about Templeton’s profitable exploits matches how I learned about the man myself.

I’ve never read an investing book about Sir John Templeton, in stark contrast to my other favourite investors. (Templeton passed away at the grand old age of 95 in 2008).

Rather, I found out about Templeton through mentions in unrelated books, word of mouth, and magazines and websites.

That’s how I came across Templeton’s 22 maxims for investing success.

These pointers are most applicable to active investors trying to beat the market.

But there are also nuggets that passive investors should appreciate, too.

Enjoy!

The 22 investing maxims of John Templeton

1. For all long-term investors, there is only one objective: ‘maximum total real return after taxes.’

2. Achieving a good record takes much study and work, and is a lot harder than most people think.

3. It is impossible to produce a superior performance unless you do something different from the majority.

4. The time of maximum pessimism is the best time to buy, and the time of maximum optimism is the best time to sell.

5. To put ‘Maxim 4’ in somewhat different terms, in the stock market the only way to get a bargain is to buy what most investors are selling.

6.  To buy when others are despondently selling and to sell what others are greedily buying requires the greatest fortitude, even while offering the greatest reward.

7. Bear markets have always been temporary. Share prices turn upward from one to twelve months before the bottom of the business cycle.

8. If a particular industry or type of security becomes popular with investors, that popularity will always prove temporary and, when lost, won’t return for many years.

9. In the long run, the stock market indexes fluctuate around the long-term upward trend of earnings per share.

10. In free-enterprise nations, the earnings on stock market indexes fluctuate around the book value of the shares of the index.

11. If you buy the same securities as other people, you will have the same results as other people.

12. The time to buy a stock is when the short-term owners have finished their selling, and the time to sell a stock is often when the short-term owners have finished their buying.

13. Share prices fluctuate more widely than values. Therefore, index funds will never produce the best total return performance.

14. Too many investors focus on ‘outlook’ and ‘trend’. Therefore, more profit is made by focusing on value.

15. If you search worldwide, you will find more bargains and better bargains than by studying only one nation. Also, you gain the safety of diversification.

16. The fluctuation of share prices is roughly proportional to the square root of the price.

17. The time to sell an asset is when you have found a much better bargain to replace it.

18.  When any method for selecting stocks becomes popular, then switch to unpopular methods. As has been suggested in ‘Maxim 3’, too many investors can spoil any share-selection method or any market-timing formula.

19. Never adopt permanently any type of asset, or any selection method. Try to stay flexible, open-minded, and skeptical. Long-term results are achieved only by changing from popular to unpopular the types of securities you favor and your methods of selection.

20. The skill factor in selection is largest for the common-stock part of your investments.

21. The best performance is produced by a person, not a committee.

22. If you begin with prayer, you can think more clearly and make fewer stupid mistakes.

Want more? Compare Templeton’s maxims to the rules of Walter Schloss.

{ 35 comments }
Weekend reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

I suppose it’s because I’ve long worked from home anyway, but I’ve been overlooking a big aspect of ‘back to office’ post-Covid debate.

Hitherto I’ve mostly focused on the productivity angle. How would firms weigh productivity gains from remote work against the loss of culture or development potential, I wondered?

As an active investor, I’ve spent 18 months shifting my money back and forth between work-from-home stocks like Zoom and Atlassian and beaten-up commercial property, reflecting my changing views.

But what I’d forgotten is that people are people. And that some of them are desperate to get back to an office simply to justify their jobs.

I’m someone who has more than once left office life – and killed my career prospects doing so, at least in that dark pre-lockdown era – just to escape the politics, busywork, colleagues I’ve have to carry, and clueless managers.

So it’s pretty dumb of me not to see that those who thrive in such an environment might want it back, pronto, entirely for their own reasons.

Logged out

One class of such people are, more or less, the loafers.

These are the non-working workers celebrated in books like City Slackers, Bonjour Laziness, and Michel Houllebecq’s Whatever.

They need to be in an office because remote work is usually more carefully measured work.

Doing nothing soon adds up.

I haven’t got anything personally against such people. Some of my best friends and so on. Many jobs are rubbish and soulless. Not everyone is cut out to be a cog in a modern machine.

However I don’t want to effectively be paying for them with my output, as the lack of their own drags us all down.

As a freelance I have no choice but to be measured on my own output. At least that way I live or die by my own sword.

How do they manage?

The other type of office denizen who has been drowning for 18 months – while waving all the time – perches at the other end of the org chart.

I’m thinking of high-flying, do-nothing managers.

I’m lucky to have had several great employers in my short on/off work CV. A couple of companies that regularly win/won awards as great places to work.

And largely they were.

Yet their corridors were still patrolled by a few of those passive-aggressive managerial types who climb up the career pole with spiked boots and aren’t concerned with who they gouge in the head on the way.

These are people whose days are packed with meetings where they talk a lot but rarely contribute. People who apparently did something great a few years ago, but always seem to be stealing someone else’s ideas today. People in charge of people that you wouldn’t let look after your dog.

An article from MSN this week brought them flooding back:

Remote work lays bare many brutal inefficiencies and problems that executives don’t want to deal with because they reflect poorly on leaders and those they’ve hired.

Remote work empowers those who produce and disempowers those who have succeeded by being excellent diplomats and poor workers, along with those who have succeeded by always finding someone to blame for their failures.

It removes the ability to seem productive (by sitting at your desk looking stressed or always being on the phone), and also, crucially, may reveal how many bosses and managers simply don’t contribute to the bottom line.

The horror. The horror.

What do you do again?

The CEO of a company I consulted for once admitted to me that he had no idea what a highly-paid mutual acquaintance on his payroll actually did.

This guy was on many projects. Yet looking for his fingerprints in the output was like hunting for the Higgs boson. Younger staff came up with the things that moved the company ahead. Meanwhile our chum was always in a meeting.

The CEO admitted he kept this chancer around almost out of superstition. The company was doing well ever since this chap was hired, even if nobody could say exactly why. The people he managed despaired of him.

I suggested perhaps our mutual contact’s direct reports worked harder under him in order to try to get past him – in the same way you’ll try to overtake a dangerous driver to put him in your rear-view mirror.

The CEO pondered this for a bit. And kept him on.

Poor petals!

Some of these high-flying underachievers do add a sort of social glue that – at least historically – bigger companies have seemed to need to grow.

Others have a brilliant idea every year or two and then fall back into a coma. That might just be enough to justify their salary and position.

But many are simply friction in the system. After a year of sending fifty Bcc-d emails a day or pinging Slack like a teenager on Snap and saying the most on Zoom in meetings but basically saying nothing, they risk being unmasked.

Meanwhile lots of actual workers at the coalface have been working from bed during the pandemic and still turning out great stuff. So it’s not like these unmanageable managers’ fears of the company culture being eroded or destroyed by homeworking are unfounded. Even if it’s actually being replaced by something better.

Often charmers, the best of these people remind me of those flowering epiphytes that thrive high in the rain forest canopy.

Growing on the sides of the trees who do all the proper hard work, they are beautiful and exotic and for hundreds of years scientists have debated whether they are harmless, subtly value-adding, or flat-out parasitic.

If you’re a fancy orchid that bears no fruit, no wonder you’re desperate to get back to the hothouse.

Even as many of the rest of us head for the doors.

Have a great weekend – whoever you are!

[continue reading…]

{ 32 comments }

Best Emerging Market bond ETFs and bond funds

Best Emerging Market bond ETFs and bond funds post image

This post – part three of a Monevator deep dive into Emerging Market debt as an asset class – will compare the best Emerging Market bond ETFs and funds I can find.

The two previous posts examined the case for and against Emerging Market bonds:

  • Part one investigated the superior risk-adjusted returns of EM debt.
  • Part two dug into why the asset class’s historic out-performance may not be repeated.

While I think the argument in favour is marginal, I’m still tempted to invest in Emerging Market US$ sovereign bonds. I believe they may be a useful diversifier on the growth/risk side of my asset allocation.

But how do passive investors put money to work in this asset class? Which index trackers best match the returns of EM US $ sovereigns?

Read on for the pick of the best Emerging Market bond ETFs and funds.

(Note: If the following table doesn’t render properly in your email viewer, please see the article on the Monevator website).

Best Emerging Market bond ETFs and funds

Fund/ETF Cost = OCF (%) Index Duration Yield-to-maturity (YTM) Sub-investment grade (%) Domicile
iShares Emerging Markets Government Bond Index Fund Class D Acc (USD) 0.18 JP Morgan EMBIGD1 7.8 4 47 Ireland
iShares JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (Dist) 0.45 JP Morgan EMBIGC2 8.5 4.1 44 Ireland
Xtrackers USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF 2D 0.25 FTSE Emerging Markets USD Government and Government-Related Bond Select 8.6 4.4 48 Luxembourg
Vanguard USD Emerging Markets Government Bond ETF Dist 0.25 Bloomberg Barclays EM USD Sovereign + Quasi-Sov 7.5 3.7 36 Ireland
Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF Dist 0.25 Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets USD Sovereign 8.6 4.2 41 Ireland
Legal & General Emerging Markets Government Bond (US$) Index Fund I Class 0.29 JP Morgan EMBI+3 8.7 UK

Source: Fund providers’ data (A dash means data not provided).

  • All products are Emerging Market US$ sovereign bond funds (an ETF is just a type of fund), currency unhedged.
  • EM debt also divides into EM US$ Corporates and EM local sovereign. There’s no need to add these sub-asset classes as well. (Use GBP hedged ETFs if you do pick EM local sovereign, however).
  • See our best bond funds piece for quick explanations of table categories such as duration and yield-to-maturity.
  • iShares EM Gov Bond Index Fund publishes yield-to-worst data in its factsheet, not YTM.
  • Most providers don’t publish the average credit rating of their EM funds. I’ve included an estimate of sub-investment grade (junk) bond holdings as a placeholder for how much risk is embedded in these products.
  • The risk inherent in Emerging Market debt products means they behave like an equity/bond hybrid. For this reason, hold them in the growth portion of your asset allocation and not on the defensive side

Selecting the best Emerging Market bond ETFs is not as straightforward as choosing the best global tracker funds. It’s certainly not as simple as picking the cheapest product and moving on. Every fund has an issue, which I’ll run through in two ticks. 

But before we get into that, let’s do a performance check.

Best Emerging Market bond ETFs – results check

Best Emerging Market ETFs annualised returns table.

Source: Trustnet’s charting tool.

Important: Because past performance is no guarantee of future results, the right fund isn’t the one that did best last Tuesday, or even beat the pack by a nose over three years.

Rather, the point of the results check is to ensure that a dysfunctional product hasn’t crept onto the shortlist.

Maybe a fund doesn’t tracks its index well? Perhaps – despite its plausible sounding-name – it isn’t faithful to the industry-standard view of Emerging Market US$ sovereign bonds?

Comparing returns can reveal a fund that doesn’t behave as expected.

Even a runaway winner should ring alarm bells. It’s vanishingly rare for one index tracker to trounce its rivals. They’re meant to be me-too products.

I’m also not keen on drawing conclusions from any less than five years of data. More is better.

Strangely, Trustnet doesn’t have returns for the iShares Emerging Markets Government Bond Index Fund. That adds to the mystery surrounding this tracker (see below).

Meanwhile, over five years, the iShares JP Morgan $ EM Bond ETF (Ticker: SEMB) soundly beat its long-toothed L&G rival, despite costing more.

That’s one of the reasons the L&G index fund is at the foot of our table.

Wider selection criteria

I’ve gone through these index trackers with my finest tooth comb and uncovered a few bugs.

Firstly, it’s important to know that the index is key for EM US$ sovereign bonds.

Monevator reader and hedge fund quant, ZXSpectrum48k, explained that institutional investors overwhelmingly use the JP Morgan Emerging Markets Bond Index Global Diversified Index (JPM EMBIGD). It’s highly diversified and includes a 10% cap on the weighting of each country.

Why do institutional bond investors insist on capped indices? ZX is in the know:

This is to mitigate the impact of an ever-increasing weighting to an issuer (sovereign or corporate) that is declining in credit quality but also to offset the reduced diversification that can result from this effect.

Capped indices are now totally dominant in emerging government bond markets. Only retail use uncapped indices (they are cheaper to buy from index providers).

The ideal index is the JPM EMBIGD

Only iShares’ Emerging Markets Government Bond Index Fund tracks the JPM EMBIGD.

This fund also happens to be the cheapest retail EM US$ debt tracker by OCF. And it looks good on other metrics, too.

There’s only one problem – I can’t find it in the real world!

Neither Hargreaves Lansdown, AJ Bell, nor Interactive Investor list it in their fund centres.

A Google search doesn’t reveal any other platforms stocking it, either.

Yet it’s listed on iShares’ retail website in Class D shares. That share class is typically used by other iShares index funds that are available to retail investors like you and me. 

And the fund was launched in May 2018, so it isn’t new.

Is it available on your platform? Please let us know in the comments below.

Often platforms will list funds when they’re nudged by customers. Perhaps there just isn’t enough demand for it in retail-land.

The next best thing: JPM EMBIGC

EMBIGC stands for the Emerging Markets Bond Index Global Core. It’s a cut-down version of the EMBIGD.

ZX compares EMBIGC to its premium counterpart like this:

This [EMBIGC] excludes many less liquid, higher yielding countries, and knocks around 70bp off the yield.

iShares JP Morgan $ EM Bond ETF (Ticker: SEMB) tracks the EMBIGC.

You can spot the difference the index makes by comparing SEMB’s data with the EMBIGD-hugging iShares Emerging Markets Government Bond Index Fund.

  • SEMB lags the index fund by 0.24% annualised over three years.
  • According to iShares, the EMBIGC index trails the EMBIGD by 0.19% over three years.

That implies the SEMB ETF isn’t too shabby, even though its OCF is 0.27% chubbier than the index fund rival. We might have expected SEMB to lag by a much higher amount, given the combined OCF and index differential.

It’s also reassuring to see the two trackers’ Top 10 geographic exposures are similar. Same countries, with less than 1% difference in weight.

Maybe that tiny difference is mission critical to institutional investors with billions under management, but it doesn’t matter much to me. I’d be happy to hold SEMB instead of the EMBIGD-tracking index fund, especially when my platform’s fees favour ETFs.

Yes, SEMB’s holdings are slightly less diversified. But they’re spread more widely than the rest of the shortlist.

I’ll have to stop mooning after the index fund if it isn’t available, anyway.

The best of the rest

The other index trackers are all cheaper than SEMB by OCF.

The only one that stands out though is Vanguard’s USD Emerging Markets Government Bond ETF. It’s got a shorter duration (and hence a lower yield) than the pack. And it holds less junk.

The Xtrackers and Invesco ETFs both have niggling index discrepancies.

The Xtracker product tracks the FTSE Emerging Markets USD Government and Government-Related Bond Select index. But its index’s ticker is different from the index of the same name published by FTSE Russell.

Such inconsistencies make me feel like I’m missing something.

The Invesco ETF’s index isn’t listed on the Bloomberg Barclays site. I don’t like it when information is hard to find or non-existent.

The Invesco ETF’s index does sound superficially similar to the Vanguard ETF’s index. But the holdings of the two funds are distinct. And information about Vanguard’s index is published on Bloomberg Barclays.

What’s going on here? For now I just see red flags.

Meanwhile, L&G’s Emerging Markets Government Bond (US$) Index Fund tracks the JP Morgan EMBI+ index.

This is an older, less diversified member of JPM’s EM US$ sovereign bond index family that includes EMBIGD and EMBIGC.

L&G’s fund is the least diversified on our list. And I won’t invest when a provider doesn’t publish data like yield-to-maturity on its fund’s webpage.

Cap my ass

The JPM EMBI+ is pure market cap. This means it’s dominated by countries issuing large amounts of debt. That helps explain why the L&G fund is the least diversified on our list.

Meanwhile, there’s no mention of a country weighting cap on the Bloomberg Barclays EM USD Sovereign + Quasi-Sov index’s factsheet.

Vanguard’s ETF is thus more heavily concentrated in its top 10 countries than the others, bar L&G. It holds more individual securities, though.

The JPM EMIGC factsheet does reference a maximum weight per country. But it doesn’t say what it is!

Xtrackers states its ETF’s index country cap is US$25 billion. Its top 10 is as moderately concentrated as the EMBIGD index fund, although the country mix is quite different.

The Invesco ETF’s index sounds similar to Vanguard’s but is less concentrated, especially in China.

Transaction costs

Fund providers get extra integrity points for publishing their product’s transaction costs.

Transaction costs can undermine your returns, and they aren’t captured by the headline OCF fee.

Only Xtrackers is courageous enough to publish its ETF’s transaction cost on its webpage.

That cost is 0.11%, which accounts for the dealing fees notched up by the product in a year. It’s a large extra cost percentage, on top of the 0.25% OCF.

Vanguard publishes transaction costs, too, but buried in a PDF in a dark corner of its site. Add 0.09% to the cost of its Emerging Market bond ETF.

If the rest do publish transaction costs then they don’t make them easy to find. (Funny that.)

Until they do, I’ll assume transaction costs are at least 0.11% for the rest of our line-up.

Tax

Bond fund taxation is heavier than equities. That matters if you hold them outside your ISA or SIPP, and/or they burst the banks of your tax allowances.

Offshore bond funds are taxed at a higher rate still, if they don’t have reporting fund status.

Our shortlist all claim reporting status except the L&G fund, which doesn’t need it (UK domiciled), and iShares enigmatic index fund, which doesn’t bother saying one way or the other. (Truly this fund is too cool for school.)

Credit risk

As a passive investor I have no opinion on the differing degrees of credit risk embedded in each of these products.

I want to take the same amount of risk as the wider market because I have no edge over the market.

So I don’t think of average credit rating (or junk bond holdings) as a selection criteria for the best Emerging Market bond ETFs and funds – as long as its roughly in line with the market’s view.

The market is best represented by the leading EMBIGD index, which posts an overall credit rating of BB+ on its factsheet. The caveat is that EMBIGD’s latest factsheet is dated 2018.

We can also use the iShares Emerging Market Government Bond Index fund as an EMIGD proxy, because it follows the index.

Only Vanguard and Invesco actually publish average credit ratings (BBB- and BBB respectively).

Gauging by the junk bond holdings of the iShares and Xtracker ETFs, they’re a little riskier, which looks about right.

Emerging consensus

So that’s my best assessment of where things stand with emerging market sovereign bond ETFs and funds right now.

Apologies if it comes across as more of an artist’s impression than a blueprint. And please do add your own strokes in the comments below.

Part four in this once-thought-to-be-one part series runs through a very naughty Emerging Market bond valuation rule-of-thumb that is in no way to be relied upon.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

  1. Emerging Markets Bond Index Global Diversified []
  2. Emerging Markets Bond Index Global Core []
  3. Emerging Markets Bond Index Plus []
{ 13 comments }

An introduction to thematic ETFs

The Mr Men as an illustration of the variety of thematic ETFs

This article on thematic ETFs is by The Lone Exchanger from Team Monevator. Come back every Monday for another fresh perspective.

Opening up his browser and heading to the ‘Funds’ page of his online broker, The Lone Exchanger felt like trying something new.

Navigating away from the relative safety of his All-World Tracker, he discovered a fresh and potentially exciting world…

Setting the stage

We know the drill by now for long-term financial independence. Budget effectively and put aside as much as you can in tax-efficient savings vehicles. Make a global index tracker fund the core of your strategy.

But where is the fun in that? In dutifully popping a portion of your hard-earned wedge into a slow and steady grower?

Surely the game played by these City types isn’t that complicated?

Well, flicking through the Monevator archives reminds us that over a ten-year period, more than 70% of professional fund managers failed to beat the market.

What chance do you or I have of doing better?

Not much.

But human nature is curious. Despite all the evidence that index funds are best for most – and that successful stockpicking is fiendishly difficult – there remains a temptation to try to beat the market to juice returns.

And as ever the financial world has stepped up to scratch that itch.

Theme-me-up, Scotty

While they’ve been around for well over a decade, ‘thematic’ ETFs have become much more popular in recent years.

The idea is that investors can easily put money into a fund which aims to track an index comprised of a subset of companies who share commonality around a certain theme.

As the name suggests, thematic ETFs offer investors the opportunity to actively invest in that specific field, or theme, without needing to buy lots of individual stocks themselves.

That makes thematic ETFs both similar to, and different from, so-called sector ETFs, which focus on a traditional industry sector, such as Banking, Retail, or Consumer Staples.

Companies held within thematic ETFs often track across different traditional sectors. For example, an ETF focusing on Robotics may contain one company focused on Artificial Intelligence (IT sector), another which manufactures industrial robots (Industrial sector), and one which provides automated surgical equipment (Healthcare sector).

Variations on a theme

There are at least a hundred such thematic ETFs now trading on European exchanges – and many more in the US.

Themes include ‘Ageing Populations’, ‘eSports & Gaming’, and ‘The Future of Food’. They are often focused on future perceived trends or fields.

In recent years, these thematic funds have become especially popular with younger investors who may have a higher risk tolerance – or a higher misunderstanding of risk.

The lowering (or elimination) of share dealing fees and the introduction of fractional share trading has also made it easier to allocate money towards such funds – and to trade in and out of them at will.

The following graph from Defiance ETFs shows the huge flow of funds into thematic ETFs since the start of 2020, compared to other ETF categories such as Financials and Energy:

Source: Defiance ETFs

Storming or performing?

Performance of thematic funds, as with any asset or sub-asset class, is difficult to gauge.

Picking different start dates can change the theoretical returns. And as most investors adjust their holdings over time – ‘dollar-cost averaging’ in at best or selling their winners at worst – the performance over fixed dates can be misleading.

The Accumulator was underwhelmed when he reviewed several popular thematic ETFs in his ten-year review in late 2019.

A deeper delve into thematic ETFs can also be found at The Evidence-Based Investor. Its conclusion was that thematic funds have put up market-beating returns on a 3-5 year timeframe. But they’ve done worse over ten years.

In addition, thematic ETFs were more volatile. That can impact returns over the longer term.

We also need to touch upon costs.

Many large passive ETFs that track broad stock indices have very low costs. Annual charges can be below 0.1%.

In contrast, thematic ETF providers may charge 0.4% or more. This sort of fee drag will dig into your returns over time.

Higher costs may be justified if the ETF is invested in tricky international stocks, or in small cap companies with limited liquidity. But often these ETFs buy large liquid companies listed on major exchanges.

In that case the higher fees charged will go straight into the pockets of the ETF’s management company and the associated index providers.

Risk or reward?

Many of the popular thematic ETFs are focused on the future, with funds often heavily exposed to growth-orientated technology companies.

In a world of relatively slow growth rates and low interest rates, these shares have done well recently due to their strong revenue growth figures and that ultra-low interest rate environment, which boosts the value of their future cash flows.

However if global interest rates start rising, it’s likely that there will be a hit to the valuations of such companies.

Furthermore, we need to be mindful of concentration risk.

If you purchase a broader ETF such as one tracking the S&P 500 in the USA, you have exposure to a mixture of sectors. This will include Financials, Energy, Retail, and Construction, as well as technology. If a particular sector struggles, others may pick up the slack.

In contrast, it’s likely most individual companies in a specific Thematic ETF will move in relative lockstep as there is little diversification. We saw that at the start of this year, when the iShares Clean Energy ETF plunged by around 30% in a couple of months as the sector fell out of favour.

Another consideration is that some companies included within a thematic ETF may have relatively small market capitalisations. This means they could end up being owned in large part by such ETFs.

Should investors’ preferences change and the ETFs get dumped, the funds in turn could be unloading shares in relatively illiquid companies. That could exacerbate share price movements to the downside, increasing volatility.

Holding on

It’s therefore important to look under the hood of a thematic ETF. At the least you should establish the number of individual holdings, and scan to see if anything interesting pops out.

You can do this by pasting the ETF name into a search engine and going to the provider’s website. There should be information on returns, any dividend yields, and exposures to regions and currencies.

As an example of what you might find, until recently the aforementioned iShares Clean Energy ETF only held around 30 companies. Compare that to a world tracker, which could hold more than 3,000. Clearly each individual company will have a far larger impact in the concentrated portfolio.

Furthermore, individual weightings matter. Do the companies held by the ETF have a fairly equal weighting? Or do just a handful make up a large proportion of the fund? In the latter case performance could again be driven by just a few giant positions.

Some holdings within an ETF may only be tangentially related to the theme in question, at least in your view. The index provider will determine how strict or loose its criteria is. Candidate holdings may only need a 25% revenue exposure to the theme to be eligible, for instance.

Consider too the overlap with any existing investments you may own.

Many specialist funds contain giants like Apple, Google, and Amazon – which you probably already hold in your passive global tracker. You’ll be paying a higher cost to hold more of them within a thematic ETF, and increasing your reliance on their performance, too.

High? Low? Silver?

Individual investors are unlikely to beat the market over a long time horizon if they deviate away from passive index trackers – and that includes making forays into thematic ETFs.

With such ETFs, costs – a key determinant of returns – are higher, returns more volatile, and some themes may be subject to boom and bust swings that gyrate with the economic cycle or investor sentiment.

Thematic ETFs do offer the more adventurous investor a glimpse of a more exotic investing world. But caution and due diligence are vital.

See more articles from The Lone Exchanger in their archive.

{ 5 comments }