Should you buy hedge-fund ETFs?
Beware of hedge-fund ETFs. They offer most of the costs of a hedge fund, with few of the advantages of exchange traded funds, says Paul Amery.

Beware of hedge-fund ETFs. They offer most of the costs of a hedge fund, with few of the advantages of exchange traded funds, says Paul Amery.
Exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and hedge funds don't have much in common. ETFs are cheap, and if you go for a plain vanilla FTSE or S&P 500 tracker, you know exactly what you're getting. Hedge funds, on the other hand, are both costly and secretive. So the idea of a hedge-fund ETF might strike the more cynical among you as being a marketing stunt, to capitalise on the growing popularity of ETFs. And we reckon you'd be right to be sceptical.
Hedge funds use a range of strategies, so grouping them under one umbrella is simplistic. But broadly, they aim to avoid market falls, while providing returns that are uncorrelated to other asset classes. Their success is open to question. The average fund lost 18% in 2008 better than most markets, but far worse than cash. More damagingly, lots of funds restricted redemptions and investors found themselves unable to pull out. Hedge-fund ETFs aim to beat this liquidity issue by ensuring all fund positions are held on a single platform. This allows daily redemptions and, in theory at least, close tracking of the underlying net asset value. But you won't learn any more about the underlying investment decisions than with a normal hedge fund.
Subscribe to MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE

Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
And there's the rub. It may say 'ETF' on the label, but you are just buying an actively managed fund, with hedge-fund fees to boot. These run to 1.75% a year, plus a 20% performance fee, in the MW Tops Global Alpha ETF, or 0.9% plus underlying hedge-fund fees (usually 1.5% plus a 15%-20% performance fee) in db x-trackers db Hedge Fund Index ETF. That compares to an average 0.15% a year for an ETF tracking Europe's most widely used equity index, the Euro Stoxx 50.
Whether you think it's worth paying all that extra for a fund manager's skill cuts to the heart of the 'active' versus 'passive' debate in fund management. Plenty of investors do db x-trackers db Hedge Fund Index ETF raised over $1bn in assets in its first year and more such funds are on the way. But we like ETFs precisely because they don't employ costly fund managers of dubious value, and because they give you an easy way to manage your asset allocation yourself. Sadly, hedge-fund ETFs seem to offer most of the costs of a hedge fund, with few of an ETF's key advantages.
Paul Amery is editor of www.indexuniverse.eu .
Sign up for MoneyWeek's newsletters
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
Paul is a multi-award-winning journalist, currently an editor at New Money Review. He has contributed an array of money titles such as MoneyWeek, Financial Times, Financial News, The Times, Investment and Thomson Reuters. Paul is certified in investment management by CFA UK and he can speak more than five languages including English, French, Russian and Ukrainian. On MoneyWeek, Paul writes about funds such as ETFs and the stock market.
-
8 of the best houses for sale with home cinemas
Houses for sale with home cinemas – from a modern oast-house style property in Kent to a house in Buckinghamshire with Dolby sound and bespoke seating
By Natasha Langan Published
-
Rachel Reeves faces £23 billion capital gains tax “black hole” – will she be forced to look elsewhere?
The fiscal watchdog has downgraded its forecast for capital gains tax revenues, leaving chancellor Rachel Reeves with £23 billion less than previously expected
By Katie Williams Published