As investors have become more acquainted with exchange-traded
products, some have wondered why so many broader market and
sector funds are dominated by the largest companies. As Apple
) has shown investors, an ETF's excessive allocation to just one
or two stocks is fine on the way, but
rather dangerous on the way down
The reason why the companies with largest market values loom
large in so many ETFs is simple: Many ETFs use a cap-weighted
methodology to assign weights to the components. For example, a
cap-weighted ETF focused on U.S.-based energy producers would,
more than likely, have Exxon Mobil (NYSE:
) as its largest component, Chevron (NYSE:
) as its second-largest and so on.
There are alternatives to cap-weighting, namely in the form of
equal-weight ETFs. The concept behind equal-weight equity-based
ETFs is a compelling one. After all, one of the allures of ETFs
is gaining exposure to multiple stocks through one fund and no
one likes the nasty surprise of finding out their ETF is
excessively weighted to just one or two stocks.
Some equal-weight ETFs have risen to acclaim over the years
for outperforming their cap-weighted counterparts over long time
horizons. Some toil in anonymity. Here is a look at a few of the
more anonymous equal-weight ETFs that have the potential to
deliver solid returns.
First Trust NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index Fund (NASDAQ:
Depending on one's view of Apple, QQEW is either an afterthought
or the perfect tech ETF for the times. Apple, the world's largest
company by market value, accounts for a scant 0.91 percent of
QQEW. That means the iPad maker is 35 basis points "less
important" to this ETF than Netflix (NASDAQ:
), the fund's largest holding.
These days, that is not a bad thing. As Apple has tumbled,
QQEW has shown its mettle
. In the past month, shares of Apple have plunged 9.5 percent,
dragging the PowerShares QQQ (NASDAQ:
) to a loss of 4.7 percent in the process. Over the same period,
QQQEW is off just 3.1 percent.
Given Apple's large weight in QQQ, currently 18.9 percent, the
premise here is simple. QQEW offers protection from downside in
that stock while keeping investors exposed to the tech sector.
Also consider the Direxion NASDAQ 100 Equal Weighted Shares
SPDR S&P Health Care Equipment ETF (NYSE:
Some folks may not realize that the SPDR sector funds, not the
select sector SPDRs such as the Technology Select Sector SPDR
), are actually equal-weight products. They are not perfect in
terms of equal weights, meaning XHE does not have 100 components
each accounting for one percent.
Rather, XHE has 58 holdings and the largest receives a weight
of 2.89 percent. XHE's approach is working. Year-to-date, the ETF
has outperformed its primary rival, the iShares Dow Jones U.S.
Medical Devices Index Fund (NYSE:
), by 150 basis points.
Guggenheim S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF
RYH will celebrate its sixth birthday on Thursday, but the fund
has just $53.9 million in assets under management, indicating
that investors have not yet taken note of the utility of this
ETF. Where RYH stands out is at the sub-sector level where it
spreads about 78 percent of its weight between health care
services providers, equipment makers and traditional
While RYH does not track the same index as XLV, the two are
bound to draw comparisons to each other. XLV, the largest health
care ETF with $5.4 billion in assets, is up 16.2 percent this
year. That is only marginally better than RYH and RYH could
easily be viewed as the more attractive option because of its
Figure it this way. If Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:
), Pfizer (NYSE:
) and Merck (NYSE:
) combined for 34 percent of XLV's weight. Those stocks are
intimately correlated to each other, implying investors do not
have to worry about single-stock risk with XLV. They have to be
concerned with potential three-stock (maybe more) risk with this
Considering that pharmaceuticals stocks are performing well
this year, it would be reasonable to expect RYH would be lagging
an ETF like XLV by a wider margin. That has not been the case and
that makes RYH all the more attractive.
For more on equal-weight ETFs, click
(c) 2012 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment
advice. All rights reserved.