Select Sector SPDR ETF.## Featured ReadsOur top personal finance-related articles today. Your wallet will thank you later.[Joey Frenette]| 3 minutes ago## If you have over $100k saved and afraid to invest, Suze Orman says do this today[Maurie Backman]| 34 minutes ago## Ramsey's "No Credit Score Needed for Success" Is Only A little Correct## Continue Reading## 3 Safety-First ETFs to Retire in Comfort[David Moadel | Feb 9, 2026 at 9:22 AM EST When you're in or near your retirement years and safety becomes pri ...

Group 1 - Vanguard has established a strong reputation on Wall Street due to its conservatively managed business model and low-cost investment products [1] - The company is the second-largest ETF issuer globally, managing over $4 trillion in assets, and is on track to potentially surpass BlackRock in the next year or two [1] - Vanguard offers more than 100 ETFs, most with expense ratios of 0.1% or less, but not all ETFs are equally recommended [2] Group 2 - The Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is the third-largest dividend ETF with over $72 billion in assets and an expense ratio of 0.04% [3] - The ETF has a yield of 2.3%, which is more than double that of the S&P 500, making it appear attractive at first glance [3] - The fund tracks the FTSE High Dividend Yield Index, which includes companies with above-average dividend yields, but the selection methodology is criticized for being too lax [4] Group 3 - The definition of "high yield" used by the ETF is considered too loose, allowing stocks with yields only slightly above the average to qualify [5] - A more selective high-yield strategy is suggested, either by narrowing the number of qualifying stocks or setting a minimum yield threshold [6] - The ETF holds over 500 stocks, which may dilute the portfolio's effectiveness, indicating a need for a more focused high-yield strategy [7]

Core Viewpoint - The Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO) is highlighted due to its strong performance and low expense ratio, making it an attractive option for investors seeking exposure to emerging markets [2][3][10]. Fund Performance and Popularity - Emerging market ETFs have seen significant popularity, with over $20 billion in new net inflows recorded in January [2]. - VWO has been around for more than a decade and is recognized as a foundational ETF for investors looking to diversify beyond domestic markets [2][10]. Cost Efficiency - Vanguard has reduced the expense ratio for VWO to six basis points, making it cheaper than many comparable funds, including those from iShares [3][5]. - The average expense ratio for similar funds is over 100 basis points, highlighting VWO's cost advantage [5][16]. Market Trends and Diversification - Emerging markets have outperformed U.S. equities, prompting investors to seek diversification away from U.S. large-cap stocks [7][9]. - Key countries represented in VWO include China, Taiwan, India, South Africa, and Brazil, providing a broad exposure to emerging markets [9][10]. Investment Strategy - VWO is positioned as a core holding for international equity exposure, suitable for pairing with actively managed strategies for enhanced performance [15][16]. - A recommended allocation for emerging markets in a portfolio is between 5% and 10%, reflecting the higher risk and potential rewards associated with this asset class [19].

Core Viewpoint - Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) offers broader exposure to the U.S. bond market compared to Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury ETF (VGIT), which focuses on intermediate-term Treasuries, providing distinct options for income seekers [1]. Cost and Size - Both BND and VGIT have an expense ratio of 0.03% [3][4]. - BND has a current price of $74.24, with a 1-year return of 2.3% and a dividend yield of 4.2% [2][4]. - VGIT has a 1-year return of 2.5% and a dividend yield of 3.9% [3]. Performance and Risk Comparison - Over the past five years, BND experienced a maximum drawdown of -17.29%, while VGIT had a lower drawdown of -14.77% [5]. - The growth of $1,000 over five years was $994 for BND and $998 for VGIT, indicating similar performance despite BND's broader exposure [5]. Portfolio Composition - BND holds 11,444 different bonds with an average effective maturity of eight years, with 49.2% in Treasury bonds, 19.5% in government mortgage-backed securities, and 14.5% in industrial bonds [6]. - VGIT primarily consists of intermediate-term U.S. Treasuries, with only 102 positions, focusing on maximum safety from credit risk [7]. Investment Implications - BND's diversification and higher yield of 4.2% make it a more attractive option for income investors compared to VGIT's yield of 3.9% [8]. - BND's average duration of 5.7 years suggests less sensitivity to interest rate changes compared to VGIT's 4.9 years [9]. - VGIT's lower drawdowns and volatility may appeal to conservative investors, but BND could provide higher upside if interest rates decline [10].

Core Insights - The iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF (SLVP) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) have distinct risk profiles, asset management sizes, and performance histories, with SLVP focusing on volatile silver miners and GLD tracking physical gold bullion [1][2] Cost & Size - SLVP has an expense ratio of 0.39% and AUM of $1.4 billion, while GLD has an expense ratio of 0.40% and AUM of $188.9 billion [3] - The one-year return for SLVP is 187.2%, compared to GLD's 72.4%, and SLVP offers a dividend yield of 1.6%, whereas GLD does not [3][4] Performance & Risk Comparison - Over five years, SLVP experienced a maximum drawdown of -55.56%, while GLD had a maximum drawdown of -21.03% [5] - An investment of $1,000 in SLVP would grow to $2,112 over five years, while the same investment in GLD would grow to $2,554 [5] Fund Composition - GLD is designed to track the price of physical gold, providing a straightforward investment without the need for physical storage or insurance, and is one of the largest and most liquid ETFs globally [6] - SLVP invests exclusively in mining companies, including major holdings like Hecla Mining and First Majestic Silver Corp, leading to more volatile returns due to sensitivity to silver prices and operational risks [7] Investor Considerations - Both SLVP and GLD offer exposure to precious metals but cater to different investor priorities based on their risk tolerance and investment strategy [9]

分组1 - The options market experienced a slow trading day with a volume of 50.92 million, below the 30-day average of 59.63 million, indicating a cautious sentiment among investors [1] - Call options outnumbered put options by 1.5 times, suggesting that bullish sentiment remains strong in the near term [1] - ETF options accounted for 54% of the total volume, with 32 put options showing unusually high activity, having volume-to-open-interest ratios of 10.0 or higher [1] 分组2 - The SPDR Gold Trust (GLD), iShares MSCI Brazil ETF (EWZ), and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) have all increased by at least 10% over the past month, significantly outperforming the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY), which gained only 0.7% [2] - GLD has total assets of $185.92 billion and has seen a significant price increase from $191.17 at the end of 2023 to $494.56 recently, with early Thursday trading showing prices above $500 [4] - Investors are increasingly purchasing gold as a hedge against the weakening U.S. dollar, with experts noting that dollar weakness is driving up gold prices [5]

Core Insights - India's currency market is under significant pressure, with the rupee hitting an all-time low against the U.S. dollar just before Republic Day 2026, raising concerns about the equity market and ETFs holding Indian equities [1][3] - The MSCI India Index has underperformed, rising only 2.2% in U.S. dollar terms in 2025, compared to a 29.9% increase in MSCI Emerging Markets [2] - The rupee's depreciation presents a paradox for ETF investors, as it may attract foreign investment but also increases volatility and risk [4] Economic Context - The decline of the rupee is attributed to massive capital outflows, with nearly $18 billion withdrawn from Indian equities in 2025, and an additional $846 million in early 2026 as investors sought safer assets [7] - Geopolitical tensions, particularly related to U.S.-India trade negotiations and global market uncertainties, have negatively impacted investor sentiment [8] - India's trade deficit has widened to over $25 billion, driven by rising energy and electronics import costs, further pressuring the rupee [9] Market Outlook - Analysts maintain a cautious outlook for the rupee in 2026, warning of potential further declines if geopolitical tensions persist or if the Federal Reserve maintains high interest rates [10] - Despite currency struggles, the IMF has upgraded India's 2026 growth outlook to 6.4%, indicating strong underlying economic productivity [12] ETF Performance - The WisdomTree India Earnings Fund (EPI) has total assets of $2.58 billion and has risen 2.4% over the past year, with top holdings including Reliance Industries and HDFC Bank [14] - The Franklin FTSE India ETF (FLIN), with assets of $2.75 billion, has also gained 2.4% over the past year, focusing on large and mid-cap companies [15] - The First Trust India NIFTY 50 Equal Weight ETF (NFTY) has total assets of $160.9 million and has risen 3.5% over the past year, providing exposure to the largest Indian securities [16]

Group 1 - J.P. Morgan Asset Management announced final cash distributions for January 2026 for two ETFs, with payments scheduled for February 6, 2026 [1] - The distributions per unit are $0.17508 for the JPMorgan US Equity Premium Income ETF (JEPI) and $0.25478 for the JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF (JEPQ), both paid monthly [1] - The ETFs are traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) and are aimed at providing income to unitholders [1] Group 2 - J.P. Morgan Asset Management manages assets totaling $4 trillion as of September 30, 2025, serving a diverse clientele including institutions and high net worth individuals globally [2] - The company offers a wide range of investment management services, including equities, fixed income, real estate, hedge funds, private equity, and liquidity [2] - The legal entity in Canada is JPMorgan Asset Management (Canada) Inc., which operates as a registered Portfolio Manager and Exempt Market Dealer across Canadian provinces [6]

Core Insights - The VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) and the SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) respond differently to gold prices, catering to distinct investment strategies [2][9] Cost and Size Comparison - GDX has an expense ratio of 0.51% and GLDM has a lower expense ratio of 0.10%, making GLDM more attractive for cost-conscious investors [3][4] - As of January 20, 2026, GDX has a one-year return of 181.64% compared to GLDM's 75.86% [3] - GDX has assets under management (AUM) of $25.8 billion, while GLDM has AUM of $25.29 billion [3] Performance and Risk Analysis - Over five years, GDX experienced a maximum drawdown of -46.52%, while GLDM had a maximum drawdown of -20.92% [5] - An investment of $1,000 in GDX would grow to $2,587 over five years, compared to $2,427 for GLDM [5] Portfolio Composition - GLDM is structured to reflect the price of physical gold, providing pure-play gold exposure without the volatility associated with mining companies [6] - GDX invests exclusively in gold mining companies, which introduces additional risks related to company performance and management [7] Investment Implications - GLDM is suitable for investors seeking direct exposure to gold prices with less volatility, while GDX offers potential for higher returns through mining company performance [10][12] - The performance of GDX can diverge from gold prices due to operational risks and market sentiment, making it more volatile [11]

Core Insights - The article discusses two prominent real estate ETFs, the Vanguard Global ex-U.S. Real Estate ETF (VNQI) and the Xtrackers International Real Estate ETF (HAUZ), which provide investors with exposure to international real estate markets outside the United States [2][4]. Cost & Size Comparison - HAUZ has an expense ratio of 0.10% and assets under management (AUM) of $951.9 million, while VNQI has an expense ratio of 0.12% and AUM of $3.53 billion [3]. - The one-year return for HAUZ is 21.27%, compared to VNQI's 19.63%, and the dividend yield for HAUZ is 4.34%, slightly lower than VNQI's 4.58% [3][4]. Performance & Risk Metrics - Over a five-year period, HAUZ experienced a maximum drawdown of -34.54%, while VNQI had a slightly higher drawdown of -35.76% [5]. - The growth of a $1,000 investment over five years would result in $891 for HAUZ and $876 for VNQI [5]. Fund Composition - VNQI holds 742 assets and focuses on global real estate excluding the U.S., with major holdings including Goodman Group, Mitsui Fudosan Co., Ltd., and Mitsubishi Estate Co., Ltd. [6]. - HAUZ, being three years younger, has nearly 300 fewer holdings than VNQI and excludes companies from Pakistan and Vietnam in addition to the U.S. [7]. Dividend Payout Frequency - HAUZ has historically paid dividends semiannually, resulting in two payments per year, while VNQI switched from quarterly to annual payments in 2023, offering a larger lump sum payment [9].