Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of considering factors beyond just expense ratios when selecting exchange-traded funds (ETFs), as costs can significantly impact long-term investment gains [2][4]. Group 1: ETF Market Overview - ETFs have become a popular alternative to traditional mutual funds, holding approximately $13.2 trillion in assets, a significant increase from $1 trillion at the end of 2010 [2]. - The average expense ratio for passively managed ETFs is 0.14%, while actively managed ETFs have an average expense ratio of 0.44% [3]. Group 2: Impact of Expense Ratios - Lower expense ratios can lead to higher long-term gains; for instance, a $100,000 investment over 20 years at a 4% annual growth rate with a 1% fee would grow to about $180,000, compared to approximately $220,000 with no fees [4]. Group 3: Considerations Beyond Fees - Investors should consider the implications of mixing ETFs from different providers, as structural differences can lead to unintended risk exposures [6][7]. - It is generally advisable for investors to stick with one ETF provider to avoid mismatches in investment exposure [8]. Group 4: Liquidity Factors - Liquidity is crucial; thinly traded ETFs may have wider bid-ask spreads, making it harder to sell quickly [9][10]. - Investors should assess the bid-ask spread and average daily trading volume to gauge liquidity [10]. Group 5: Performance of Actively Managed ETFs - There are instances where actively managed ETFs may outperform passively managed ones, justifying their higher expense ratios [11]. - For example, the Avantis emerging markets equity ETF, with a 0.33% expense ratio, has outperformed Vanguard's passively managed ETF, which has a 0.07% expense ratio, over the past year [12].

Core Insights - Authorized Participants (APs) are essential for the ETF creation and redemption mechanism, significantly influencing ETF liquidity [1] - APs are typically large financial institutions with substantial buying power, responsible for acquiring the underlying securities that ETFs aim to hold [2][3] - The exchange of securities for ETF shares occurs on a fair-value basis, benefiting both the ETF provider and the AP [4] Role of Authorized Participants - APs facilitate the creation of new ETF shares by purchasing the necessary underlying securities and delivering them to the ETF provider in exchange for ETF shares [3][4] - The process can also work in reverse, allowing APs to redeem ETF shares for the underlying securities, thus impacting the supply of ETF shares in the market [5] Impact on Liquidity - APs help maintain the fair value of ETFs by creating or redeeming shares based on market demand, ensuring that ETF prices align with their net asset value (NAV) [7] - A higher number of APs for a particular ETF enhances competition, which is likely to keep the ETF trading close to its fair value [8]

Core Viewpoint - Several public funds have announced the addition of broker-dealers as market makers for their ETF products to enhance liquidity, although improving the performance of these ETFs is considered a more effective solution for liquidity enhancement [1][4] Group 1: Market Maker Implementation - The addition of broker-dealers as market makers is a method to improve the liquidity of ETF products, with recent announcements from multiple fund companies indicating this trend [1] - As of June 30, 2025, the Shanghai Stock Exchange has 20 main market makers and 12 general market makers providing liquidity services for 746 fund products, with 688 ETFs having market makers, representing 98% of all ETFs [2] - The Shenzhen Stock Exchange has 27 liquidity service providers for 491 ETF products, indicating a high coverage rate of market makers in the ETF market [2] Group 2: ETF Market Characteristics - The number of listed ETFs has exceeded 1,200, but there is significant product homogeneity, leading to investor confusion, particularly with 31 ETFs tracking the same index [2] - As of August 1, 2023, 20 ETFs have opted for liquidation, highlighting the potential for a wave of ETF closures despite their index-tracking nature [2] Group 3: Trading Activity Disparities - ETF trading shows a "two extremes" scenario, with some products having daily trading volumes exceeding 10 million shares, while others struggle with volumes below 100 shares [3] - The reliance on market makers alone is insufficient for enhancing liquidity; active investor participation is crucial for vibrant trading [3] - ETFs with strong performance tend to attract more investment, leading to better liquidity, similar to trends observed in the stock market [3] Group 4: Recommendations for Fund Companies - For public funds, focusing on improving the performance of ETF products through various means is deemed more effective for enhancing liquidity than merely relying on market makers [4]