« August 2009 | Main | October 2009 »

September 30, 2009

State of the Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) Market

Many of my clients and readers understand my general preference for exchange-traded funds (ETFs) over mutual funds.* It isn’t that I doubt the ability of any active mutual fund managers to outperform their benchmarks—plenty of them do. It’s just that if I have to pick an overall methodology to follow in my practice, I’d rather stick to the low-cost, transparent nature of ETF investing over buying actively-managed mutual funds. Back when I wrote my book in mid-2007, ETFs were graduating quickly from speculative tools to core holdings, a trend that really started in 2005. Nowadays, we can see in the constant release of fund flow data by companies like TrimTabs and Barclays that ETF investing is growing at a rapid pace while mutual fund outflows have been consistently heavy. Part of that is obviously due to investors sidelined by the recession, but the other part is the financial advisor channel quickly catching onto the benefits of ETF investing.

Each year across the street from my office Capital Link hosts the Closed-End Fund and Global ETF Forum. It’s always fascinating to see how much this conference grows year after year. When I went for the first time in 2005 it was practically a one-room discussion between 40 or 50 industry guys. This year it attracted 722 people, a confirmation of this conference as an important destination to discuss various ETF and closed-end fund trends.

Deborah Fuhr of Barclays Global Investors gave us some updated stats as of March 31st, 2009. At that point, there were 1,635 ETFs (wow!) with total assets of $633.55 billion from 87 different providers listed on 43 exchanges around the world. In 2009 alone, 66 new ETFs have been listed with improving trading volume and marketability. iShares remains the largest provider of ETFs with 369 and assets of $269.8 billion. State Street was 2nd, followed by Vanguard. In reality, we’re still nowhere near the multi-trillion dollar mutual fund industry, but I find it quite possible that ETF assets exceed $1 trillion by year-end.

On the topic of closed-end funds (CEFs), Mariana Bush of Wachovia Securities chimed in and pointed out that spreads between the closed-end fund trading prices and their net asset values have been narrowing during this recent period of strength, whereas spreads widened during the precipitous market declines earlier in the year. As many investors know, closed-end funds trade on exchanges like stocks but alienate some investors due to their ongoing discounts and premiums to net asset value. Mariana pointed out that leveraged closed-end funds often account for this dramatic spread which may narrow further as fund managers take on less leverage and become increasingly realistic about their total return expectations. Personally, I think the space has more opportunities than most investors realize, especially in improving markets such as the one we appear to be in. Obviously investors should do their homework in terms of exploring the costs, expenses, liquidity, safety, etc, before jumping into any investment product.

Russell Bailyn
--
Wealth Manager
Premier Financial Advisors, Inc
14 E 60th St. Suite 402
New York, NY 10022
P: 212-752-4343 *231
F: 212-752-7673
rbailyn@premieradvisors.net

*An investor should carefully consider investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses before investing in an Exchange Traded Fund. This information and more complete information, including potential risks, is included in each ETF prospectus, which can be obtained from their financial professional or by calling the investment company directly. Read the prospectus carefully before investing.

Equity-based ETFs are subject to risks similar to those of stocks; fixed income ETFs are subject to risks similar to those of bonds. Investment returns will fluctuate and are subject to market volatility. Shares may be worth more or less than their original cost when sold. Foreign investments have unique and greater risks than domestic investments. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Although exchange-traded funds are designed to provide investment results that generally correspond to the price and yield performance of their respective underlying indexes, the trusts may not be able to exactly replicate the performance of the indexes because of trust expenses and other factors.

Securities and certain investment advisory services offered through: First Allied Securities, Inc., a registered Broker/Dealer. Member: FINRA/SIPC. Premier Financial Advisors, Inc. is a Registered Investment Advisor. First Allied Securities & Premier Financial Advisors are not affiliated entities.

September 11, 2009

Going Independent? Is it Better to be an RIA or IAR?

There was a great article in last month's Financial Advisor magazine which compares RIAs and IARs. To anybody reading this article not in the financial services industry those anagrams probably mean almost nothing. However, they represent important operational choices which an advisor must make when venturing out of the wirehouse channel and into smaller, independent firms. RIA stands for Registered Investment Advisor. This is generally considered to be the most free and flexible business structure which an advisor can choose to reduce his/her exposure to onerous regulatory oversight and obtain more freedom in terms of clearing firm options, investment products and payout percentage. The choice to become an IAR (Investment Advisor Representative) may be viewed as somewhere in between total freedom and partial oversight. The difference is that IARs can rely on the back-office support offered by broker/dealers. As the article in Financial Advisor concludes, plenty of advisors are moving into the broker/dealer channel rather than opening up their own RIA, the result of a tighter compliance environment and a slumping economy.

A few years ago the real financial planning 'purists' would probably have told you that being an RIA is the only real way to assure pure objectivity. Because having an association with a broker/dealer can sometimes limit an advisor's options in terms of clearing firms, investment products and compensation models, some would say that it's not as flexible clients as the pure RIA structure. However, when considering the regulatory and economic
environment which we've landed in over the past five years or so, it becomes clearer why a trend is emerging in which advisors move into the broker/dealer channel first and then consider opening up their own shops.

One consideration before opening an RIA is the compliance burden. Understanding the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, along with its recent updates in terms of written policies and procedures, is anything but easy. It may be cost effective for larger RIA firms ($100M+ under management) to hire their own compliance officer, but a smaller firm would quite possibly drown with this sort of added expense. You see, RIA firms may be able to pay themselves out 100% of their compensation, but they are also responsible for eating every fee and expense associated with running an investment advisory business. And those expenses extend beyond compliance and into areas such as technology. In order to run an efficient and competitive practice, you'll need product research, trading platforms, sales ideas, insurance coverage, etc. Some of this you may be able to obtain through an arrangement with your clearing firm, but a lot of the valuable extras only become affordable when a broker/dealer is contracting on behalf of hundreds, if not thousands of advisors. For some advisors, paying out 5% or 10% or maybe even 20% of gross revenues may be a small price to pay for handing off many of these responsibilities to a broker/dealer.

As mentioned above, the sour economy over the past year also provides a reason why some advisors might stick around the broker/dealer channel before rushing to open their own RIA. Under the RIA model, the advisor is being compensated with fees, usually either flat or a percentage of assets under management. Because stock market portfolios are down so much, advisory fees and overall compensation are down this year. Advisors may choose to hold onto that series 7 and stick around their broker/dealer to continue receiving trailer income from commissionable investment products. Basically, this isn't the ideal economic environment in which to risk earning less money while spending more to gain some independence. That entrepreneurial mindset will likely resume as the economy continues to improve.

All things considered, it's a good dilemma to have if you're trying to decide how to organize your investment advisory business. In all likelihood it means you're transitioning away from the increasingly unpopular commission structure. If more advisors continue to think this way it could be good for our industry's reputation as a whole.

Please don't hesitate to e-mail or call with any questions or comments.

Russell Bailyn
--
Wealth Manager
Premier Financial Advisors, Inc
14 E 60th Street, #402
New York, NY 10022
P: 212-752-4343 *231
F: 212-752-7673
rbailyn@premieradvisors.net

Securities and certain investment advisory services offered through: First Allied Securities, Inc., a registered Broker/Dealer. Member: FINRA/SIPC. Premier Financial Advisors, Inc. is a Registered Investment Advisor. First Allied Securities & Premier Financial Advisors are not affiliated entities.



Disclaimer

This site is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security, which may be referenced herein. First Allied Securities, Inc. does not endorse or support this web site, nor are they affiliated with Premier Financial Advisors. We suggest that you consult with your financial or tax advisor with regard to your individual situation. This site has been published in the United States for residents of the United States. Persons mentioned in this site may only transact business in states in which they have been properly registered or are exempt from registration.

Securities offered through First Allied Securities, Inc., a registered broker/dealer. Member FINRA / SIPC. Advisery services offered through: Premier Financial Advisors is a NY Registered Investment Advisor. Form ADV part II is available upon request.

Links are being provided for information purposes only. Premier Financial Advisors is not affiliated with and does not endorse, authorize or sponsor any of the listed websites or their respective sponsors. Premier Financial Advisors is not responsible for the content of any website or the collection or use of information regarding website's users and/or members.

Credit Card Applications
Five smart ideas for your money
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2

Seeking Alpha Certified

investing channel