Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

The Master ETF
Matthew Hougan has an interesting idea:
What would your portfolio look like if you bought the five-largest ETFs on the market and weighted them based on assets under management?
- 51% U.S. Equities (41% SPY, 10% QQQQ)
- 39% Foreign Equities (25% EFA developed markets, 14% EEM emerging markets)
- 10% Gold (GLD)
The costs would be just 28 basis points per year (0.28%).
But why stop at five? If you extended it to ten, the proportion in US equities would go up substantially, and five seems a very arbitrary cut-off.
Instead, just keep on going. Take all of the listed ETFs, and weight them by AUM. The result would be a much better indication of where people are really invested than a relatively narrow index like the S&P 500. There would be stocks and bonds, real estate and commodities, emerging markets and currencies - everything.
Obviously, this isn't something you could easily do at home with a Charles Schwab account. But if a financial institution offered a Master ETF along such lines, it could act as quite an attractive one-stop investment. Yes, it would suffer from the same problem that all cap-weighted indices have, of chasing bubbles - that's why gold is in the top five. But if you're OK with cap-weighted indices in general, then this could be a useful addition to the ETF space. The only problem, of course, is that if it took off, it would have to start buying shares in itself...
(Via Abnormal Returns)






