Jump to content
The World News Media

Vanguard to offer suite of factor-based products


Guest

Recommended Posts

  • Guest

Vanguard said today it plans to introduce a suite of products offering low-cost, targeted, and transparent exposure to well-known market factors.

Greg Davis

Chief Investment Officer Greg Davis 

The actively managed, rules-based factor products—six exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and a mutual fund—are expected to be available around mid-February 2018, according to a registration statement filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Vanguard Quantitative Equity Group, which has more than 25 years of quantitative investing experience, will serve as investment advisor.

"Our factor-based fund offerings serve as a valuable extension to our low-cost active lineup, providing additional ways for suitable investors to help meet their long-term objectives by targeting exposure to specific factors in the market," said Vanguard Chief Investment Officer Greg Davis. "With Vanguard's actively managed, rules-based approach to factors, investors will be able to harness well-known factor exposure in a more transparent and low-cost way."

The proposed factor products and the objectives theyÂ’ll pursue are:

Vanguard U.S. Value Factor ETF—Long-term capital appreciation by investing in stocks with relatively lower share prices relative to fundamental values as determined by the advisor.

Vanguard U.S. Quality Factor ETF—Long-term capital appreciation by investing in stocks with strong fundamentals as determined by the advisor.

Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF—Long-term capital appreciation by investing in stocks with strong recent performance as determined by the advisor.

Vanguard U.S. Liquidity Factor ETF—Long-term capital appreciation by investing in stocks with lower measures of trading liquidity as determined by the advisor.

Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF—Long-term capital appreciation with lower volatility relative to the broad U.S. equity market.

Vanguard U.S. Multifactor ETF and Vanguard U.S. Multifactor Fund Admiral™ Shares—Long-term capital appreciation by investing in stocks with relatively strong recent performance, strong fundamentals, and low prices relative to fundamentals as determined by the advisor.

Factor-based funds can be used in a number of portfolio applications—such as substituting for a high-cost active fund, creating a static tilt to seek enhanced returns or dampened volatility, or filling a portfolio gap.

The new products will join Vanguard's actively managed lineup of stock, bond, balanced, and money market mutual funds representing $1.2 trillion in assets, or roughly 27% of the company's total assets under management as of October 31, 2017.

The Quantitative Equity Group currently manages more than $30 billion in assets across more than 35 mandates, including the firm's first active factor fund, Vanguard Global Minimum Volatility Fund, launched in December 2013.

The new offerings are expected to carry the following expense ratios.

Fund or ETF Estimated expense ratio
U.S. Value Factor ETF 0.13%
U.S. Quality Factor ETF 0.13%
U.S. Momentum Factor ETF 0.13%
U.S. Liquidity Factor ETF 0.13%
U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF 0.13%
U.S. Multifactor ETF 0.18%
U.S. Multifactor Fund Admiral Shares 0.18%

There are no minimum investment requirements for ETF Shares of the funds. For financial advisor clients (excluding supermarkets), investment minimums are not required to open and maintain accounts for Admiral Shares of the funds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 316
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Popular Days

Popular Days

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...




  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • One issue with historian Flavius Josephus is that he suggests that the Royal Captain of the (Guard) can also be regarded as General Nebuzaradan. A confusion arises from Josephus' account of the captives mentioned in Jeremiah, as he claims that they were taken from Egypt instead of Babylon. Since Nebuchadnezzar was occupied in Rilah, he directed his generals to lay siege to Jerusalem. This could potentially account for the numerous dispatches that Nebuchadnezzar would have sent to the west, but the considerable distance to Borsippa still poses a challenge. As a result, the Babylonians managed to gain control of regions such as Aram (Syria), Ammon, and Moab. The only territories that remained were the coastal cities, where the Egyptians held sway. King Josiah decided to form an alliance with Babylon instead of being under Egyptian rule. So, that part of the territory was covered until King Josiah was defeated.  It's interesting how they started back then in 4129, but still end up with the same conclusion with Zedekiah's Defeat 3522 607 B.C. 3419 607 B.C. even though their AM is different.  
    • In the era of the Bible Students within the Watchtower, there were numerous beginnings. It is essential to bear in mind that each congregation functioned autonomously, granting the Elders the freedom to assert their own assertions and interpretations. Most people embraced the principles that Pastor Russell was trying to convey. You could argue that what you are experiencing now, they also experienced back then. The key difference is that unity was interpreted differently. Back then it had value where today there is none. To address your inquiry, while I cannot recall the exact details, it is believed to have been either 4129 or 4126. Some groups, however, adopted Ussher's 4004. It is worth mentioning that they have now discarded it and revised it to either 3954 or 3958, although I personally find little interest in this matter. I believe I encountered this information in the book titled "The Time is at Hand," though it may also be referenced in their convention report. Regardless, this is part of their compelling study series 3. Please take a moment to review and confirm the date. I am currently focused on Riblah. The Bible Students who firmly believe that Israel is the prophetic sign of Armageddon have made noteworthy adjustments to their chronology. They have included significant dates such as 1947/8 and 1967/8, as well as more recent dates. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that, according to their calculations, 2024 holds immense importance. The ongoing tension of Iran targeting Israel directly from its own territory amplifies the gravity of the situation. If their trajectory continues, the subsequent captivating event will occur in 2029, rather than as previously speculated, in 2034 by some.
    • Would it be too much to ask what was the bible students starting point of creation?
    • @JW Insider Your summary is irrelevant, as I do not make any assertions regarding BC/AD other than their usage by scholars and in history, as you yourself have also acknowledged on numerous occasions, thus rendering your point invalid and evasive. The Watchtower leverages external viewpoints, including secular evidence, to substantiate the accuracy of their chronological interpretations. There are numerous approaches to dating events. Personally, I explore various alternative methods that lead to the same conclusion as the Watchtower. However, the most captivating approach is to utilize secular chronology to arrive at the same outcome. By relying solely on secular chronology, the pattern still aligns, albeit with a distinct interpretation of the available data. Nevertheless, the ultimate result remains unchanged. This is why when you get upset, when you are proven wrong, you, Tom, and those with the authority to ban take action, because you like others cannot handle the truth. In this case, your infamous tablet VAT 4956 has become useless in this situation. I do agree with you on one thing: you are not an expert, just like COJ. However, I must admit that this foolish individual was not the first to debate the chronology with the Watchtower and abandon it based on personal beliefs. He simply happened to be the most recent one that's on record.
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.3k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.