The financial barriers to entry for launching an ETF are high and increasing. A new fund requires a minimum of $25 million in seed capital and faces around $200,000 in annual operating costs, necessitating a long-term financial commitment of three to five years to reach a breakeven AUM of $25M to $100M, depending on the fee structure.
The ETF market is dominated by a few large players like BlackRock and Vanguard who control the majority of asset flows into broad, passive index funds. New entrants cannot compete on scale or fees in this core market.
Even for purely systematic, rules-based strategies, the recommended structure is now an active ETF rather than an index-based one. The active wrapper provides greater operational flexibility for portfolio managers, such as adjusting rebalancing schedules around market events, without the high compliance overhead of deviating from a stated index methodology.
The liquidity for 99.99% of ETFs is not derived from secondary market trading volume but from primary liquidity provided by market makers. The bid-ask spread is determined by the cost for market makers to trade the underlying basket of securities, not the ETF's own trading activity. Key disadvantages of the ETF wrapper are the requirements for daily transparency and the inability to close the fund to new capital, making it unsuitable for proprietary or capacity-constrained strategies.
Keep pulling the thread on Wes Gray.