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.
"STREAM S&P Dynamic Roll Commodities Fund (BNPC) was the single ETF delisted in April. It provides a real-time example of why investors should sell shares prior to delisting and avoid the liquidation process. BNP Paribas, the sponsor of the ETF formerly known as BNPC, did not liquidate the portfolio and has not announced any plans to do so. The BNPC website has been taken down. Technically, the fund still exists as CUSIP 86324B103. If you own shares, good luck trying to find a buyer at a fair price."
FROM THE LINK BELOW “ETF closures are a healthy part of the maturation of the industry, and enable providers to free up capital to develop new and innovative product offerings for investors,” William Belden, managing director for Guggenheim Investments, said in a press release.
Fund closures this year now total 32 funds—a healthy clip relative to most years in the industry’s 20-year history, but well off last year’s pace that led to more than 100 strategies shutting down. Industry sources generally echo Belden’s words about closures being a sign of a maturing industry, and many say also that fund sponsors are now less willing to try bringing to market any type of fund and are instead much more likely to carefully consider what the market will bear before investing resources in a rollout. http://www.indexuniverse.com/sections/features/18727-guggenheim-to-shut-rmb-its-yuan-bond-etf.html?source=email_rt_mc_body
Reply to @TSP_Transfer: The closures are expected as fringe or 'me too' products do not attract assets.
The problem arises for investors if an ETF stops issuing shares but does not liquidate. You are left with something in hand that you cannot exit.
From my second link:
"No liquidation will also place BNP Paribas in the ETF Hall of Shame, along with Credit Suisse for taking four years to liquidate three ETNs and JPMorgan for delisting BSR in 2009 without liquidation. "
Comments
“ETF closures are a healthy part of the maturation of the industry, and enable providers to free up capital to develop new and innovative product offerings for investors,” William Belden, managing director for Guggenheim Investments, said in a press release.
Fund closures this year now total 32 funds—a healthy clip relative to most years in the industry’s 20-year history, but well off last year’s pace that led to more than 100 strategies shutting down. Industry sources generally echo Belden’s words about closures being a sign of a maturing industry, and many say also that fund sponsors are now less willing to try bringing to market any type of fund and are instead much more likely to carefully consider what the market will bear before investing resources in a rollout.
http://www.indexuniverse.com/sections/features/18727-guggenheim-to-shut-rmb-its-yuan-bond-etf.html?source=email_rt_mc_body
The problem arises for investors if an ETF stops issuing shares but does not liquidate. You are left with something in hand that you cannot exit.
From my second link:
"No liquidation will also place BNP Paribas in the ETF Hall of Shame, along with Credit Suisse for taking four years to liquidate three ETNs and JPMorgan for delisting BSR in 2009 without liquidation. "