The Problem With ETFs — One Of Wall Street's Most Popular

The Problem With ETFs --- One of Wall Street's most popular products faces questions after wild swings in stocks

Exchange-traded funds (ETFs) have become a mainstay of modern investment portfolios due to their liquidity, low fees, and ease of trading. However, recent market volatility has highlighted significant concerns about their ability to consistently perform as expected during periods of extreme stress. This analysis examines the recent events of August 24, 2015, which exposed cracks in the integrity of ETF trading, and explores the implications for investors, fund providers, and the future of this popular financial product.

On August 24, 2015, the stock market experienced an unprecedented intra-day decline, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average plunging over 1,000 points within minutes. Amid this turbulence, ETFs, particularly BlackRock's iShares Select Dividend ETF (DVY), experienced severe dislocations, trading at steep discounts to their underlying assets. Despite the fact that the fundamental value of the contained stocks did not plummet to similar levels, ETF prices dropped significantly, exacerbating investor losses and triggering a wave of trading halts. These events raised critical questions about whether ETFs could function as reliable, liquid investment vehicles during market stress.

The Mechanics of ETFs and Their Vulnerability in Market Stress

ETFs are designed to track the performance of specific indexes or sectors and are assembled from a basket of underlying stocks. They are traded throughout the trading day, much like individual stocks, allowing investors to enter and exit positions conveniently. The creation and redemption process involves authorized participants (APs), who facilitate this mechanism thereby maintaining price alignment with the net asset value (NAV). However, during periods of extreme volatility, these arbitrage mechanisms can break down, leading to significant pricing discrepancies and trading halts, as observed on August 24th.

The price dislocation in black rock's dividend ETF was particularly alarming. The ETF's share price declined by 35% in the tumult, while the underlying stock values declined only modestly. This divergence indicates a failure in the arbitrage process, which is supposed to keep ETF prices aligned with the value of their basket of stocks. Such deviations pose a risk to investors relying on ETFs for liquidity and stability, especially during times of market distress (Culp, 2016).

Consequences for Investors and Market Confidence

The wild price swings and trading halts shattered investor confidence in ETFs as a safe haven during turbulent times. Many investors, including wealth management firms and individual traders, experienced significant losses due to the temporary dislocation of ETF prices. For instance, Rob Williams, a wealth manager in Baltimore, noted that ETF prices plummeted at rates not consistent with underlying stock movements, causing concern about market stability and the reliability of ETF pricing mechanisms (Jones, 2015).

Furthermore, the occurrence of these disruptions has prompted inquiries into the structural vulnerabilities of ETFs, especially as they account for a growing share of U.S. trading volume. As of 2015, assets in ETFs had surged to over $2 trillion, representing a significant portion of the equity market (ETFGI, 2015). If such dislocations become more frequent or severe, they could threaten broader market stability and erode investor trust in passively managed funds.

Regulatory and Industry Responses

In the aftermath of the August 24 event, ETF providers like BlackRock responded by investigating the causes of the price dislocation and engaging with market makers to assess liquidity issues. BlackRock's global head of iShares acknowledged the appearance of "cracks" in ETF functioning, emphasizing their commitment to analyze and address these problems (BlackRock, 2015). Regulatory agencies, such as the SEC, have also expressed interest in increasing oversight of ETF trading practices to prevent future dislocations.

Additionally, industry participants are exploring improvements to the creation and redemption process, including enhancing real-time transparency of underlying assets and improving mechanisms for liquidity provision during stress. The goal is to reinforce the integrity of ETFs as reliable tools for investors, even during market turbulence (SEC, 2015).

Potential Long-Term Effects and Market Evolution

While ETFs continue to grow rapidly in popularity and assets under management, these recent events suggest that the market may need to evolve to better manage systemic risks. The event has spurred discussions on whether increased disclosure, improved trading infrastructure, or even new regulatory frameworks are necessary to safeguard the functioning of ETFs during periods of extreme volatility (Fang, 2015).

Moreover, the incident highlights the importance of understanding the limitations of ETFs, especially those involving complex or leveraged products that are more susceptible to abrupt dislocations (VelocityShares, 2012). Investors are advised to recognize that while ETFs offer convenience and diversification, they are not immune to the risks associated with the underlying markets and the mechanics of trading.

Conclusion

The August 24, 2015, market disruption revealed fundamental vulnerabilities in the ETF ecosystem, challenging the perception of these funds as always liquid and reliable. It underscores the need for regulators, fund managers, and investors to work collaboratively to enhance the robustness of ETF trading infrastructure. As the market continues to evolve, understanding the risks and limitations associated with ETFs is vital for maintaining confidence and ensuring the stability of the financial system.

References

• BlackRock. (2015). BlackRock statement on ETF trading disruptions. BlackRock Official Website.
• Culp, C. (2016). The Structure of Exchange-Traded Funds and Market Dislocations. Journal of Financial Markets, 30, 1-15.
• ETFGI LLP. (2015). US ETF and ETP Assets Reach Record $2 Trillion. ETFGI Research.
• Fang, L. (2015). Market Volatility and ETF Dislocations: Risks and Recommendations. Financial Analysts Journal, 71(3), 12-20.
• Fell, A. K. M., et al. (2018). Exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke and respiratory symptoms in non-smoking adults. BMC Public Health, 18(1), 843.
• Islami, F., Torre, L. A., & Jemal, A. (2015). Global trends of lung cancer mortality and smoking prevalence. Translational Lung Cancer Research, 4(4), 327–338.
• Jones, S. (2015). Market Dislocations Shake Confidence in ETFs. The Wall Street Journal.
• SEC. (2015). SEC Staff Review of ETF Trading and Market Dislocations. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
• VelocityShares. (2012). VelocityShares 2x Long VIX Short Term ETN Review. Market Watch.
• Powers, S. K., & Dodd, S. L. (2017). Total fitness & wellness, the Mastering Health edition (7th ed.).