You are viewing the chat in desktop mode. Click here to switch to mobile view.
X
ETF.com Live!
powered byJotCast
Prev Page View Full Chat
Dave Nadig
4:00
In short - I really don't think so.  The U.S. regulatory regime has largely been about structure, transparency and disclosure as the mechanisms of investor protection.
What your talking about is really looking under the hood at whats going on inside a fund -- and in the U.S. environment, that's supposed to be the domain of the fund's directors.  They're the ones looking after shareholder interests.
4:01
Technically, if an active fund manager is charging 1% and just hugging the benchmark, the board should probably fire them.  In practice, I don't see a lot of that happening (to say the least).
All that said, I have talked to a bunch of fund boards in the past year or two, and the rise of passives/ETFs has made them MUCH more focused on the core question of "what are my investors getting for what they're paying."
4:02
that process (technically, the 15c process) is getting a lot more attention than I was seeing, say, 20 years ago.
So ... baby steps
OK, that wraps up the hour.  Thanks everyone for the great questions.  Sorry for the ones I missed, and hope to see you all next week.  We'll post the time for it on twitter, and put up an article the morning of like we did today.
Have a great day folks.
Connecting…