ETF Edge - Thematic Tech Turmoil & Vanguard's ETF Anniversary

Episode Date: May 24, 2021

CNBC’s Bob Pisani spoke with Jay Jacobs, head of research and strategy at Global X ETFs, DataTrek Research co-founder Nick Colas and Rich Powers, Vanguard’s head of ETF and index product management. They discussed trouble in the thematic ETF arena and how it impacts the broader market. Plus, it's the 20th anniversary of Vanguard's ETF business. In the 'markets 102' portion of the podcast, Bob continues the conversation with Powers from Vanguard. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://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, exchange, traded funds, you're in the right place. Every week, we're doing interviews, we're doing analysis, and we're breaking down what it means for investors. I'm your host, Bob Pisani. Today on the show, we'll be doing a deep dive on thematic tech trends. Prices may have fallen fast, but the flows, not.

That's a little bit of a different story. We'll clarify that. Plus, it's the 20th anniversary of Vanguard's ETAF business and one of the biggest ETFs in the world, total stock market. We'll get more on how the industry has evolved over the years. Here's my conversation with Rich Powers, head of ETF product management at Vanguard. Jay Jacobs is the head of research and strategy at Global XETFs.

Nicolus is the co-founder of Datatrek Research. Rich, we've got an anniversary, 20th anniversary of the Vanguard total stock market. It was Vanguard's first ETF launched 20 years ago today. And what I remember about it, and I was here right at this very point when it started trading, was the low cost of it, number one. We had index funds before Vanguard had them, but it really helped popularize that VTI, the whole concept of index and ETF investing. Well, that's right, Bob. If you think about indexing has been core to the Vanguard DNA since our founding in the mid-1970s,

but our entrance into the ETF marketplace, what that did for the marketplace, not only for our clients, but also for clients of ETFs at large, is lower the cost of investing for all those who are considering ETFs. You can see that today in the cash flows where the vast majority of cash flows and ETFs go to ETFs at the single basis points expense ratios.

And so kind of democratized low-cost investing for ETFs. Certainly the idea of better tracking of our benchmarks relative to our indexes was something that we brought to the market There were products that were an ETF wrapper that were not tracking their benchmarks as well, and we brought our sophisticated approach there. And then lastly, this idea of having to trade ETFs to actually tap into their utility, we've been able to kind of disavow that as more and more investors are using ETFs as a strategic

asset allocation. And I think we brought that concept of the floor. And I want to make people sometimes think this is a big cap fund, but it isn't. It's market cap weighted, but it's the total investing universe. You have small caps in it. You might even have microcaps in it, right? I think that's the key point here. It's market cap-weighted, but it's across the entire spectrum.

And it's neutral, right? There's no sector overweights or anything like that, right, Rich? That's exactly right, Bob. The exposure offered by total stock market is from the largest companies in the U.S. to the smallest companies. And so you're getting a market-cap-weighted exposure to that market, inclusive of all the different sectors that are there, and they're simply allocated based upon there

weight in the overall equity markets. Yeah. This was one of, of course, VanGuard's founder, Jack Bogle's favorite investments that's out there, and it was along with total bond market as well. Maybe we can talk about that a little later. You've also got a new ultra-short bond ETF that you just launched six weeks ago. I'm amazed at how much money it's gotten. $500 million in assets, an ultra-short bond ETF?

What is this got all of a sudden that's made it so popular? We're really excited about this, Bob. This is something that we've been looking at for some time and we launched a mutual fund version of this product more than five years ago. But our investors were increasingly telling us we'd love to have this strategy within the ETF wrapper. So this is an active ETF. This is our first active fixed income ETF. And yeah, I think it's a product that's benefiting from the times we find ourselves in. Certainly not why we launched it. We think this has enduring long-term investment merit. But if you think about the current interest rate environment and where money market yields are relative to say short-term bond yields, this product kind of falls in nicely between the sweet spot of those two, where you have a one-year duration, around a 50 basis point yield today, given rates, given current rates.

And you're getting for your six-month, 18-month investment time horizon, this type of product could be really suitable to pick up that yield when yield is so hard to. fine today. Yeah, one year, one year is relatively safe. It's not risk-free, for sure, but it's certainly, that's a much better yield than sit in a money market fund right now. Rich, let me bring you in here, excuse me, Jay, let me bring you in. You run some of the largest thematic tech ETFs. I constantly put up GlobalX ETFs around cloud computing and lithium batteries and robotics and fintech. We have been noting, I've been covering this for month now 15, 20%, 25%, declines are more, and some of these thematic tech ETFs, including yours, and yet you, in our discussion at the end of last week, you made it very clear that the

outflows have been very modest, zero to five percent you were saying. How do you explain price declines of 25 percent or even more in some cases, but very, very modest outflows? What's going on? Well, I think the first thing to look at is just the trajectory of this performance. So we've seen phenomenal performance in pretty much any theme related to digitalization, video games and e-sports, e-commerce, cloud computing. These themes really thrive during the state-at-home economy, so a really strong 2020s, and we're seeing a little bit of a pullback in the last few months as people get ready for reopening.

So the pullback is real, but it is relatively small in the grand context of what we've seen over the last 12 or so months. Beyond that, though, I think that Baker, yes, Bob. Go ahead. Go ahead. No, I think beyond that is the people who are owning the funds and really their behavior. So I think there's a little bit of a misconception in who's buying into these EPS. Sometimes the market just thinks, you know, it must just be retail, buying a cloud computing

ATF. But really, it's much more focused on financial advisors and even institutions that are buying these EPS. Last year, about half of our inflows came from financial intermediaries. So that's financial advisors, registered investment advisors, brokers. and 15% came from institutions. So these are serious investors sticking to long-term strategies and are holding these EPS for the long-term.

They are not going to be affected by daily or weekly trends. That's very interesting. So only about a third of your holders are retail, what we would consider weak hands or people who might be short-term more momentum investors. Two-thirds are longer-term. Nick, I wonder if you could comment on that. You've been very eloquently writing for a long term about thematic tech. You did a piece last week about the J-Curve and investing in this kind of technology.

I wonder if you could explain that because the concept is very clear to me that longer-term investors look at these companies with the understanding that they're probably going to lose money in the first few years. So they're not expecting anything for the first, say, three years, but they are expecting something for, say, four through ten years. and that J-curb sort of dominates a lot of thinking for longer-term tech investors. Yeah, Bob, that's right, and I think Jay set it up really well. We've had this huge raft of disruption come through the system in the last 12 months because of the pandemic and a lot of exciting companies start to get built. But we also know that they're not all going to be winners. And so sophisticated investors understand that the first couple of years investing in a big disruptive trend,

you might see some choppiness in years one, two, and three because not all those things are going to be winners, but as we get into years four through ten, the winners do begin to pay off. Think about it as buying every e-commerce company in 2000. A lot of them went bust, but you still outperformed massively because you owned Amazon, and overtime Amazon won everything. So the ETF structure really is an ideal way to play these themes because you're not betting on one or two companies. You're looking at the whole theme and saying, I want to be there, and I know the winners are somewhere in this. list that I want to own when they win. Yeah. I wonder, you know, Rich, if you could comment on this from Vanguard's point of view. We cover this here at CNBC, because my job is to cover the ups and downs of the stock market on a daily basis.

But, you know, Vanguard, it's, I wonder what your viewpoint of all of this thematic tech investing is. Vanguard doesn't offer this kind of thematic tech idea. It offers broad rays of products, but a lot of this strikes me as is still momentum-oriented in a way? Can you give us your or Vanguard's perspective on all of this

sort of frenetic trading or buying in and out of thematic tech? Sure. I think I think we all know that lots of trading usually ends up in a sad way for investors that actively trading is a really challenging way to make profits. I think one of the challenges that investors, be it individuals or financial advisors will encounter in thinking about thematic spaces, what actually constitutes thematics, right? Is it ESG? Is it tech? Is it clean water? Is it something else? So I think there's some open questions there from a definitional standpoint. But maybe the broader question I'd be asking is what problem is trying to be solved. If you look at the success of ETFs of the last 20 or so years, it's largely been a on the backs of

indexing as a concept, right? That investors have come to appreciate their virtues of low-cost, diversified approach to investing, really simplifying their lives. And going down this past, of investing in more focused areas. Certainly there's benefits to that, but it usually comes at a higher cost. And it also usually comes at a cost of time. If you're going to do it right, you need to invest more time. Yeah. I wonder, of course, Jack Vogel would be appalled at all this discussion

about buying into and out of thematic tech ETS, but that's what we do these days. I wonder, Jay and Nick, if you could address the role of higher rates and inflation on these companies. Nick, you're the expert here. I don't want to go into a tutorial on the discounted cash flow model. But can you explain why when rates rise, that is a problem for stocks, but particularly it's a problem for companies that don't have any profits right now.

Why is that such an issue? Because these all hit their highs in February when rates started going up and have had a problem ever since then. Yeah, it's a fantastic point. And the simple explanation, but still very accurate, is if you're betting on a company to make a whole lot of money in four, five, six, ten years' time, then you're at basically the behest of what interest rates are, because if interest rates go up, those dollars in the future are simply worth less today.

And investors are keenly aware of this dynamic, and that's why you see tech kind of trade with interest rates. At the same time, you are still betting on disruptive theme, and you're betting that it will eventually be deeply profitable. So I always tell people, don't worry too much about rates if you understand and believe in the core technologies. because those will win out, but it is another reason where you're going to have to eat some volatility in the near term,

particularly in the current part of the market cycle. Yeah, you know, Jay, the, Nick's got a great point here. We love talking about cloud stocks, for example, about Fastly or JFrog or Snowflake or PagerDuty or any of them. But by and large, they don't make any money right now. And they're not, talk about a J-curb, they're not expected to make any money for the next several years. There's a sort of hope down the road that they'll do,

that J-Curb the people are talking about. You feel your investors are fairly, certainly cognizant of all that being longer-term investors. Yeah, I mean, this is a key tenet of thematic investing, is that when you have a huge potential market you're trying to disrupt, you want to put every dollar available into disrupting that market. So if you're a small cloud provider, the absolute wrong thing to do is be giving dividends back to investors or buying back your stock.

You want to take every dollar coming in, reinvest it in making your technology better, growing your sales force, buying a competitor, really trying to firm up your position within a very fast-growing market and try to dominate it. That's what we've seen with the likes of Apple.

That's what we've seen with the likes of Google, Amazon. A lot of these really big tech companies have really not focused so much on profitability in the last few years, but have really focused on continuing to maintain high growth. So if you look at some of these themes like cloud computing or even earlier themes like lithium and battery technology that's going into electric vehicles,

they're absolutely not in the part of the cycle where they're thinking about earnings. They're thinking about growth, growth, growth. Yeah. But as Nick implied there, you've got to essentially go through a lot of clunkers to find a handful of winners, which is what, you know, the JV people do,

joint venture crowds, they're trying to figure out, you know, if you're investing in a whole bunch of different companies, how many of them are actually going to be successful. Jay or Nick, I wonder if you can explain outflows. Last week, the last couple weeks have been a problem for me because people seem to be very confused about what happens with outflows and who actually controls outflows and the differences. So maybe, Jay, you can explain how that happens, how you have price declines, but no, outflow. So what happens when there is an outflow? Do you sell the underlying shares? Is this determined by, does the market maker do that, or do you actually do that? People seem confused

about outflows. Explain what happens in that process. Yeah, sure, absolutely. So if effectively there's more people selling the fund than buying the fund, you have an imbalance, and ultimately there's going to be redemption out of that ETF. Now, for the VASPs, when there's a redemption, That means the ETF issuer like Global X or Vanguard or whomever is going to deliver the underlying shares of the companies held by the ETF to a market maker in exchange for redeeming the shares of the EPS. Then it's really up to that market maker to do what they want with those underlying shares. So if they've just redeemed the basket of tech stocks, they could sell them, they could hold them, they can lend them, they can do a lot of different things with it. But there's an intermediary between redemptions and actual selling activity in the market on those underlying companies. What I would also further distinguish is that funds can go down in price without seeing outflows.

So a fund is really just a reflection of the average value of the stocks being held by that fund. If those stocks fall 10%, but all the holders of that ETF are still perfectly fine holding the ETF, you're not necessarily going to see any redemption. The fund might be down in value, but people are still hanging on in there. That's what we're seeing in thematic tech right now. Not a lot of redemptions, but the price of some of the shares is down. So the question is that process by which you decide to essentially create the redemption process, where you would surrender shares of the stocks underlying it to the market maker?

Is there some trigger point? You generically said, well, there's more people who want to sell the fund than want to buy it that would trigger outflows. But is there some legal obligation or something like that where you're required to actually do that for whatever reasons? Well, it's ultimately up to the authorized participants who are off on the market makers if they want to redeem the shares. So an ETF should always be open to redeeming shares, and it's the market makers that are going to say, we have enough shares to redeem, we'd like the underlying companies in there. So it's not really up to the ETF issue, or it's up to the market makers and what they want to hold. Yeah, so the shares, the market maker ultimately will decide what to do,

whether they're actually reducing the share count or not. right? I mean, is that how it works? Yeah, effectively, yes. Yeah. Okay. A little bit of market internals there, folks, but I can't tell you how many people messaged me last week and wanted to know a little bit about that. Jay, you're big on, just one more thing. I know I'm hit on you a lot here, but I want to go back to this thematic idea here.

Infrastructure is very hot right now. The negotiations are heating up. You've got one of those infrastructure, thematic ETFs, PAVEE Pave right now, and it went from, what, $100 million last year? Is this right? Three and a half billion? Are people looking to play the American jobs plan here right now? Or what are we doing?

That's correct. I mean, this is a fund that we launched actually during the previous election cycle when it was Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump. Not a lot of consensus between those two on what they wanted to do politically, but one area where we saw consensus was an infrastructure development. Fast forward four years later, it's very much kind of ripe for disruption, if you will, with an economy that's still, you know, below kind of prime GDP. We're seeing a lot of talk about the American Jobs Plan.

Even if Biden doesn't get his way, Republicans have a counter that still includes hundreds of billions of dollars for infrastructure. So I think investors are very excited about the prospects of probably the largest infrastructure bill we ever had in the United States and a fund that's really designed to own the winners of that type of bill, construction engineering companies, commodities, transportation companies and heavy machinery companies that are going to be building that infrastructure. Rich, while I've got you here, you're one of the big ETF watchers here.

What are you seeing in the ETF business right now? What are your, what are clients interested in doing it? I know there's been very notable inflows into plain vanilla, what we call plain vanilla, indexed, and that plays right up your alley. Any other observations on what investors are doing right now? about investors continue to focus on broad-based funds so our total stock market or total bond market funds are certainly among the best sellers in the industry this year but also you know for the last several years so investors are focused on diversification and low cost I think the other interesting thing to keep that the working on eye on is the adoption of ETFs by newer investors so only about 10% of all individual investors without an advisor use ETF so we're seeing that number increase on our platform and elsewhere And then even advisors. We're hearing more and more advisors shift to ETFs. It happens when you have these market events like we had in the last year where a big sell-off happens and you see a leg up in terms of ETF adoption. It happened in the global financial crisis. It happened in the early 2000s. These types of events tend to be a catalyst for another upward trajectory in terms of ETF adoption across a full range of clients. And Nick, you're one of the better market watchers that I know out there.

Why don't you give me your 30-second, 30,000 view of what we're going to see this summer? We flatten out a little bit on the S&P earnings. They're still raising numbers for the second and third quarter. And it seems to me the conversation with the Federal Reserve about tapering has already begun. The market seems to be happy about at least starting that. Who knows how it'll end? Tell us what you're expecting over the summer for the markets. Yes, you're right. I mean, the funny thing about this year is that we've seen more earnings revisions than we've seen stock price performance. We've seen 12% upside to earnings expectations this year, only about 10% on the S&P. So multiples are coming down, and you're right. It's going to come down to Q2 and Q3 earnings. The numbers are still too low, it seems to us, for Q2. So we should have another strong earnings season coming up, but that will be kind of the tug of war until then. So expect a couple more weeks of exactly what you've just seen. And then as earnings will begin to show,

themselves through and not only higher towards the end of the year. Yeah, I think, and I noticed the VIXes have been flattening out a little bit here. We already see a little bit of the summer doldrums, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing to happen. Remember, folks, we're only 2% from an historic high on the S&B, despite a lot of anxiety. It's a pretty remarkable year. Now it's time to round out the conversation with some analysis and perspective to help you better understand ETFs. This is the Markets 102 portion of the podcast. Today will be continuing the conversation with Rich Powers from Vanguard.

And Rich, you know, I love talking about Vanguard total stock market because it was one of Jack Boguls, Vanguard's founder, favorite investment vehicles that's out there, the concept of total stock market. I know he had some issues with the ETFs, but I know he made it clear that a large part of his personal holdings was in total stock market and total bond market. So 20 years on, you could still see.

the impact of that decision. What's amazing to me is that Vanguard managed to become a major force in the ETF business, even though Jack had tremendous suspicions about the ETF business. He was always unhappy that people were suddenly going to turn into day traders. And while some funds, I guess, are used by day traders, for the most part, it's been a brilliant investment on Vanguard's part to go into the whole, the ETF business. Other people didn't, and they're behind. I think one of the great concerns was that investors might use ETFs to trade extensively,

and we know that when there's a lot of trading that happens, usually that ends up in poor outcome for investors. The better approach to building for a long-term investment outcome would be to buy and hold, rebalance, have those types of disciplines versus trading, which ETFs had a reputation for. But as we've talked to financial advisors, individuals, and we observe their behavior in their portfolios, they tend to use ETFs as a strategic asset allocation tool to reach those investment outcomes, be it a retirement, college funding, whatever it might be. And so I think that those were the concerns at the outset, but we've seen a very different set of behaviors for investors. Yeah.

I can't help but think if Jack was sitting here next to me, he'd be shaking his finger at me. he'd be appalled at these discussions about thematic tech ETFs. He'd say, don't you remember the conversations we had in the 90s? Don't you remember? Are you a student of history, Bob? I remember when Jack used to have that professorial attitude with people who he thought were not paying attention to the lessons of history. I remember when common sense on mutual funds came out in 99. I had been the stocks reporter.

I was still down here for two years. And the impact that had on the industry. and he had a very famous chapter called On Simplicity, where he took one single investment, a single broad mutual fund, 65-35 fund, stocks to bonds, sort of like Vanguard-Welington would be, and he looked at the performance of just owning that one fund

over many, many years, and found that it outperformed most other, and anybody kind of actively managed fund that was out there. Just buy and hold a 6530 fund outperformed all other actively managed, diversified funds in general. I forget how long it went back, he went back 25 years or something like that. His point being that do nothing, stay invested, don't do active, don't try to time the market, don't trade it, don't be actively trading, and keep the costs low. Of course, as you know, his point being that trading in and out, high costs, high active management.

fees ate into the profits. And I think his essential message from 25 years ago is still accurate, wouldn't you say? I think so. When we think about active management, there's certainly a place for active management, but there are a variety of conditions that need to be in place for that active management to be successful. One, you need to have a talented manager who has discipline and can execute that over a long period of time. Two, low costs need to be a tailwind for them, not a hurdle for them. to jump over. That's part of the reason why when you look at the Vanguard active

management offer across our equity in fixed income franchises, they've been successful. They not only have talented managers, but they also have a lower fee hurdle for them to overcome and therefore to deliver value for investors. And maybe just a little bit of a kind of tangent back to the question you posed earlier, Bob, but I'll also say what ETFs have done, it's actually bring indexing to more and more investors. You know, ETFs have this great portability to them where they're available on every brokerage platform that you can, that an investor would be engaged with. And so that's brought indexing to more and more people who otherwise wouldn't have access to it,

access to it, access to it before, and that's created value for them. In fact, there's more assets and ETFs today than there are index mutual funds, even though index mutual funds had a more than 20-year head start from a inception standpoint. Yeah. And I'm sorry to keep bringing up, Jack, but he had such an impact on me that, I mean, my whole basic way of looking at the world comes from Jack and a few other people. But he always used to say we were never and are not opposed to active management. We have very good active management. Of course, Jack being Wellington, some of the best active managers in the world over there. But what he was against was high-priced active management.

So even in the book, and I remember this so well, there was a chapter of the book where he said, Listen, if you are, my preference was for you to use index funds. If you don't and you choose active managers, for heaven's sake, make sure you choose low-cost active managers because the high-cost ones destroy any alpha that they generate. Of course, Vanguard's, I think, still exists on that principle. We do. We have more than a trillion dollars of active assets across our mutual fund franchise, fixed income, equity, and balanced portfolios. And they have a very esteemed track record to point to.

But even within our ETF lineup, we've started to offer active products. So a little more than three years ago, we launched a series of factor strategies that cover value, momentum, among other equity strategies. And then this past April, we launched our ultra-short bond fund, which is our first active fixed income fund. So certainly big believers in active. The conditions you outline have to be in place. And we're demonstrating that in the launches we're bringing to the market in our ETF lineup. One other thing that you did that I thought was, I think it's unique to Vanguard, was you built your ETFs as share classes of existing mutual funds instead of, I guess you would call them standalone vehicles. So the fund shareholders were allowed to convert to ETF shares if they wanted to.

And that was a feature, I think, that appealed to a lot of Vanguard investors who already believed in index investment, but like the concept of owning an ETF. I guess some people liked intradate trading as a part of that. Jack would be appalled. But you did have that kind of unique feature of that, you know, a share class of existing mutual funds. You know, we do have a unique ETF structure. It's called a multi-class ETFs structure. And that's for 70 of the 82 ETFs we have here in the U.S. And so as you outlined, we had a mutual fund.

We attached an ETF to it and just different ways for investors to access the product. Some of the key benefits that those early. funds, a particular total stock as an example benefited from, was that on day one of total stock ETF's inception, it had broad exposure to thousands of stocks on day one, a very low expense ratio, and incredible tracking. And so that type of track occurred and scale and low cost put total stock in a really good position to be successful and deliver value for its investors effectively from day one. And this year, we're starting to see some mutual fund make the conversion to an ETF.

Like I said, I'm bringing this up because Vanguard had the ability to do this a long time ago. Any observations on the industry as you obviously see some asset managers, active managers who are concerned about outflows and costs trying to make that transition over to an ETF structure? I think the steamsher characteristic between what our products are relative to what we're seeing right now is that our products it's the same pool of assets. It's just converting from one share class to another, which happens to be an ETF,

so that that can be a tax-free change for those investors. In the case of these active mutual funds that are converting to mutual funds, converting to ETFs, I think what you're, the catalyst for that is likely that these firms look at the ETF structure is a more attractive vehicle in terms of their ability to reach more investors,

because they are on effectively all brokerage platforms, because of the in-kind nature in which ETFs transact, they're not taking in cash from investors and sending cash out when investors are deemed. So there's a benefit of a tax perspective because of the in-kind nature of way ATFs operate. It remains to be seen whether this will be a long-term trend. I think one certain governor on it from the number of products you'll see that convert is that most, a lot of mutual funds are held in 401K plans.

The 401K plans really don't hold ETFs. And they don't hold brokerage accounts. And so the ability for a fund that's held pretty widely in 401K plans to convert is probably somewhat constrained because those products simply can't be made available to the underlying participants of those plans. And what about that? What about the penetration of ETFs in the 401K business? That is a little bit amazing to me. I mean, obviously, a lot of companies have invested interest in keeping up relatively higher-cost mutual funds that they can charge higher fees on than in low-cost ETFs. Is that the significant barrier to why we're not seeing ETFs in 401Ks?

There's a couple reasons. One, most planned sponsors have moved their plan participants into target date type portfolios. So those are kind of pre-constructed portfolios that evolve as an investor moves towards retirement. So those tend to be balanced funds. And you just don't see many balanced ETFs out in the marketplace. But more germane issues relate to ETFs tend to benefit from a tax-efficient. perspective, in the case of a 401k plan, tax considerations really aren't part of the equation because those are in tax deferred accounts. But maybe the most important thing, as most 401K

plans actually have access to institutional shares or collective trusts of the same investment strategies, and those tend to be a little bit cheaper than even the ETFs. And so some of the benefits around ETFs from a cost standpoint don't necessarily pour it over as well because these plans are bringing hundreds of millions or billions of dollars, and they can get even lower cost investment strategies than the ETF offers today. Yeah, it's a good point. All right, Rich, I'm going to have to leave you there, and I appreciate you sticking around and talking what's a little bit more here. Rich Powers, folks, the head of ETF and index product management over at Vanguard. And happy anniversary with that total stock market. Rich, thanks very much for joining us. 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, CNBC. Invesco QQQ believes new innovations create new opportunities. Here's the greater possibilities together. Learn more at investco.com slash QQ. Investco Distributors, Inc.