ETF Edge - Inside Vanguard HQ: Sizing Up ETFs, Rates & Big Tech in the Year Ahead 10/27/23

Episode Date: October 27, 2023

CNBC’s Bob Pisani sat down on the trading floor at Vanguard HQ, where he caught up with Vanguard CIO Greg Davis and Janel Jackson, Global Head of ETF Capital Markets and Broker and Index Relations at Vanguard. Our panel of experts broke down top ETF gave us a glimpse of where the flows could be headed next. They also weighed in on the mega-cap tech trade and handicapped the Fed’s next policy moves, outlook for the global economy, equities and interest rates in 2024. In the “Markets 102” portion, Bob continued the conversation with Vanguard’s Janel Jackson. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The ETF Edge podcast is sponsored by InvescoQQQ, Supporting the Innovators Changing the World, Investco Distributors, Inc. Welcome to ETF Edge, the podcast. If you're looking to learn the latest insights on all things, exchanged, traded funds, you are in the right place. Every week, we're bringing you interviews, market analysis and breaking down what it all means for investors. I'm your host, Bob Pisani, and we've got another very special show for you today. We're coming to you live from the newly revamped trading floor here at Vanguard headquarters in Malvern, Pennsylvania, to give me you a rare inside look at what goes on behind the scenes here and talking to some top market trends in the ETF world and beyond. Some of the best in the business are here at Vanguard folks.

Here's my conversation with Greg Davis, the CIO of Vanguard and Janelle Jackson global head of ETF capital markets and broker-and-index relations at Vanguard. Greg, before I ask about the ETF business, the big topic in everybody's minds is interest rates in the direction of interest rates. What are you telling Vanguard investors, where are interest rates going to be towards the end of the year? and into 2024. Well, if you start at the very beginning in terms of what the Fed's going to do, our expectations is the Fed still has some more activity to take place, potentially one to two more rate hikes before they finish. The good news for investors, though, is the fact that interest rates are a lot higher.

People actually earning a real return, a real income on your fixed income investments. It's a very different market environment than what we've seen over the last 10 to 15 years. So look at money market funds. You can get a 5.5% percent yield when in the past you were getting zero. So there's real money to be made out there, even in money markets, aren't very sexy, but it's a stable part of the market and an important part of people's portfolios. You know, our viewers love clipping these 5% coupons on their money market funds and their one-year treasuries. Are we at a peak in interest rates, or rates are going to be higher or lower a year

from now? Yeah, I think what we're seeing from an investor perspective as you look at cash flows, we've seen investors move really along the quality spectrum into the shortest dated securities away from credit into treasuries. But with this feeling of higher for longer, we're also seeing investors move to the longest end of the curve now. So at the beginning of the year, it was all about short-dated treasuries. We're actually starting now to see more investors move out

to the end of the curve in 20-year-plus treasuries to try and grab more of that total return given the higher-for-longer scenario. So it's still not clear, though, whether we're going to be higher a year from now. It seems like there's a bit of a natural limit. To go 5%, 6%, say 10-year treasuries now would imply we're moving up 7, 8, 9% mortgage rates. This would be a real slowdown in the economy.

There seems to be some kind of natural limit. Would you agree? Yeah, I mean, look, we've already seen mortgage rates hit 8%, right? So that's already been impactful to the marketplace. But you have to start at the very front end of the curve. The question is, what's the neutral rate for Fed funds? Our team believes that the neutral rate longer term is probably 3.5% or so, with a higher R-star than many folks have been talking about in the marketplace.

So historically R-star, people have looked at at about half a percent. We're thinking our investment strategy group believes it's 1.5%. At 2% inflation on top of that, that gives you a long-term Fed funds of 3.5. And then you've got to factor in the term premium. The normal term premium from Fed funds out the 10-year bonds is somewhere around 150 basis points. So 5% Treasury yields is about normal and neutral. And so, again, could it go higher than that? absolutely depends on what happens with the Fed. A lot of jargon there. The key point, I think,

is for the viewers, the neutral Fed funds rate would be the rate that is neither accommodative nor stimulus. Correct. Or restrictive, right. So where would that, and we don't know where that is, right? That's sort of a theoretical idea. That's right. Where should it be at this point? Yeah. Where is it right now where? Historically, people have viewed the Fed specifically in their research have viewed it to be somewhere around half a percent on a real basis. You had 2% inflation gives you a long-term Fed funds of 2.5%. Again, our, our team with their research, given what we think about, you know, structural deficits and all those types of factors, we think it's higher than that.

And even before the global financial crisis, the neutral rate of Fed funds was actually higher than what we've seen, you know, recently as well. So again, we think it is higher than what the market's pricing in, which allows us to believe that Fed funds will be somewhere in a 3.5% type level longer term, which again is elevated relative to the marketplace. The viewers love bond funds. It's been years and years and years. In the last couple of years, I'm just flooded with questions every week about it.

Vanguard offers a very large suite of ETFs, bond ETFs, and, of course, mutual fund ETFs, corporates, high yield, a vast spectrum munis. Where are we? Tell me a little bit about where's the money going and what role the bond ETFs play here in a portfolio. Yeah, I think the money, like I said, is going into treasuries, and folks have kind of bar-belled their exposures to the shortest end to grab that yield the most income that they can with interest rates being over 5%. And then now it's where are we in that interest rate cycle? So as Greg just talked about, are we at a place where the Fed's going to pause? Are they going to rise from here? How can you grab more of that total return? So the price appreciation, if this is the higher for longer scenario, maybe rates do start to come back in a little bit, plus the yield would be on that longer end of the

curve. So that's where we're looking at those longer dated treasuries. I think a lot of of investors are also starting to think about allocations to active fixed income and leaving these decisions to the professionals. We're seeing a lot more active ETF launches. Of the 400 products that have been launched this year in the ETF space, 73% of those have been active solutions and a decent amount of those are starting up in the fixed income space as well. Now, you actively managed ETFs here. Vanguard was founded largely as an index shop, though. where does something like active management fit in with the Vanguard ideology overall? And is it more appropriate in bonds than stocks?

I mean, where does this fit in, this active idea? Yeah, we always get questions about active versus passive at Vanguard. And the story at Vanguard has always been low cost. So it's really dependent on investors' time horizons, what their goals are, with their risk tolerances. But most importantly, investors need to think about what they're paying for and stick to low-cost solutions. so they have more opportunities to keep that out for that excess return to them, to the investors. Yeah. I want to go back to some specific ETF areas, but I want to ask you about the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve seems unsure whether it needs to raise rates any further. You viewers know all about this.

So we got a major inflation report today, at the personal consumption expenditures, folks, you should know about this. That's the Fed's preferred inflation gauge. So what happens from here? First of, what's your interpretation of this PCE? report today? Is inflation going in the right direction? The Fed wants inflation coming down. Is the report today supportive of that? And what does the Fed do from here? Do we get another rate hike? Are we going to be higher for longer? Are we going to be lower a year from now? Yeah, it's a great question. I mean, clearly the number that came in today is still well above the Fed's target. At 3.7 percent, the Fed has a 2 percent target. There's still a long ways away from where

they want to get to. However, the direction of where we've been coming down from from the peak a year ago to where we are today. Directionally, we're going in the right place. Even month over month, it's gone from 3-9 to 3-7. So, again, good progress. But if the Fed is ultimately trying to hit their 2% target, we believe they will likely need the hike rates again sometime in the course of the next couple of meetings.

So it wouldn't be surprising enough for one or two more rate hikes if we think about the next number of Fed meetings. Think about the time that we're living through now. The viewers are really confused. You know, there's no imminent sign of recession, Yet the stock market is actually recently, like people are anticipating a recession. I get emails from all of your viewers all the time. Investors are trying to convince themselves that higher rates are finally going to cause a recession at this point.

And then the consumer, to me, still looks very healthy. I looked at American Express's report. Good report. No problem there. Visa said the consumer was still healthy. And yet consumer spending is, consumer confidence seems to be down two months in a row. So I guess the question is, what's going on with the economy right now? The viewers are so confused in the stock market is jirating around a lot.

It seems confused as well. Janelle, give us a comment. I mean, I would just think about this from an investment perspective, and what you're saying and what you're talking about is uncertainty. So nobody really knows when if we are going to enter a recession. Nobody knows what the Fed's going to do in advance of meeting next week. And what we've seen with investors moving a lot of their cash into money markets is that they don't know either, but they're really comfortable getting this 5% plus yield. The trouble with that is you don't know what direction things are going and you don't want to miss out on the upswing in price appreciation when that does happen.

So it just is another example of, you know, when you feel like there's uncertainty, go back to being disciplined with your portfolio, thinking about your asset allocation, making sure that you are trying to be thoughtful about your long-term goals and achieving them. because you don't want to get left on the sidelines when things do change. Yeah, same thing. Totally agree. You know what's amazing is I tell people, they say, oh, I want to take money out of the stock market because I'm nervous. And I always say, well, let me ask you this. How old are you and how long do you think you're going to live? Because if you're 35 years old, you're going to live 60 years.

And this year is not going to matter at all to. This is a fundamental principle of investing. And it's one that Vanguard was based upon my life change meeting Jack Bowdo and that. 1997. Everything I'm spouting is basically Jack Bogleisms. And yet people don't understand that. They don't understand themselves very well. And so how do you keep emphasizing that message? How old are you? How long stay invested? Market timing does it work. Understand risk your own personal risk tolerance. That will influence your asset allocation. But how do you keep pounding away on the break? You try to focus on the things that we know are critically important. Diversification, low cost.

again, keeping that long-term perspective in mind, because the reality is, to your point, somebody who's saving for retirement or the kids' college education, they should be fully invested, right? And ultimately, capture the market returns that you're getting in equities and fixed income and making sure you stay invested. The reality is when somebody tries the market time, you have to get two decisions right. You have to get the decision right of when to get out of the market, which is unbelievably hard. And then you have to get the timing right to when to get back into the market, again, which is ultimately very, very difficult. So for a, for a, investors, the main thing they should focus on is what can you control?

Staying invested, low cost, diversification, and making sure that you have the right level risk in the portfolio. So even if you do have a market downturn, it's not going to cause you to do something really bad, which means getting out of everything and going into cash, things like that. So you want to make sure you have the right portfolio construction in place. So the viewers constantly message me, they're obsessed with their bond detept portfolios, but they have differences of opinion about, should I have high yield? should I have just treasuries?

Should I own a corporate mix? Should I just own the AGG, which is a broad index of everything? They're sold on the bond idea, but they're debated amongst themselves on how to break that up. What kind of advice can you give people? And by the way, let's just say for the moment

we're talking about a retirement fund, okay? Not a regular cash account. So what do you tell people who say? I'm confused. I have a 60-40 portfolio. Should I have that 40% in Treasury? Should I have it in AGG? Should I have it in high yield?

Should I put it in munis? What do you tell them? Yeah, I don't know if your viewers are going to like this answer, but I'm going to say it depends. And the best way you could get customized advice for yourself as an individual is probably to consult with a financial advisor. We do offer all of the building blocks and tools that you would need to build that 40% allocation of your fixed income portfolio.

But the decision is to whether it goes into treasuries, goes in aggregate bonds, even if you're a tax-sensitive investor, do you use municipal bonds. Those are decisions that have to be made for each individual specific to their time horizon, their goals, and their risk tolerance. Vanguard's not an RIA. This is essentially what she's essentially saying, and you do have to make it up yourself, but I want to move to the stock market, which is really my bailiwick. I'm the stocks guy.

It's the NBC. In case you wanted, Greg is not like a strategist on Wall Street. street. He doesn't give your end S&P 500 targets, but you did say in January that you expect averages for the stock market for the next several years to be below average and you use the range there, 4.7 to 6.7 percent. And folks, if you don't know, the typical very long-term range in the stock market, the S&P is in the 9 to 10 percent range. So you're essentially saying that stock market returns will be below normal for the next several years. What is your thinking on that? Why?

The primary driver, Bob, has really been around valuations, right? So when you look at where PE ratios are today relative to what they've been historically, much of the growth that we've seen in the equity market has been valuation expansion in addition to earnings growth. But that valuation expansion can't continue indefinitely. And so when you look at the U.S. market relative to the international markets, those valuations are a bit out of sync. And so, yeah, over the last 10 years, we've seen U.S. stocks outperform international stocks

by 8 percentage points a year over a decade. It's very unlikely that we're going to see that persist for the next 10 years. And that's why we're expecting U.S. equity market returns to be somewhere in that 5% per annum over a 10-year-year. It's largely a reversion to mean call. That's exactly it. International would not normally underperform for this long, number one. And valuations, what we call PE multiples, would not normally stay this elevated. That's exactly it.

And so for the international markets, we have return expectations that are between 7 to 9%, call it 8, you know, just to meet in the middle. But again, that's over a 10-year time horizon. And the other thing you have to keep in the consideration is like the implied equity risk premium. What are you being paid to invest in equities relative to a 10-year treasury? In the U.S. market, it's not as compelling. It's about two percentage points lower than the long-term average. When you look at the international markets, investing in equities there relative to the bonds, is actually more attractive from an equity risk premium standpoint.

It's very difficult. You're right. And the viewers, even without being able to define what an equity risk premium, which is, as Greg said, what you're getting paid for the risk of owning equities that are riskier than bonds, even without understanding what that is on an academic level, the viewers seem to understand it because they're sticking with their 5% Treasury. So they understand that the equity risk premium, even if they can't define it, is actually very low.

That's right. It's like close to zero right now, actually. It's below 1% for a while. About 40 basis points, whatever. Yes. Nerd over here. He knows exactly what the equity risk premium is. He gets up every morning looking at it. We're not going to go there.

Let's talk a little more specifically about what's going on with ETFs. We've had years of inflows. We've been so used to saying every year, $700 billion, $800 billion, and now we have $7 trillion, and then we're going to have $8 trillion, and then $9 trillion. And yet there's still inflows this year, but it's really slowed down, much more modest for both stocks and bonds. Why is that happening, and is Vanguard also seeing a slowdown? Does that worry you or where are we at in terms of the flows right now?

Yeah, so ETFs as an industry have taken in around $330 billion this year, which is down 30% from where we were this time last year. At Vanguard, we're still leading the industry in cash flows with over $100 billion of that $330 coming here. I think where we're seeing that cash go is to cash, right? Money markets have taken in north of $800 billion. It's a huge year for money markets. But we are still seeing those investors who are staying the course broadly. when you look at industry cash flows, that split is 6040, 60% equities, 40% bonds. I think Vanguard's investors may be a little close to your philosophy, Bob,

and that we've seen 70% of those inflows go to equities and 30% going into fixed income products. Yeah. How do you feel about the 6040? I'll tell you honestly, I'd never got it. I know Jack argued for years, but the world changed a lot. And, you know, I'm almost 70. My portfolio was 75, 20, it used to be 5% class. So it's close to 80, 20. And it has been for years. And I've been very open about what I own.

I publish what I own. I've said I'm almost 70. I'm planning to live to 90. And most of the actuarial friends I have in the business say, you should work at 95, not 90, Bob. So maybe I'm wrong. And I'm, but I'll, you know, go out having a lot of fun. So I don't know.

I have a problem with the over 6040. I think it's too risk averse myself. But I'm not asking how you feel about it. That's sort of the industry standard. That's the way I've always felt. I think it's a good starting point for people to consider. But again, it goes back to what Janelle was saying around risk tolerance and also time horizon and all those different factors.

So it's a nice starting point because you want the balance that a bond, the bond component of the portfolio will add to your portfolio. But again, it really depends on how risk-tolerant you are. It also depends on how much wealth do you have. Are you trying to do something from a legacy standpoint? So there's so many variables, but it's a great starting point for investors to get started. And then depending upon how much wealth they have, their risk tolerance, time horizon, you can pivot and shade it one way or the other. There's been a big move into active ETFs this year.

You could see the active guys, you know, screaming off stock pickers. Ah, you see, we're back. But if you really look at it, it's not really what's going. A lot of his conversions to a certain extent. But there is a lot of niche products that have launched this year in the ETS space. We talked about this earlier off air. about buying protection, option protections, some downside protection for people owning equities. Do any of these products that are out there interest vanguard?

I mean, you're very particular about what kind of stuff you take on because you have a certain way of investing that you encourage the viewers to follow. Does any of this sudden spate of active ETFs interest you at all? Yeah, I mean, I would say we stick to our product philosophy as we think about things we're going to launch that fit in. with our investors' needs and with what's rooted in academia. So when we think about our product development agenda, we want to offer products that have long-term, enduring investment merit, that meet a long-term need for a client portfolio, are things that we can do and be best in class

at a lowest total cost, and also that, you know, they're feasible to launch, so there's no operational, regulatory hurdles to launching them. We think about how that applies across asset classes, across styles, sectors, et cetera. And, you know, I think that, you know, I think that, we're really finding opportunities for us to think more about what our fixed income ETF lineup looks like. So I think you'll see more from Vanguard in that space. Yeah. Is there more of an argument to me that fixed income is a more appropriate space for active management than bond trading? It's, I mean, it seems like, I'm not sure about the answer. I don't actually have a strong opinion about this. There are, I see people make that argument.

I think there's opportunities in both spaces. When you think about, when you think about our actively managed equity portfolios, you know, most of them, are sub-advised, right? And we hire some of the best managers out there. But the key to success is low cost. And so the challenge many active managers have, whether not they're on the fixed-income side or the equity side, they charge too much for the alpha they generate,

and hence it's a losing proposition. Yeah, and you have great Bailey Gifford, Wellington, those guys are foundationally great global managers. Jack Bogle was never against active management. Everybody says, oh, Jack Bogle found it. He was very involved in the creation of the very earliest active-managed funds at Bankard. What he was against was high cost.

That's right. And he was one of the first people to ever correctly observe that the rare people who do outperform, their alpha is destroyed by their high fees. That's right. And that was the fundamental insight that Bogle had very, very early on. Another reason, Jack's very famous. Speaking of niche products, regulatory issues, there's a lot of speculation the SEC is going to approve a Bitcoin ETF. Would Vanguard ever have any interest in this? I'll let the guy who makes the decisions answer that one.

The head of the investment committee, go ahead. Yeah, again, we solely believe in the technology behind, you know, Bitcoin in terms of the blockchain technology and things of nature, but you will not be seeing Vanguard offering a Bitcoin ETF. We just don't think there's real investment merit in that type of speculative product. It doesn't fit in our lineup. Okay. We're seeing Big Cap Tech this year being a little bit dismantled. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta, we're down since their earnings.

I know you're not, you know, sector pickers, but is there a right way to look at, considering how obsessed people are with investing in technology and owning the S&P tech funds, Vanguard Growth, VUG, big thing, Vanguard mega cap, MGK, that I put that up all the time. We talk about the Magnificent Seven. I say, here you go. This is mostly, MGK is mostly Magnificent Seven. What's the right way to look at tech as part of the portfolio? I think it's an important part of the portfolio, but again,

it goes back to diversification. You don't want too much concentration. So again, you want the whole market exposure. You don't want it overly concentrated in growth versus value. There's room for both in a portfolio. People take a lot of risk if they end up being segmented to, you know, the very top end of the cap structure, focused, you know, primarily on growth. You're taking a lot of outside risk that over time you're not going to be compensated for. What about people, and I'm just sitting a few final questions here who I get calls in people who have non-retirement accounts, you know, their cash accounts outside of a retirement fund. What's appropriate for them?

I mean, the de-jerk reaction is people say, well, you know, let's put them in Muni funds. It's tax-exempt on a federal level. It's throwing off, what, 4% right now. I think Vanguard intermediate term muni is 4%. Somewhere around that. Is that appropriate? I know you're not, I know you don't,

you're not an RIA, but what do you tell people? My friends ask me, and viewers ask me, I got $100,000 in cash. I just got for money. I can't put it in my retirement account. should I just dump it into the vanguard short-term muni or some muni account, or is there another way to look at it? I think you're giving sound advice. I mean, it depends, again, on the individual.

But if you're thinking about taxable accounts and high-net-worth investors and the yields on municipal bonds right now, you know, you talked about the 4.2% from our intermediate term muni bond fund, if you look at that from a tax-equivalent yield perspective, you're pushing close to 7% at that point. So I think it would be smart for somebody to consider a product like that, in addition to thinking about having a balanced well-diversified portfolio. You know, I tell people this all the time, $8 trillion. What a staggering amount of money it is. I think 7.8 is the recent number for Vanguard. And that to get an eye, your head around this, that is the entire outlay of the U.S. government last year was $6 trillion.

The budget of the U.S. outlays, what's the U. they spent was six trillion. Vanguard manages 7.8 trillion. You're neck and neck with your competitor, BlackRock, but basically you guys are the two biggest asset managers in the world. That's a huge responsibility, isn't it? It's a staggering amount of money. It's hard to even imagine how big it is. I mean, the U.S. stock market, the S&P is $32 trillion. Uh-huh. Stock market's probably $40 trillion. Maybe the bond market's $50 trillion, something around there. But you manage a very large chunk of the whole country's money at this point.

How do you feel about that? It's a huge responsibility. It's a huge responsibility, something that, you know, everybody here comes in every day, recognize that we're focused on trying to, you know, produce the very best results we can for our clients, whether or not their index investors or actively managed fund investors. At the end of day, it's a responsibility that we take to take the heart every single day to try to produce the best results we can to our clients. Well, we really appreciate you having me here.

I know this is a, you just opened this beautiful new trade. Vanguards always trying to improve their campus as beautiful out here folks. If you ever want to drive by you can wave from the highway here. It's one of the nicest campuses I've ever been on. Thank you both for very much for inviting us. Now it's time to round out the conversation with some analysis and perspective to help you better understand ETF. This is the Markets 102 portion of the podcast. We'll be continuing the conversation with Vanguard's Janelle Jackson.

And Janelle, I keep watching the ETF business grow year after year, $3 trillion, $4 trillion, trillion. I think we're at seven trillion right now. What do you see for growth prospects? What's interesting to me is even in a year where growth has been very muted, Vanguard still takes in money. It's that constant flow of largely index ETFs, those S&P 500 funds that you manage and keep getting money. But where do you see the moves happening in 2024? Yeah, it's something else that I like to point out is that the markets keep moving. We keep getting a lot of cash flow. But we've had a pretty consistent lineup. So $2.1 trillion in assets under management and U.S. ETS at Vanguard, and we have 82 products in our lineup. So we keep it consistent to the tools in the toolkit

that investors really need for the core of their portfolio. Many of these solutions are market cap weighted index products, equities and fixed income. But we've also broadened out our lineup to include some more active exposures, if you think about factors, if you think about ultra-short bonds. And we're really looking to 20-24 and beyond to broaden out what those solutions look like in strategies where we can offer best-in-class solutions at a low cost. And there are some things that you don't seem interested. I asked you and Greg Davis earlier about a Bitcoin ETF seem to be no interest here in that, not in keeping with your long-term philosophy. There's other nichey products that are out there, S&P protection overlays where you own

S&P 500 and they sell option products against them as a way of protecting against the downside. Those are a little more complicated. I would say somewhat more gimmicking, and yet some of them have done very, very well. Does any of that fit in with Vanguard's philosophy? Yeah, I think if you look at products and say, hey, is this something that I could buy and hold for a decade plus, that's where you'll see Vanguard offer a product. It's not going to be something where you might have bursty periods of outperformance. It's not going to be something that's considered a trend or a shiny object, but is there some investment merit there that's rooted in academia? This long-term, low-cost philosophy is really where you would see us offer a product,

and not everything fits there, even if it is someplace where investors are putting cash today. How low can we go on low? VanguardSB is, what, three basis points now? And everyone's gone to you at this point. And everyone who hasn't has had a tough time, and certainly any kind of index product. And even in active management, you're down in 20 and 30 basis points. Is there a natural limit to how far you can go on this? I mean, one of the reasons I think active has become so popular is a lot of these fund families need ways to get alternative money, alternative revenues coming in. Three basis points is tough. You've got to have a lot of assets under management.

Fortunately, we have a lot of assets under management. Yeah, with the $7.8 trillion. But if you look at our product lineup and what we stand for, you know, our asset weighted expense ratio is nine basis points relative to the industry average. It's around 53, 54 basis points. So how low can you go? We are the low, and that's the nine basis points. We'll continue to, you know, gain economies of scale and pass those savings through to our investors, given that we are shareholder owned, which is another unique aspect of Vanguard. We're owned by our funds.

So when you talk about all this money that we manage, yeah, it's $7.8 trillion. but it's $7.8 trillion of our investors' money. We're here to serve our clients and make sure that they're able to achieve their goals in a low-cost fashion. And the fact that Vanguard is owned by its – it's a mutual company owned by its investors makes it a somewhat unique business in this area. Janelle, thank you very much for joining us. Really appreciate it. That's it for today.

I'm Bob Pisani. Thank you for listening and make sure you tune in next week. And in the meantime, you can tweet us your questions or topic ideas at ETF Edge, CNVC. Thank you all for joining us on the ETFAG podcast. InvescoQQQ believes new innovations create new opportunities. Become an agent of innovation. InvescoQQQQ, Invesco Distributors, Inc.