Connect with us

Finance

ETFs will soon beat mutual funds among advisor holdings: report

Published

on

Violetastoimenova | E+ | Getty Images

Financial advisors will soon — and for the first time — hold more of their clients’ assets in exchange-traded funds than in mutual funds, according to a new report by Cerulli Associates.

Nearly all advisors use mutual funds and ETFs — about 94% and 90% of them, respectively, Cerulli said in a report issued Friday.

However, advisors estimate that a larger share of client assets (25.4%) will be invested in ETFs in 2026 relative to the share of client assets in mutual funds (24%), according to Cerulli.

If that happens, ETFs would be the “most heavily allocated product vehicle for wealth managers,” beating out individual stocks and bonds, cash accounts, annuities and other types of investments, according to Cerulli.

Currently, mutual funds account for 28.7% of client assets and ETFs, 21.6%, it said.

More from ETF Strategist:

Here’s a look at other stories offering insight on ETFs for investors.

ETFs and mutual funds are similar. They’re essentially a legal structure that allows investors to diversify their assets across many different securities like stocks and bonds.

But there are key differences that have made ETFs increasingly popular with investors and financial advisors.

ETFs hold roughly $10 trillion of U.S. assets. While that’s about half the roughly $20 trillion in mutual funds, ETFs have steadily eroded mutual funds’ market share since debuting in the early 1990s.

“ETFs have been attractive for investors for a long time,” said Jared Woodard, an investment and ETF strategist at Bank of America Securities. “There are tax advantages, the expenses are a bit lower and people like the liquidity and transparency.”

Lower taxes and fees

ETF investors can often sidestep certain tax bills incurred annually by many mutual fund investors.

Specifically, mutual fund managers generate capital gains within the fund when they buy and sell securities. That tax obligation then gets passed along each year to all the fund shareholders.

However, the ETF structure lets most managers trade stocks and bonds without creating a taxable event.

In 2023, 4% of ETFs had capital gains distributions, versus 65% of mutual funds, said Bryan Armour, director of passive strategies research for North America at Morningstar and editor of its ETFInvestor newsletter

“If you’re not paying taxes today, that amount of money is compounding” for the investor, Armour said.

'Much of' inflows into ETFs are going to passive funds, says MFS CEO Michael Roberge

Of course, ETF and mutual fund investors are both subject to capital gains taxes on investment profits when they eventually sell their holding.

Liquidity, transparency and low fees are among the top reasons advisors are opting for ETFs over mutual funds, Cerulli said.

Index ETFs have a 0.44% average expense ratio, half the 0.88% annual fee for index mutual funds, according to Morningstar data. Active ETFs carry a 0.63% average fee, versus 1.02% for actively managed mutual funds, Morningstar data show.

Lower fees and tax efficiency amount to lower overall costs for investors, Armour said.

Trading and transparency

Investors can also trade ETFs during the day like a stock. While investors can place a mutual fund order at any time, the trade only executes once a day after the market closes.

ETFs also generally disclose their portfolio holdings once a day, while mutual funds generally disclose holdings on a quarterly basis. ETF investors can see what they’re buying and what has changed within a portfolio with more regularity, experts said.

However, there are limitations to ETFs, experts said.

For one, mutual funds are unlikely to cede their dominance in workplace retirement plans like 401(k) plans, at least any time soon, Armour said. ETFs generally don’t give investors a leg up in retirement accounts since 401(k)s, individual retirement accounts and other accounts are already tax-advantaged.

Additionally, ETFs, unlike mutual funds, are unable to close to new investors, Armour said. This may put investors at a disadvantage in ETFs with niche, concentrated investment strategies, he said. Money managers may not be able to execute the strategy well as the ETF gets more investors, depending on the fund, he said.

Continue Reading

Finance

China strives to attract foreign investment amid geopolitical tensions

Published

on

Tensions between the world’s two largest economies have escalated over the last several years.

Florence Lo | Reuters

BEIJING — China is trying yet again to boost foreign investment, amid geopolitical tensions and businesses’ calls for more concrete actions.

On Feb. 19, authorities published a “2025 action plan for stabilizing foreign investment” to make it easier for foreign capital to invest in domestic telecommunication and biotechnology industries, according to a CNBC translation of the Chinese.

The document called for clearer standards in government procurement — a major issue for foreign businesses in China — and for the development of a plan to gradually allow foreign investment in the education and culture sectors.

“We are looking forward to see this implemented in a manner that delivers tangible benefits for our members,” Jens Eskelund, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, said in a statement Thursday.

The chamber pointed out that China has already mentioned plans to open up telecommunications, health care, education and culture to foreign investment. Greater clarity on public procurement requirements is a “notable positive,” the chamber said, noting that “if fully implemented,” it could benefit foreign companies that have invested heavily to localize their production in China.

There will be a 'stronger push' for foreign direct investments by the Chinese government: Strategist

China’s latest action plan was released around the same time the Commerce Ministry disclosed that foreign direct investment in January fell by 13.4% to 97.59 billion yuan ($13.46 billion). That was after FDI plunged by 27.1% in 2024 and dropped by 8% in 2023, after at least eight straight years of annual growth, according to official data available through Wind Information.

All regions should “ensure that all the measures are implemented in 2025, and effectively boost foreign investment confidence,” the plan said. The Ministry of Commerce and National Development and Reform Commission — the economic planning agency — jointly released the action plan through the government’s executive body, the State Council.

Officials from the Commerce Ministry emphasized in a press conference Thursday that the action plan would be implemented by the end of 2025, and that details on subsequent supportive measures would come soon.

“We appreciate the Chinese government’s recognition of the vital role foreign companies play in the economy,” Michael Hart, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, said in a statement. “We look forward to further discussions on the key challenges our members face and the steps needed to ensure a more level playing field for market access.”

AmCham China’s latest survey of members, released last month, found that a record share are considering or have started diversifying manufacturing or sourcing away from China. The prior year’s survey had found members were finding it harder to make money in China than before the Covid-19 pandemic.

Consumer spending in China has remained lackluster since the pandemic, with retail sales only growing by the low single digits in recent months. Tensions with the U.S. have meanwhile escalated as the White House has restricted Chinese access to advanced technology and levied tariffs on Chinese goods.

‘A very strong signal’

While many aspects of the action plan were publicly mentioned last year, some points — such as allowing foreign companies to buy local equity stakes using domestic loans — are relatively new, said Xiaojia Sun, Beijing-based partner at JunHe Law.

She also highlighted the plan’s call to support foreign investors’ ability to participate in mergers and acquisitions in China, and noted it potentially benefits overseas listings. Sun’s practice covers corporates, mergers and acquisitions and capital markets.

The bigger question remains China’s resolve to act on the plan.

“This action plan is a very strong signal,” Sun said in Mandarin, translated by CNBC. She said she expects Beijing to follow through with implementation, and noted that its release was similar to a rare, high-profile meeting earlier in the week of Chinese President Xi Jinping and entrepreneurs.

That gathering on Feb. 17 included Alibaba founder Jack Ma and DeepSeek’s Liang Wenfeng. In recent years, regulatory crackdowns and uncertainty about future growth had dampened business confidence and foreign investor sentiment.

China needs to strike a balance between tariff retaliation and stabilizing FDI, Citi analysts pointed out earlier this month.

“We believe China policymakers are likely cautious about targeting U.S. [multinationals] as a form of retaliation against U.S. tariffs,” the analysts said. “FDI comes into China, bringing technology and know-how, creating jobs, revenue and profit, and contributing to tax revenue.” 

In a relatively rare acknowledgement, Chinese Commerce Ministry officials on Thursday noted the impact of geopolitical tensions on foreign investment, including some companies’ decision to diversify away from China. They also pointed out that foreign-invested firms contribute to nearly 7% of employment and around 14% of taxes in the country.

Previously, official commentary from the Commerce Ministry about any drop in FDI tended to focus only on how most foreign businesses remained optimistic about long-term prospects in China.

Continue Reading

Finance

The Fed is stuck in neutral as it watches how Trump’s policies play out

Published

on

U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell testifies before a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on “The Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to the Congress,” at Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., Feb. 11, 2025. 

Craig Hudson | Reuters

The popular narrative among Federal Reserve policymakers these days is that policy is “well-positioned” to adjust to any upside or downside risks ahead. However, it might be more accurate to say that policy is stuck in position.

With an abundance of unknowns swirling through the economy and the halls of Washington, the only gear the central bank really can be in these days is neutral as it begins what could be a long wait for certainty on what’s actually ahead.

“In recent weeks, we’ve heard not only enthusiasm — particularly from banks, about possible shifts in tax and regulatory policies — but also widespread apprehension about future trade and immigration policy,” Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic said in a blog post. “These crosscurrents inject still more complexity into policymaking.”

Bostic’s comments came during an active week for what is known on Wall Street as “Fedspeak,” or the chatter that happens between policy meetings from Chair Jerome Powell, central bank governors and regional presidents.

Officials who have spoken frequently described policy as “well-positioned” — the language is now a staple of post-meeting statements. But increasingly, they are expressing caution about the volatility coming from President Donald Trump’s aggressive trade and economic agenda, as well as other factors that could influence policy.

The impact tariffs could have on growth is being underpriced, says PGIM’s Tom Porcelli

“Uncertainty” is an increasingly common theme. In fact, Bostic titled his Thursday blog post “Uncertainty Calls for Caution, Humility in Policymaking.” A day earlier, the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee released minutes from the Jan. 28-29 meeting, with a dozen references to the uncertain climate in the document.

The minutes specifically cited “elevated uncertainty regarding the scope, timing, and potential economic effects of possible changes to trade, immigration, fiscal, and regulatory policies.”

Uncertainty factors into the Fed’s decision making in two ways: the impact that it has on the employment picture, which has been relatively stable, and inflation, which has been easing but could rise again as consumers and business leaders get spooked about the impact tariffs could have on prices.

Missing the target

The Fed targets inflation at 2%, a goal that has remained elusive for going on four years.

“Right now, I see the risks of inflation staying above target as skewed to the upside,” St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem told reporters Thursday. “My baseline scenario is one where inflation continues to converge towards 2%, providing monetary policy remains modestly restrictive, and that will take time. I think there is a potential for inflation to remain high and activity to slow. … That’s an alternative scenario, not a baseline scenario, but I’m attentive to it.”

The operative in Musalem’s comment is that policy holds at “modestly restrictive,” which is where he considers the current level of the fed funds rate between 4.25%-4.5%. Bostic was a little less explicit on feeling the need to keep rates on hold, but emphasized that “this is no time for complacency” and noted that “additional threats to price stability may emerge.”

Chicago Federal Reserve President Austan Goolsbee, thought to be among the least hawkish FOMC members when it comes to inflation, was more measured in his assessment of tariffs and did not offer commentary in separate appearances, including one on CNBC, on where he thinks rates should go.

“If you’re just thinking about tariffs, it depends how many countries are they going to apply to, and how big are they going to be, and the more it looks like a Covid-sized shock, the more nervous you should be,” Goolsbee said.

Many risks ahead

More broadly, though, the January minutes indicated a Fed highly attuned to potential shocks and not interested in testing the waters with any further interest rate moves. The meeting summary pointedly noted that committee members want “further progress on inflation before making additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate.”

There’s also more than just tariffs and inflation to worry about.

The minutes characterized the risks to financial stability as “notable,” specifically in the area of leverage and the level of long-duration debt that banks are holding.

Prominent economist Mark Zandi — not normally an alarmist — said in a panel discussion presented by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation that he worries about dangers to the $46.2 trillion U.S. bond market.

“In my view, the biggest risk is that we see a major sell off in the bond market,” said Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “The bond market feels incredibly fragile to me. The plumbing is broken. The primary dealers aren’t keeping up with the amount of debt outstanding.”

“There’s just so many things coming together that I think there’s a very significant threat that at some point over the next 12 months, we see a major sell-off in the bond market,” he added.

In this climate, he said, there’s scant chance for the Fed to cut rates — though markets are pricing in the potential for a half percentage point in reductions by the end of the year.

That’s wishful thinking considering tariffs and other intangibles hanging over the Fed’s head, Zandi said.

“I just don’t see the Fed cutting interest rates here until you get a better feel about inflation coming back to target,” he said. “The economy came into 2025 in a pretty good spot. Feels like it’s performing well. Should be able to weather a lot of storms. But it feels like there’s a lot of storms coming.”

There's no compelling reason to cut rates, says Fmr. Cleveland Fed President Loretta Mester

Continue Reading

Finance

Alibaba rose on China AI hopes. Where analysts see the stock heading

Published

on

Continue Reading

Trending