The Dark Side of ETFs – Passive Regression – The Trouble with ETFs

Published on
August 18th, 2017
30 minutes

The Dark Side of ETFs – Passive Regression – The Trouble with ETFs

Presentations ·
Featuring Grant Williams

Published on: August 18th, 2017 • Duration: 30 minutes

When Grant Williams sat down for a presentation on ETFs with Steve Bregman of Horizon Kinetics it was mind blowing, as the true realities of investing in these instruments were unraveled. In a pre-cursor to his interview with Steve later this week, Grant charts the rise of the 5,000 plus ETF market and the trouble that could be in store for financial markets from the proliferation of passive investing. Filmed on August 2, 2017, in the Cayman Islands


  • CT
    Craig T.
    21 November 2018 @ 22:43
    I found the index mutual fund history very interesting. The comments/analysis of some of the investing "names" about ETFs and passive investing were VERY enlightening. I just started the series. It looks to be a serious education coming.
  • DS
    David S.
    22 October 2017 @ 02:47
    After reading the comments, pro and con, I think there is a lot of common ground on high risk, highly leveraged and low turnover ETFs. Many baby-boomers are trying to increase retirement investments before it is too late; thereby flooding the markets with cash. The major market ETFs are a reasonable part of a long-term balanced portfolio. There are, however, enormous pitfalls for markets and individuals within the current ETF landscape. This series is trying to point them out. There is no doubt that we are in uncharted waters. Market corrections normally follows when too many people are doing the same thing or have a common belief like house prices will always go up. DLS
  • JD
    Joe D.
    18 October 2017 @ 21:00
    OK - Understand the issues, but active isn't always that great either. You get on the wrong side of the brokers trade, or just get killed by churning, or locked into the broker's firm's products, and so on. Looking forward to the rest of the series.
  • TB
    Tad B.
    15 September 2017 @ 22:02
    I'm intrigued..... and a bit worried. I've had it with crusty old 'mangers' working their ticket for fees and, like many others, have built a portfolio around themes "best" (or seemingly so) represented by ETFs.... Selling anything when it all goes south is always going to be a problem; we all know this. Misrepresentation & fraud are different though. I'm gonna watch these vids now.... been putting it off. Grant, your intro was as exquisitely put as usual ! Thankyou.
  • JM
    James M.
    11 September 2017 @ 11:41
    Grant ain't the best interviewer as hes too soft on the guests and doesn't ask the most probing questions IMO, which is cool i get it that's his style. But he sure does an excellent job in presentations no matter the subject he covers. I have learnt a lot from this fella even though I often disagree with him. Cheers.
  • ST
    Simon T.
    29 August 2017 @ 03:20
    Great intro to a fascinating topic thanks Grant, one point on index investing that concerns me is that most (not all) indicies are market cap. weighted. As such you are buying a bigger % of assets while they are at higher prices. Think Gold GICS2 sector in Australia which got upto circa 6% of the index it's now 1.85%... only criticism bit repetitive.
  • DP
    Daniel P.
    23 August 2017 @ 14:20
    Excellent. Keep up the awesome work Grant.
  • SS
    Sam S.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:02
    Slow down on the conversation as hard to digest the subject when moving so fast. I do love Grant best. Can't wait to watch and the "real vision" of the ETF market will be all telling for the future. So true that the emotions from the GFC are still strong and powerful.
    • MR
      Mark R.
      23 August 2017 @ 00:44
      i rely on the pause button and google search - when it moves too fast for me.
  • Sv
    Sid v.
    17 August 2017 @ 17:57
    why do i feel like Grant is a friend of mine? I am sure getting to know him as i hear or see him so much. Interesting. I hear what you are saying, but i can not see the problem with investing in ETFs that are a liquid as individual shares of companies?
    • BM
      Bryan M.
      19 August 2017 @ 05:49
      Wait for the next "big one" and you'll find out.
    • MR
      Mark R.
      23 August 2017 @ 00:36
      I think the problem is a combination of an over valued stock market with a number of stocks being especially over valued because of the blind ETF investing. When the air starts to go out of the market the ETF's will be sold and the market cap metric used to choose those stocks will reverse - smart buyers will not be around to provide a bid until valuations appear to be attractive.
  • BW
    B. W.
    21 August 2017 @ 05:41
    I'm having trouble with the math here. If passive funds have grown to $6T in the past 10 yrs, and active funds have grown to $24T in that same period, how are we going to see parity in the US by 6 months from now? If these are global figures, it still seems like a stretch to suggest that it will be 38%/62% in six months if we are at 20/80 now. Or is it the case that Morningstar's data simply does not agree with the other source that projects the more radical numbers?
  • EF
    Eric F.
    20 August 2017 @ 22:59
    The question for me is - how to best play this for profit?
  • JH
    Jesse H.
    17 August 2017 @ 22:08
    Great stuff, Grant - some fascinating info to absorb -- this also syncs up well with the 26 charts sent out earlier from RV publications. This matches my core observation / thesis that by and large, most of today's money in the markets is speculative rather than investment-related. It makes me long for a time when our world was simpler, and growth of AUM was about careful, multi-year decisions with occasional rebalancing. Not this ultra fast tech BS that has significantly exacerbated the predominant "get rich quick" culture. Benjamin Grant must be rolling in his grave.
    • GM
      Gerald M.
      18 August 2017 @ 01:34
      Those days have never existed in the market. Read any of the classics like "Reminiscences of a Stock Operator " or "How I Made $2,000,000 in the Stock Market" or many other "old" books from yesteryear. The most careful thing done in last century's stock market was marketing. But in any event, what happened then was then. 2017 is where you need to be ;-)
    • JH
      Jesse H.
      20 August 2017 @ 17:04
      Hi Gerald - I respectfully disagree that "those days have never existed in the market." Perhaps I was unclear - I wasn't saying that speculation is a new phenomenon in markets (it goes back beyond the Roman Empire most likely). What I was trying to say was that there used to be an approach to seeing money grow over time through slower, more long-term decision-making. I think a number of factors today have combined to drive a type of short-termism which is actually relatively new in recorded financial history.
  • MC
    M C.
    18 August 2017 @ 01:24
    grant, your fear mongering when it comes to ETFs is getting tiresome and this was probably the worst bit of "reporting" ive seen on real vision. I can call out almost every single point but unfortunately am limited in time and space. First let me first exclude from my brief rebuttal any leveraged ETFs and those at the margins which have absolutely no basis being used by any retail account. Now let's address Sanford Bernstein's research. Equating passive ETF investing to Marxism is absolute trash Ask your self why? could it be that passive investing is one of the main drivers compressing Wall St commission revenues and keeping more money in the pockets of average people ?!? What Jack Bogle and academia have known and index ETFs are addressing is - control the one variable that can be controlled to give investors the best chance for LONG term investment success - COST. Passive investing has exposed an active industry that in some/many cases never even came close to providing the risk adjusted returns commensurate with the fees they were charging. Next: passive ETFs are not just passive. Smart active managers are using passive ETFs as an efficient vehicle to obtain exposures in an active portfolio With respect to the ETF technology functioning in stressed markets - they have. High yield ETFs during the oil collapse, country ETFs such as Egypt and Greek during periods when the entire country market was closed - the ETF provided price discovery. there are many more examples. Not a very well researched or even moderately balanced piece.
    • HK
      H K.
      18 August 2017 @ 08:41
      agree. I would like to understand the down votes to that comment.
    • PU
      Peter U.
      18 August 2017 @ 09:46
      Henning K., please read the last two letters from Howard Marks at Oaktree Capital. Howard dives deeper into the potential dangers of the growth in ETF, especially, bond ETFs.
    • GW
      Grant W. | Founder
      18 August 2017 @ 13:33
      Hey MC.... to be clear, I am not averse to ETFs such as the SPDRs which enable investors to track indexes easily and replicate them in a low-cost fashion. The problem comes with trying to express complicated trades in simple fashion (take HYG and JNK for example - how liquid will they be when the market is trying to sell them aggressively? I don't know, but I can guess). I think, once you've seen the full interview with Steve Bregman, you'll have a better understanding of the full thrust of this argument and, while it's impossible to lay out an entire thesis surrounding ETFs in one piece, what Steve does is pick apart some of the 'plumbing' and demonstrate some of the things that investors probably don't realise when opting to "go long biotech" or "go long junk bonds" - two ideas which, pre-ETFs would have meant considerable research to identify either good companies or sound credits but which are now reduced to a click of a mouse. Steve's observations are fascinating and, to me at least, scary. Again, it's not that ETFs shouldn't be used - I agree with Jack Bogle as I said in my piece - there is definitely a place for them. I just happen to think that the more esoteric ones or the double-, triple- or even quadruple-leveraged vehicles will appeal in large part to the last people who really ought to use them to invest. Either way, I appreciate the feedback and I hope you watch and enjoy the conversation with Steve. If not, I'll see you back here on the weekend ;) Cheers
    • MC
      M C.
      18 August 2017 @ 15:26
      Appreciate the comment Grant. I will absolutely listen to Steve's interview though I have disagreed with his point of view on ETFs before. Unfortunately, comment section is not a great venue to debate the finer points but i certainly appreciate a lively and spirited debate. Best MC
    • GW
      Grant W. | Founder
      18 August 2017 @ 15:39
      Likewise! There's no cut-and-dried answer and nobody (least of all Steve himself) believes he is 100% right and everybody else is wrong, but he's one of the only guys looking at the possible downside (of which there is one to everything) of a vehicle which has mushroomed during the most benign, upward-trending market in living memory. I thoroughly enjoyed my conversation with him (as I hope will the Real Vision audience) and that extends to conversations like this, MC! Thanks for getting involved in the debate
    • AE
      Alex E.
      19 August 2017 @ 02:11
      "Next: passive ETFs are not just passive. Smart active managers are using passive ETFs as an efficient vehicle to obtain exposures in an active portfolio" So, fees on top of fees is a good thing...
    • WM
      Will M.
      20 August 2017 @ 13:59
      Having watched the series now I think MC your comment about this being a "Not a very well researched or even moderately balanced piece." is a bit out of whack. Almost everyone who appears on RV is probably ten times smarter than me and I thumbs up 90% of the presentations and leave blank most of the rest. I have thumbs down only about 6 since joining. Steve Bregman's series is excellent and he came across as deeply thoughtful, humble and extremely knowledgable about the topic. There is no doubt there was (and is) a place for ETFs. I think the point of the series is that ETFs are quickly becoming a monster that will likely feed on itself in the end. Just look at the charts and extrapolate the passive sector by just another 2 to 4 years. When everybody is into something its time to think about getting out. I own GDX and could see me buying some other specialist ETFs, but I own more direct stock. Many of my colleagues have just the indexes in their 401Ks. It just all feels like another new ERA to me with few thinking its a bubble...... However it most certainly IS a bubble driven by Fed Reserve liquidity excess as never seen in history before. Having said that I expect the DOW may well soar as bonds collapse when the music stops.
  • DY
    Damian Y.
    20 August 2017 @ 04:19
    OK Grant, we know you hate ETF. Being that Real Vision is all about promoting Hedge Fund and there overpriced products, lets have a look at the two. Buffett made a famous bet in 2008 saying that passive investing will out perform Hedge Funds. In 2017 Buffett won buy a long shot. The book, A Random Walk down Wall Street, sums it up also. Grant has said many times, that there are more ETF than stocks on the NY Stock Exhange. If you combine the total number of ETF and Stocks on the NYSE then you'll still have more hedge funds than the two combined. Most Hedge Funds last for about 5 years. About 15% of Hedge Funds fail every year. The reason why people go into passive is because they perform much better than Hedge Funds and the fees are a fraction of the cost. No wonder Grant and his Hedge Fund buddies hate them so much. Yes some ETF will go under. How many listed companies have you seen that are dodgy and have gone under in your life? I would be more worried about companies and Hedge Funds going under than ETF. I've heard Grant say that ETF will go to zero and blow up. If Grant knew how they worked then he would know that if the price gets too low then they split the ETF and reprice them. During the middle part of 2000s, Hedge Funds accounted for 70%-80% of ETF Trading. The Hedge Fund will charge you 20% fee while the ETF will charge you about .5% fee. ETF have been actively used since the early 90's. How many blew up in the Tech bubble and the 2007 market melt down. A lot of companies and Hedge Fund went out of business then. If you want to learn about ETF then a good book is, A Comprehensive Guide To Exchange Traded Funds, by CFA Institute Research Foundation. Much better information that Grants interview. Type into google, why buffet hates Hedge Funds, and read what one of the greatest investors has to say about them. Buffett compares active managers to monkeys, and they are his words not mine. Grant can you please do a video about the dangers of investing in Hedge Funds and companies? Grant can you also do a video on all these overpriced financial news letter that are full of conflicting advise and how most of these so called expert get it so wrong. I do agree with Grant that the market is due for a correction and I personally aren't going long on ETF. There are some good short ETF that look very good. ETF are one of the best product for retail investors for investing in Macro.
    • GW
      Grant W. | Founder
      20 August 2017 @ 05:18
      Hi Damian I have never said that I "hate ETFs". That would be a very foolish statement. What I have tried to say is that, while I agree with Jack Bogle that Indexation and passive investment makes a lot of sense for a lot of investors, the proliferation of ETFs that try to express complex ideas in a very simple way are both largely untested in anything but gently rising markets and potentially extremely dangerous when markets reverse. As I have said many times before, 2x, 3x and even 4x leveraged ETFs do not give retail investors what they think they do and should only be used in the short term by experienced professionals. Also, offering a one-click way to buy 'junk bonds' (to choose but one of my betes noir) makes a mockery of the incredible due diligence process that seasoned investors have always done in identifying good credits and weeding out poor ones. 'Junk' may be an asset class, but it's also a valuation and, amongst the 'junk' there are always good value bonds incorrectly priced as well as debt which will ultimately go to its correct value of 0. As for my 'hedge fund buddies', I like to think I count many types of investors amongst my 'buddies' and would certainly never restrict them to hedge fund managers. I try to spend my time with good people who are smarter than me (the latter half of that Venn diagram being a far bigger circle and a very easy one to populate, fortunately!!). I am extremely lucky to count many non-hedge fund managers amongst that group and I learn an incredible amount from them. ETFs provide a very good way to invest in, for example, foreign countries but those types of ETFs will, in most cases, replicate the benchmark Index so being 'long Japan' will effectively mean being 'long the Nikkei 225' which is quasi-indexation and, for many investors, a smart strategy. God forbid anybody launches a 'Japan Junk Bond ETF' that retail investors can avail themselves of. It's impossible to answer every question when filming a conversation such as mine with Steve Bregman - such things are always a world view and, as such, a starting point for debate rather than any kind of absolute statement of fact. Many people will agree with what they hear, many will disagree (and I welcome that) but hopefully many others will have their interest piqued enough to do their own due diligence and come to their own conclusions. That, in essence, is the idea behind Real Vision. On the topic of "so-called experts getting it wrong", one has to understand that everybody who makes a prediction or a recommendation about either a specific stock or a macro theme (whether they be a newsletter writer, investment professional, hedge fund manager or retail investor) is essentially making a guess about an unknowable future so of course they will get it wrong. Often. Even the very best investors agree that getting 55% of your bets right is a great way to be successful - as long as you size those bets correctly and handle both your losses and your successes the right way. Blaming newsletter writers who make what can never be more than an educated guess about future direction misses the point. The trick, for retail investors, is to weed out the people whose process is less rigorous than others and stick with those who demonstrate a framework that stands up to scrutiny better BUT to own every trade once they decide to back it with their own money and not rely 100% on others to do the work for them. Caveat emptor. Thanks for your comment on the video. Cheers Grant
    • DY
      Damian Y.
      20 August 2017 @ 09:27
      Hello Grant, Thanks for your reply and thanks to taking the time to address some of my issues. I'm still a big fan of you and your work and I love Adventures in Finance. Keep up your great work and I always look forward to hearing your opinions. All the best, Damian
  • KG
    Kevin G.
    20 August 2017 @ 00:47
    Interesting piece. Looking forward to watching Steve's interviews next! The one thing that I would say is that it makes sense to me that a market would be part-active and part-passive. Some investors could be actively involved in the capital allocation in an economy (and attempt to earn alpha in the process), while other investors who had no special insight into capital allocation could simply accept a lower return and invest passively. An economic system that has a mix of active and passive investors seems to me like it would still be able to allocate capital effectively.
  • AE
    Alex E.
    19 August 2017 @ 02:16
    3 points to make, Mr. Williams. 1.) Faster than breakneck is "sonic". 2.) I weep for people like Kelly A who are going to get slaughtered in the coming crash. 3.) What is wrong with what Mr. Charlie Munger said: " Buy Great companies at good prices than sit on your ass!"
    • HK
      H K.
      19 August 2017 @ 08:23
      Re 3.) Nothing is wrong with that. But: Fact is that vast majority of active managers (i.e. buy stocks based on own estimate of prive/value disconnect) don't beat the market over long time horizon. The ones who do, cannot be identified a priori because there is no direct link to any characteristic. Of course, if you think you can do better than all the professionals, go ahead. But an ETF provides a very efficient, cheap tool to capture equity risk premium (without any work compared to your work and opportunities cost analyzing all those companies). And that is a good stuff for retail investors for sure (I am talking about broad market products with rather buy & hold approach here and not niche/levered whatsoever). So again, there is nothing wrong, but it is not the thing you would do totally from a rational investor standpoint. And in that context your 2. point is not really a -let's say- smart comment to make.
  • MB
    Mike B.
    17 August 2017 @ 20:44
    Can someone please tell me when this wonderful equity orgy comes to an end. Preferably a week or two before it rolls over. If it gets ugly, will the Fed not consider going to Congress to get approval to expand its wonderful tool box to include the purchase of equities. Seems to work for the BOJ and SNB. If the ETF carze actaully wipes out active managers, some entity is going to have to step in and be the equity buyer of last resort? Think about it, if the Fed convinces the bozo's in Congress to allow it to expand its toolbox to include the purchase of equities, they would not only save the equity/ETF market from collapse, they could also gift the appreciated value of the securities to the unfunded Social Security Trust. Just being silly but am expecting the unexpected ...
    • AE
      Alex E.
      19 August 2017 @ 02:04
      At what cost? Because, in the end, it is the taxpayer who foots the bill!!
  • BS
    Bruce S.
    18 August 2017 @ 23:20
    Great presentation Grant. I am a stock picker. I have disciplines. Even junk is trading at a high price. Am I to change my screens and disciplines to accommodate stupidity? 7 stocks get through my screens and I don't like them! It looks like short duration Treasuries are my only refuge. Bruce.
  • VS
    Victor S. | Contributor
    18 August 2017 @ 20:19
    Grant great reporting as always. The facts have shown the market via S&P 500 will NOT TOP IT -WILL JUST END -ONE DAY.
  • GT
    Graham T.
    18 August 2017 @ 17:53
    Do you think it would rate its own chapter in Mackay's "Extraordinary Popular Delusions..."?
  • GT
    Graham T.
    18 August 2017 @ 15:06
    7 ups and 8 downs !! You should have been a market maker Grant. Were you at Wedd or Ackroyds in a previous life?
  • GT
    Graham T.
    18 August 2017 @ 12:05
    Reason, if ,God Forbid ,reason were needed, here is why RV was created.
  • AK
    Alexander K.
    18 August 2017 @ 10:19
  • TR
    Thomas R.
    18 August 2017 @ 00:24
    I can fully appreciate the implication that in the event of a market crash - the long ETF's crash - with no bid under the underlying stocks and accelerating selling as prices fall. The examples provided appear to only address long ETF's. What about the short ETF's? or buying puts on the long ETF's? Is there an implication then of possible or probably counter-party risk with firms like Direxion on their short ETF's?
  • TS
    Tim S.
    17 August 2017 @ 22:01
    Binge baby Binge. Can hardly wait! Looks to be a very valuable discussion.
  • TS
    Tim S.
    17 August 2017 @ 22:01
    Binge baby Binge. Can hardly wait! Looks to be a very valuable discussion.
  • HK
    H K.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:13
    ETFs are just a different vehicle to access e.g. the entire US large cap universe vs an active stock picker choosing a selection of stocks (and re-weighting within that universe based on value estimate). I agree the latter is necessary for price discovery. But the valuable job for society 'unfortunately' ex ante has on average lower expected returns for investors relative to the market. Hence, from the end investors angle I can totally understand the great rotation and the billions moving from Wall Street to investors. Question then is who will pay for that 'service for society' the active mutual funds deliver, if investors don't want to do it anymore apparently. Other remark: I think the presentation in the end mixes market timing with choice of vehicle. If I believe in market timing, of course I can make the argument S&P500 is overvalued and will break down whatsoever. But if stocks tank, then that will happen to all vehicles investing into that market (active or passive) as they own the same stuff. Even if ETF accelerate the downside to stocks (which I can even agree to as they represent part of the market that cannot step in as they are 100% invested per construction) that does not help the active to outperform if they hold stocks from the same universe. It would only help if they could identify the outperforming stocks ex ante, which they cant in aggregate after costs -- the reason we have that discussion in the first place.
    • IP
      IDA P.
      17 August 2017 @ 20:10
      Investors should avoid funds and etfs for a while, I suggest you take a look at what happened on Aug. 24, 2015 to the index and to many ETFs that day. Why doesnt anyone consider buying directly stocks and bond for a while, and avoid these containers.
    • HK
      H K.
      17 August 2017 @ 21:28
      aha, if you think you are safer betting on selected stocks - go ahead. On Aug 24 2015 you had a problem in various securities if you used market orders, which is indeed a terrible thing to do. I am not looking at them to trade intraday but to express asset allocation efficiently and cheaply in long term. They are great vehicles for that. I am just annoyed that the criticism is very undifferentiated and not really valid in some points. The fact ETFs may distort price and market pricing mechanism doesn't imply anything about relative performance to active investing. Those are separate discussions and are presented at causality (at least how I understood it listening to the presentation).
  • DC
    Darrell C.
    17 August 2017 @ 21:26
    Just a devils advocate, did the active managers save us from the 2007-09 great recession....?
  • BF
    Bruce F.
    17 August 2017 @ 20:07
    brilliant. 100% agree. would be interesting to see David Kotok defend ETFs since that is his investment style.
  • IJ
    Ian J.
    17 August 2017 @ 18:53
    Hey Grant, did Hugh Hendry inspire the attire? The Dark Knight Rises.
  • CY
    C Y.
    17 August 2017 @ 18:36
    The one thing that Grant never differentiates in is the difference between systematic ETFs (smart beta) to use an annoying term and market cap ETFs. While I share his concern on the overall ETF market I do think there is a huge difference in between true passive market cap weighting and other ETFs.
  • KA
    Kelly A.
    17 August 2017 @ 14:21
    I'm not buying the Marxist argument. Sounds more like whining from active managers who failed investors. Their cozy game has been hurt, but they are still taking advantage of people. And in any case, who cares about Marx. ETFs are the free market at work. AND: There are plenty of ETFs that are about investing, not speculation. Sure, could there be a multiplier effect from ETFs in a down market? I hope so, because i plan to be using 3x ETFs for shorting it. I think Grant is ALWAYS worth listening to, and I don't disagree with his market predictions. But the Marxist stuff is a distraction of the nasal gazing type. And, BTW, let us have our 4x ETFs. Make sure they are well funded and managed, but otherwise, why not allow them? The market IS about speculation, even if you are an "investor."
    • JL
      J L.
      17 August 2017 @ 17:51
      The problem appears when certain products are dumped onto retail investors who don't know what they're buying and later sue their advisers and banks like happened in Spain with certain debt securities. To go down the route of complete deregulation you would need people to pass something like a driving test for investing and make sure they actually sign off on the potential consequences of taking on risk. else I feel they are mostly right to consider themselves victims of the system...
  • WG
    Wade G.
    17 August 2017 @ 16:54
    Simply outstanding. Thank you Mr. Williams for a cogent introduction to what I believe will be a fascinating series of videos. I'll mention I hope your work addresses the fundamental "pluming" of ETF share creation and retirement, as what little I know about it, suggests a set of potential problems in and of themselves. Thank you again for your outstanding and easily understood work.
  • DW
    David W.
    17 August 2017 @ 16:44
    Horizon is one of the best value shops out there..... Cannot wait for more Grant!
  • DR
    David R.
    17 August 2017 @ 15:19
    I too am concerned about the lack of true price discovery. But I do like that the proliferation of ETFs allow retail investors to invest more like hedge funds. We now have easy, affordable access to countries and sectors w/o taking on company specific risk.
  • BG
    Brad G.
    17 August 2017 @ 14:05
    Great point about State tax receipts as an indicator
  • HJ
    Harry J.
    17 August 2017 @ 14:04
    What about muni bond ETFS?
  • RM
    Richard M.
    17 August 2017 @ 14:02
    Wow, nice mug shot Grant (out drinking too late in the Caymans)!!! :-)
  • CR
    Charlie R.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:37
    Excellent and source-rich setup! You're right Grant - EAGER to hear your convo with Steve! Binge on!
  • EL
    Elizabeth L.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:29
    Thanks Grant for this illuminating foundation piece.
  • EG
    Eduardo G.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:25
    Standing ovation here! The number of 'robo-advisors' that are offering ETFs as the holy grail is growing at a really fast pace. None of these strategies have been put to test in a bear market, and in many cases is worrying that retail investors think that they can find better ETFs than their advisors, taking extra risks blindly. Very interesting the comparison between a Marxist economy and passively managed capital markets.
  • SH
    Stu H.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:22
    Great stuff as always, Grant. I wouldn't touch a Gold ETF with a barge pole. It defeats the very purpose of holding gold, a no counter-party risk store of value. With some very reputable allocated gold storage companies out there it's just as quick and easy to hold physical as it is the index tracking ETF. Better still find a good local dealer and hold it in your hand.
  • DM
    Daniel M.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:09
    A masterclass in spinning a yarn
  • GM
    Greg M.
    17 August 2017 @ 13:00
    Can't wait. Excellent video Grant.
  • PJ
    Peter J.
    17 August 2017 @ 12:13
    A taster for next week for those interested is Steve Bregman's presentation on James Grant site:'s%20Conference_Oct%204%202016_Steven%20Bregman_Final[2].pdf
  • RO
    Rodica O.
    17 August 2017 @ 12:02
    Grant is always bringing some great and practical info . Thanks !
  • RI
    R I.
    17 August 2017 @ 11:52
    Ironically, this series makes me want to go buy ETFs; however, only two in particular: GLD and GDX.
  • IH
    Iain H.
    17 August 2017 @ 11:09
    Can't wait!