Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Dave Giroux TCAF ETF : Attracting assets?

I know Dave Giroux is held in high regards here. My question is how his new ETF doing attracting new money? Has the launch been successful and what level of AUM would it need to be viable?


  • $217M so far. Still pretty new. Time to grow...? Viable? Certainly on the way, eh?
  • Shares outstanding (as of Sept 15): 8,450,000
    NAV (as of Sept 15): $25.66
    => AUM = $216.827,000

    There are people posting here who have or are running funds; they are much better positioned to say what is needed for viability, though one has to believe that $200M+ is more than enough. (Though how much of this is seed money, we don't know.)

    It's about the same size as FAN, XTN, ICSB, FXY, WDIV, and PBJ (gotta like that ticker). Generally not the broadest based ETFs around, but all seem viable.
  • Thanks for the responses. Given that Mr Giroux is widely acknowledged to be a brilliant fund manager and the access to his talent has been limited for years I would have expected faster growth. After all, investors have been waiting to invest with Giroux for years.
  • Giroux made his rep on a low-volatility balanced fund. Now he is on a different playing field. And it's crowded.

    MFO premium says you can screen for top-ten holdings, but really only allows five. As it is, Giroux is competing with 98 funds that charge .50 or less, and feature the same top five holdings. If you knock out the index funds, that still leaves 27 active competitors. Ten of those competitors charge less than .31 cents.

    Just looking at the etf's from those ten funds, his competitors from least to most expensive are: DFUS, PLRG, JUSA, and DFSU.
  • M* Performance tab shows that the new TCAF (6/14/23- ) had inflows of about $70 million/mo. Its $222.4 million AUM (M*) is decent for a new ETF. A survivable ETF typically has $50+ million AUM. True, there have been hot ETFs from other hot managers that ran up the AUM to billion soon after inception. Some new funds may be seeded by the sponsoring firms (with $50-100 million) but Price didn't do that for TCAF. Also be aware that the stocks haven't done much since mid-June as the rally has stalled.
  • edited September 19
    PRWCX has an absolutely incredible long term record under Giroux. Looking nearer term, the M* numbers say the fund lost 11.94% in 2022 and is up about 12.55% so far in 2023. Since it takes a larger % increase to make up a loss, this would mean that investors in the fund are roughly back to where they were at the beginning of 2022?

    That’s more of a question than an assertion. As I said, long term there is no disputing the manager’s success. I know 20.5 months is a very short term in investing. Just find it interesting to pick apart numbers in various ways. (And investors’ investment horizons appear to be getting shorter. Giroux has mentioned in the past that 3 years is a reasonable “break-even” point for this fund. There’s little doubt he has exceeded that.
  • @hank, FWIW, I believe Giroux's stated goal for PRWCX is to obtain S&P 500 like returns with lower volatility over a market cycle.
  • To get compound interest (or cumulative returns) - multiply by each period's (1 + rate).

    Here: (1 - 11.94%) x (1 + 12.55%) = 99.11153%, meaning that an investor's got "just" 99% of what they started with at the beginning of 2022.
  • edited September 19
    Thanks for doing the math @msf. None better.

    I also appreciate that no one has slammed me for being sacrilegious re this great fund. Like I said, it’s fun to slice and dice the numbers in a variety of ways. I suspect most who were heavy into equities at the start of ‘22 would be happy to be back to break-even, or to 99% of the original amount at this time. BTW - The 1-year return is much better as it’s measured from a low point in ‘22.
    MikeM said:

    @hank, FWIW, I believe Giroux's stated goal for PRWCX is to obtain S&P 500 like returns with lower volatility over a market cycle.

    Sounds right Mike. I’ve heard him allude to both 3 and 5 year time horizons in various interviews. He’s also very good at discussing this in his semi & annual reports as well. I’ve stopped reading them, however, since exiting the fund maybe 18 months ago.
  • 3 years, top 2% of category.
    5,10, 15 years: top 1% of category.
    OK by me. If additions to my account would not be non-deductible, I'd be adding.
  • TCAF has much healthier trading volumes than a slew of small, new funds. No wide bid/ask prices.
Sign In or Register to comment.