Yet single-stock funds have been able to list in part thanks to rule changes in 2019 and 2020 that allow leveraged and inverse ETFs to launch without first getting the SEC’s approval. That’s led to the current dynamic where regulators are “simultaneously dissing and approving” these ETFs, Nadig said.
“Complex doesn’t mean more risky, you just have to understand what it is,” Nadig said. “For example, DBMF and PFIX absolutely are complex, but the right tools for the market we’re in right now.”
The $440 million iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (ticker DBMF), which holds futures contracts across commodities and equities, has returned 24% this year thanks to the one-way inflation momentum trade. The $292 million Simplify Interest Rate Hedge ETF (PFIX), which uses options to ride floating interest rates, has gained about 44% in 2022.
While the S&P 500 has entered bear-market territory, the $175 million Innovator Equity Power Buffer ETF-August (PAUG), which seeks to buffer against the first 15% of losses in the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) over its 12-month outcome period, has outperformed the fund by 8% since last July.
“Even though our growth is very good and very strong, it could have been much faster and much better if they had not put this label of complex product on our funds,” said Bruce Bond, chief executive officer at Innovator. “They’ve made it difficult for us to get in established brokerage distribution.”
Derivatives-heavy products labeled as “complex” by some regulators aren’t necessarily risky, according to Deborah Fuhr, co-founder of ETFGI. But curbing access to certain speculative funds may be no bad thing. She is hoping Finra will clarify things soon enough.
“Many people feel that there are a large number of investors who don’t understand how many leveraged and inverse products work,” she said.
This article was provided by Bloomberg News.