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.
Worth watching. Given their huge minimums most of us cannot access their mutual funds. Occasionally, they have co-managed other MF, like one for Vanguard years ago.
Never went anywhere and finally GMO got fired.
Their "Climate Change" fund seems to be outperforming most of the other similar funds I have looked at
I've written to GMO twice, about this and about the research on their seven-year asset class projections. In The Great Distortion, they appear to have been off by, say, 180 degrees on the order of their asset class projections.
No response so far, but they do have a final November prospectus posted at the SEC. I take that as evidence that they're free to push the launch button whenever the want. One tiny issue might be that the fund's ticker symbol (QLTY) is already in use.
I'm trying to get more intel on this right now, as the ETF won't be an exact mirror to the GQETX mutual fund. The ETF will be US only, whereas the MF has 20% int'l allocation. Per our contact at GMO, "The intention is for the two portfolios to be managed very similarly, with substitutions made wherever possible for international names we hold in the flagship Quality Strategy. This is currently is possible for all except a small handful of names." GMO currently manages an SMA portfolio using the US-only strategy for one of our clients.
OK, just got info thru 9/30 (all vs S&P 500): YTD 22.2 vs 16.9 1Yr 25.0 vs 19.6 3Yr 18.5 vs 14.6 5Yr 15.5 vs 12.3 10Yr 14.8 vs 12.9
That is impressive.
Just to make sure I understood the above returns.
They are GMO's SMA portfolio returns using the US-only (Quality) strategy for one of their clients. Right? Why returns for only one client. If they have the strategy already implemented, I would have thought multiple clients would have already had SMA under this strategy. I am a bit confused. Please clarify / expand on your returns post.
Those r the Quality returns if you strip out the int'l exposures. The US only strategy is a very new strategy, most clients just use the general Quality strategy. They are basically the exact same thing, for example, the 9/30 holdings for US only are 37 vs 42 for the Quality fund, they've substituted similar US companies where they could. FYI u can actually see the holdings for the ETF on GMO's website already.
Those r the Quality returns if you strip out the int'l exposures. The US only strategy is a very new strategy, most clients just use the general Quality strategy. They are basically the exact same thing, for example, the 9/30 holdings for US only are 37 vs 42 for the Quality fund, they've substituted similar US companies where they could. FYI u can actually see the holdings for the ETF on GMO's website already.
I am surprised their compliance department allowed them to share that return data which seems to be custom fit but not real.
@BaluBalu Yeah, they do a bit of catering to us since we have over $300 million just in the Quality fund.
My apologies for not recognizing who you are. I could not look up your member profile. Could you pl disclose either in this thread or via message which firm you represent and what you do for them?
I took an initial position as today's volume was decent and B-A spread was the acceptable 1 penny. I tried to figure out its starting AUM and the two sites I use for ETFs do not even recognize the ticker yet. Neither did M*.
Looking at the holdings spreadsheet at their site, its launch AUM was $3.1M. That is very, very low relative to the trade volume today and unless the AUM bulks up soon, trade volume could drop drastically and exiting the position could become a problem, with wider B-A spreads. I normally do not buy into any ETF until it reaches close to $100M in AUM and never bought one, if ever, with less than $50M in AUM. I am surprised GMO did not seed their first ETF! Not enough commitment to the first born! If I had known about the low AUM, I would not have bought it. Now I will wait and watch.
It started with 35 investments. I am calling it focused to semi-focused - there may be an industry definition but I have not checked. I think the 35 is consistent with @rsorden earlier post.
Its ER is 0.5%, the same as the ER of GQETX - their Global Quality mutual fund. The two popular US Quality ETFs, QUAL and JQUA, sport an ER of 0.15% or less - but both follow their respective indices; while QLTY is active.
QLTY disclosed its holdings; perhaps, they are not worried about others trying to mimic GQETX, assuming the US holdings of GQETX and QLTY are always the same. May be someone can check the prospectus if QLTY is designed to be a transparent ETF.
"The Fund’s entire portfolio holdings are publicly disseminated each day the Fund is open for business through financial reporting and news services including publicly available internet websites. In addition, the composition of the in-kind creation basket and the in-kind redemption basket is publicly disseminated daily prior to the opening of the Exchange via the NSCC."
Comments
David_Snowball?
Never went anywhere and finally GMO got fired.
Their "Climate Change" fund seems to be outperforming most of the other similar funds I have looked at
No response so far, but they do have a final November prospectus posted at the SEC. I take that as evidence that they're free to push the launch button whenever the want. One tiny issue might be that the fund's ticker symbol (QLTY) is already in use.
I'll let you know if I get a response.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/QLTY.AX/profile?p=QLTY.AX
Edit> And YBB beats me by a mile
0.5%
GMO currently manages an SMA portfolio using the US-only strategy for one of our clients.
YTD 22.2 vs 16.9
1Yr 25.0 vs 19.6
3Yr 18.5 vs 14.6
5Yr 15.5 vs 12.3
10Yr 14.8 vs 12.9
Just to make sure I understood the above returns.
They are GMO's SMA portfolio returns using the US-only (Quality) strategy for one of their clients. Right? Why returns for only one client. If they have the strategy already implemented, I would have thought multiple clients would have already had SMA under this strategy. I am a bit confused. Please clarify / expand on your returns post.
Looking at the holdings spreadsheet at their site, its launch AUM was $3.1M. That is very, very low relative to the trade volume today and unless the AUM bulks up soon, trade volume could drop drastically and exiting the position could become a problem, with wider B-A spreads. I normally do not buy into any ETF until it reaches close to $100M in AUM and never bought one, if ever, with less than $50M in AUM. I am surprised GMO did not seed their first ETF! Not enough commitment to the first born! If I had known about the low AUM, I would not have bought it. Now I will wait and watch.
Its ER is 0.5%, the same as the ER of GQETX - their Global Quality mutual fund. The two popular US Quality ETFs, QUAL and JQUA, sport an ER of 0.15% or less - but both follow their respective indices; while QLTY is active.
QLTY disclosed its holdings; perhaps, they are not worried about others trying to mimic GQETX, assuming the US holdings of GQETX and QLTY are always the same. May be someone can check the prospectus if QLTY is designed to be a transparent ETF.
"The Fund’s entire portfolio holdings are publicly disseminated each day the Fund is open for business through financial reporting and news services including publicly available internet websites. In addition, the composition of the in-kind creation basket and the in-kind redemption basket is publicly disseminated daily prior to the opening of the Exchange via the NSCC."
Fifty cents seems like a lot to pay for a fund holding the positions shown in the download at GMO.