"Loophole" is a loaded word that IMHO is being misused here. Since ETFs trade on exchanges they don't exactly fit into the 1940 Investment Company Act's rules for OEFs. That Act allows them to individually apply for "exemptive relief" so that ETFs can operate despite the incompatible rules.
If that procedure is a "loophole", then what they're getting is a gaping hole. That's because starting now most ETFs get to do the same thing they've always been doing, except without having to ask for permission. It's now automatic.
Nor has the exemption procedure (the so called "loophole") been eliminated. Leveraged ETFs, ETFs structured as UITs, and Vanguard patented ETFs (structured as share classes of OEFs) still have to go through this procedure. So the procedure is still available. Just not often needed.
Note that this new rule is available only for funds that are willing to disclose holdings daily. Currently, passively managed funds need only disclose quarterly, like OEFs. That option remains, but those ETFs wanting to disclose less than daily will still have to seek "exemptive relief" - using ye olde "loophole".
SEC press release: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2019-190
SEC final rule: https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2019/33-10695.pdf

FYI: Reader Charles Calvert stepped off the USS Shangri-La and into civilian life in 1961 at the National Savings and Trust in Washington, D.C. Little did the tyro securities analyst realize that interest rates were poised for a 20-year lurch to the upside followed by a multigenerational break to the downside.
He realizes it now. Like many who came of age in the inflation of the late 20th century, Calvert has had the devil’s own time adjusting to the era of subzero percent bond yields. He can’t get it out of his head that the borrower ought to pay the lender, not the other way around.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/jim-grant-theres-trouble-ahead-for-austrias-100-year-bonds-51569615760?mod=djem_b_Weekly Feed for Barrons Magazine

FYI: Harvard University’s endowment gained 6.5% in fiscal 2019, joining other colleges in a year of lackluster performance.
College endowments are now reporting investment returns for the fiscal year ended in June, and they’re getting beat by the S&P 500, which gained more than 10% in the same period.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/harvard-endowment-gains-6-5-in-lackluster-year-for-college-endowments-51569590704?mod=hp_LEAD_2

FYI: (This is a follow-up article.)
The $4 trillion exchange-traded fund industry has, for the last 27 years, operated via a quirk in the law. After some dramatic back-and-forth this week, the Securities and Exchange Commission has finally changed that.
The 2,273 ETFs on the market today have essentially been created via a loophole in the law that governs mutual funds and other investment products for individual investors. The much-hyped and long-awaited “ETF Rule” was supposed to change that, making it easier for companies to create new products. After canceling an open meeting scheduled for Wednesday to vote on this proposed regulation, the SEC announced on Thursday that it has in fact adopted the ETF Rule, more officially known as Rule 6c-11.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/will-the-secs-new-etf-rule-benefit-investors-51569519577?mod=djem_b_Weekly Feed for Barrons Magazine

FYI: The Federal Reserve’s latest rate cuts are taking yields back down to nearly zero percent at online brokers.
TD Ameritrade reduced the interest it pays on cash sweep deposits by 0.03 of a percentage point on balances under $200,000. The annual percentage yield on cash at TD now ranges from 0.01%-0.04%.
In a note published Thursday, Credit Suisse analyst Craig Siegenthaler said that with the yield reductions, TD is “running out of room” to offset the next Fed rate cuts.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/your-cash-is-earning-even-less-at-one-online-broker-after-the-feds-rate-cut-51569513908?refsec=income-investing

nothing at all :)
just that they exist and are visible
event recently
https://time.com/5675575/hillary-clinton-emails-art-exhibition/

@Crash. Ditto on deplorable MI roads. We often remark on how much better the surfaces are when we travel to other states. The other day we returned to DTW and took the shuttle to our parking lot. The short ride was so rough that I said, "Well, we know we're home," and other shuttle passengers nodded in agreement.

I thought the roads in Arizona were terrific when I visited about 5 years ago. Wondered if McCain maybe pulled some strings in D.C. to get the funding? Problem in Michigan is the people back the anti-tax pols. And there aren’t many road builders willing to work for free.
Apologies @Puddenhead. This thread has really strayed.
Re investments
- I’ve avoided even short term bonds after the pullback at the short end, which temporarily boosted their return. Mostly MM and ultra short for me as far as the cash sleeve goes. That said, I continue my allocations to RPSIX, DODLX, and PREMX. S*** - Your fixed income $$ has to go somewhere.
- Just slightly overweight the miners. About 4-5% vrs a normal 2-3% weighting. I’m optimistic for gold. Think it will really break out one of these days, but it can be awfully painful to own shorter term. Plus, what I “think” will happen doesn’t always.
- Otherwise, normal weighting in a conservative, diversified portfolio.

This article provides a good background discussion about IOFIX...including the niche, the process, the people, and the competition.

IOFIX offers a pure-play into one of our favorite areas of the bond market, non-agency MBS.
The trade on legacy non-agency MBS is waning, thanks to lower rates and improving homeowner balance sheets.
The fund is a great play to add defense to your portfolio while generating a fairly safe 5%+ yield.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4293861-alphacentric-income-opportunities-fund-offers-safe-5_21-percent-yield-limited-time

impeachment risks was 42% yesterday w/ vegas betting
2020 odds:
trump 1:1
warren 800+:100
biden 650+:100
sander 1000+:100
if it does go through, many states Trump maybe stronger and Democrats may loose house + 2020 president.
never seen so much corruptions recently

FYI: Cumulative assets in the U.S. exchange-traded fund industry zoomed 90% during a nearly five-year period through last month and now hover around the $4 trillion mark, but this amazing growth story has a downside in that 24% of ETFs closed during that period and another 7% are rapidly declining, according to statistics from investment research firm CFRA.
CFRA last month bolstered its in-house research chops when it acquired data-and-analytics firm First Bridge Data LLC, and CFRA today held a media call that utilized First Bridge’s research muscle to provide an in-depth look at the winners and losers in the ETF space during the period from December 2014 through August 2019.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.fa-mag.com/news/roughly-25--of-etfs-closed-during-past-five-years-51860.html?print

Interesting graphic displaying companies by revenue in 2019...Energy companies look good...also, Walmart's revenue was twice what Amazon has done so far in 2019 ($514B vs $233B)
https://screencast.com/t/ez3tesnf8T6
Article:
https://howmuch.net/articles/worlds-largest-companies-by-revenue
Comparing VGENX to VDE since March of 2009. VGENX has outpaced it's ETF counterpart...especially since 2016.
https://screencast.com/t/y3lXBxQdHO

You're conflating delivery mechanism (with various effects of their own) with addictive substances. The addictive substance in e-cigarettes such as Juul is nicotine. Same as in cigarettes, cigars, etc.
Cigarettes are proven much more dangerous? Fair enough to say that cigarettes are proven dangerous. What one can't say is that e-cigarettes are proven to be less dangerous. Where are the 30 year studies? Oh, wait.
When even the relatively toothless FDA (I agree with you on that) says that Juul hasn't proven its products to be safer, it seems fair to ask where's the proof (not just fragmentary evidence, but "proof").
https://www.wired.com/story/fda-juul-cant-claim-safer-cigarettes/
Nicotine issue ignored?
https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/ctp-newsroom/fdas-comprehensive-plan-tobacco-and-nicotine-regulation
From an investor perspective, Fidelity went out on a limb investing in a company where (according to the cited article) 80% of its revenues come from flavored products. The historical pushback on cigarette ads targeted at youths was well known before recent events unfolded. Foreseeable risk.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4293351-vanguard-energy-etf-time-greedy-market-fearful
Vanguard Energy ETF (VDE) owns a portfolio of giant and large-cap U.S. stocks in the energy sector.
Summary
VDE’s portfolio of stocks consists of mostly giant-cap and large-cap U.S. energy stocks.
The ETF has not performed well in the past year due to weak demand caused by a slowdown in the global economy.
Fortunately, stocks in VDE’s portfolio are stocks with moats and have generated excessive cash flows from its operations.
The fund pays an attractive 3.5%-yielding dividend.

Watch out while you're there in the home of the Zags, @Crash. You may not realize it's time to zig and fail to sell timely. LOL. Enjoy your travels.

...It was indeed a great vacation with my best friend. So far away, but it's just a plane ride away, too. The birches in the southern interior of B.C. and Alberta have all turned. Bright golden color on the leaves. Lovely. And the sumac is nuclear red. My friend got lucky at a few different casinos. Small stakes, but coming away with a profit from places like that takes some doing. Toronto-Pearson Airport was my going and returning stop. My official review of YYZ is that it is a total cluster-fuck. Never again. At the Calgary Airport, there are all kinds of volunteers in cowboy hats to assist, and they helped us in a big way. Kudos to them. The Calgary Airport (YYC) is not a cluster-fuck.
Roads throughout southern B.C. and Alberta are being worked on, extensively. Even in the shadow of the Rockies, and up around latitude 50, the road conditions are fabulous compared to Massachusetts. When will we learn? BTW, the weather forecast for Calgary on Friday, 27 Sept. includes rain/snow showers. Jeez. Even so, it's too early to stick to the ground and the roads. But it will be a chilly 26 F. out there, that night.
LINKS:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson,_British_Columbia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley,_British_Columbia

What pops out immediately from JABAX's portfolio is that its equity sleeve is large cap growth, and has been at least leaning that way for the past five years or longer. See here. We've been in a long period, virtually the whole tenure of MPinto, where growth has outperformed value.
This raises the questions (1) whether its good performance has been due in part simply to this bias, and (2) whether this is where the manager is comfortable investing or whether he would shift to value (and under what conditions)?
It's hard to answer #2. To address #1, I ran a quick analysis using Portfolio Visualizer.
I ran back tests from May 2005 to the present, comparing JABAX with VWELX and with 60/40 mixes of VOOG & VBTLX (to check JABAX value add vs. index funds) and VOOV & VBTLX (for VWELX value add vs. index funds). Rebalanced quarterly.
From best to worst annualized returns:
VOOG/VBTLX: 10.43% (growth mix)
VWELX: 9.74%
JABAX: 9.32%
VOOV/VBTLX: 8.36% (value mix)

You will have slightly different results is you punch in VWENX instead of VWELX, if the admiral shares go back that far. Has a lower fee/higher yield.

Does this look a little similar to Grandeur Peak Global Advisors?
From Wasatch website:
https://www.wasatchglobal.com/wasatch-advisors-rebrands-as-wasatch-global-investors/
News / September 24, 2019
Wasatch Advisors Rebrands as Wasatch Global Investors
New branding better reflects the firm’s global investment management business
Salt Lake City, Utah, September 24, 2019—Independent investment manager Wasatch Advisors has rebranded as Wasatch Global Investors, the firm announced today. There are no changes in ownership, employees, philosophy or process.
“The name Wasatch Global Investors better reflects our global business and clearly expresses our 100% focus on investment management,” said Eric Bergeson, President. “Our roots are in U.S. small-cap investing, but our process has proven successful in identifying high-quality businesses of all sizes around the world. Today, almost half of our $18.5 billion in assets under management is invested in dedicated ex-U.S. and global strategies.”
Wasatch CEO and portfolio manager JB Taylor said, “Our new name highlights our heritage as long-term investors. Our advantage starts with our culture, and a long-term perspective is part of that. Our best ideas come from seeing future potential, not short-term opportunities for trading or speculation.”
Wasatch offers 16 strategies that span market caps and geographies. Across all of them, what most defines Wasatch’s approach is a collaborative culture that embraces unique and diverging viewpoints. Taylor said, “To get to our best ideas, we debate—sometimes fiercely—with a motto of disagreeing without being disagreeable. Our employees are diverse, curious, creative and, most importantly, a team.”
In conjunction with its name change, Wasatch Global Investors today unveiled new visual branding and launched a new website, wasatchglobal.com, serving both institutional and individual investors.
Wasatch’s team members bring a truly global perspective to investment management, having lived in 42 countries and speaking 23 languages. Last year, the team visited 23 countries performing intensive due diligence to find the highest-quality, long-duration growth companies in the world.
About Wasatch Global Investors
Wasatch Global Investors is a 100% employee-owned investment manager founded in 1975 and headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah. Named after the nearby Wasatch Mountain Range, the firm brings unparalleled experience to U.S. and international micro-, small- and mid-cap investing with a culture that emphasizes collaboration, excellence and intellectual curiosity. Wasatch had $18.5 billion in assets under management as of June 30, 2019. Wasatch Global Investors is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Learn more at wasatchglobal.com.

Boundary confusion here.
When StockCharts shows a heading of Dec 7, 2018 - Sept 24, 2019, it means the performance on those days, inclusive. So if there were no dividends, one would just take the closing price on Sept. 24 and divide it by the closing price on Dec 6 (and multiply by $10K) to get the final value of a $10K investment.
StockChart graph for VTSMX.
Since the fund had divs, you can use the adjusted prices from Yahoo to verify that this is in fact what StockCharts is showing (correctly). FWIW, I cross checked Yahoo's daily prices with Vanguard's data, incorporated the divs from Vanguard, and came up with $11,370. Clearly some rounding errors by someone, but close enough to validate the StockCharts price.
M*'s handling of the boundary dates is a bit problematic. The chart linked to here will illustrate. It graphs VTSMX from Dec 7, 2018 to Dec 10, 2018. (Weekend days were Dec 8 and Dec 9.)
Notice that there are three prices in the graph, i.e. two changes. Since this spans a weekend, that must mean that it is including the performances of Dec 7 (Friday), and Dec 10 (Mon). But it shows the starting value on Dec 7 as $10K, and a drop (to $9770.83) on Dec 8th, a Saturday. After one day with no price change (for the weekend) it shows a price change on the 10th. But a weekend must have two days with no price changes.
Regardless, it would appear that M*, like StockCharts, plots performance inclusive of the start date. It is just struggling with how to represent the change on the first date. (In fairness, StockCharts doesn't do any better; here's its chart going from Sept 23 to Sept 24, and it shows only one price change.) Or perhaps not ...
Rather than waste time reverse engineering how these tools handle their start points over different time spans, I'll just suggest you look at this M* graph of VTSMX from Dec 8 to Sept 24. Dec 8 was a Saturday, so in theory this should make no difference (but it does). This graph shows a final value of $11,371, within a dollar of my calculation and a couple of bucks or so of StockCharts.

I found this information connected to M*. No date stamp was with this information; so I can only presume this is their correct method as of today.
Growth of 10,000
The Growth of $10,000 graph shows a fund's performance based on how $10,000 invested in the fund would have grown over time with dividends reinvested. The returns used in the graph are not load-adjusted. The growth of $10,000 begins at the fund's inception, or the first year listed on the graph, whichever is appropriate. Located alongside the fund's graph line is a line that represents the growth of $10,000 in either the S&P 500 Index (for stock funds and hybrid funds) or the LB Aggregate Index (for bond funds). Both lines are plotted on a logarithmic scale, so that identical percentage changes in the value of an investment have the same vertical distance on the graph. This provides a more accurate representation of performance than would a simple arithmetic graph. The graphs are scaled so that the full length of the vertical axis represents a tenfold increase in investment value. For securities with returns that have exhibited greater than a tenfold increase over the period shown in the graph, the vertical axis has been compressed accordingly.

fwiw, just checked DODGX for the same ~5k-day period on M* and SC and results look pretty different also

@davidrmoran I don't dismiss what one may discover at M*, just that I use the chart info provided to obtain a "total return" for whatever given period.
Yes, it is not easy to get an exact start date, but I was able to review the chart with a starting date of 4-21-2005; which is close enough over such a long time frame.
I find JABAX and VWELX even at +211%.
The other four for this time period range from +171 to +160%.
ALSO, that as one moves the left side slider to the right to shorten the time frame, more interesting changes may be seen.
Obviously, being active managed funds; their paths vary based upon management choices during the period(s).
FPACX running with high cash positions recently will show in their returns vs the others. Although I don't know what "cash" means in this case.
I can not offer more to this discussion, IMHO.
Take care,
Catch