Best And Worst Q3 2019: Mid Cap Blend ETFs And Mutual Funds

The Mid Cap Blend style ranks sixth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in our Q3’19 Style Ratings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. Last quarter, the Mid Cap Blend style ranked fifth. It gets our Neutral rating, which is based on an aggregation of ratings of 19 ETFs and 375 mutual funds in the Mid Cap Blend style. See a recap of our Q2’19 Style Ratings here.

Figures 1 and 2 show the five best and worst rated ETFs and mutual funds in the style. Not all Mid Cap Blend style ETFs and mutual funds are created the same. The number of holdings varies widely (from 18 to 2630). This variation creates drastically different investment implications and, therefore, ratings.

Investors seeking exposure to the Mid Cap Blend style should buy one of the Attractive-or-better rated ETFs or mutual funds from Figures 1 and 2.

Our Robo-Analyst technology[1] empowers our unique ETF and mutual fund rating methodology, which leverages our rigorous analysis of each fund’s holdings.[2] We think advisors and investors focused on prudent investment decisions should include analysis of fund holdings in their research process for ETFs and mutual funds.

Figure 1: ETFs with the Best and Worst Ratings – Top 5

* Best ETFs exclude ETFs with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity.

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL) and WBI BullBear Quality 2000 ETF (WBID) are excluded from Figure 1 because their total net assets (TNA) are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums.

Figure 2: Mutual Funds with the Best and Worst Ratings – Top 5

* Best mutual funds exclude funds with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity.

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

State Street SPDR Russell 1000 Low Volatility Focus ETF (ONEV) is the top-rated Mid Cap Blend ETF and SEI Institutional U.S. Equity Factor Allocation Fund (SEHAX) is the top-rated Mid Cap Blend mutual fund. ONEV earns an Attractive rating and SEHAX earns a Very Attractive rating.

Invesco Raymond James SB-1 Equity ETF (RYJ) is the worst rated Mid Cap Blend ETF and Pacific Advisors Mid Cap Value Fund (PAMVX) is the worst rated Mid Cap Blend mutual fund. RYJ earns a Neutral rating and PAMVX earns a Very Unattractive rating.

The Danger Within

Buying a fund without analyzing its holdings is like buying a stock without analyzing its business and finances. Put another way, research on fund holdings is necessary due diligence because a fund’s performance is only as good as its holdings’ performance. Don’t just take our word for it, see what Barron’s says on this matter.

Performance of Holdings = Performance of Funds

Analyzing each holding within funds is no small task. Our Robo-Analyst technology enables us to perform this diligence with scale and provide the research needed to fulfill the fiduciary duty of care. More of the biggest names in the financial industry (see At BlackRock, Machines Are Rising Over Managers to Pick Stocks) are now embracing technology to leverage machines in the investment research process. Technology may be the only solution to the dual mandate for research: Cut costs and fulfill the fiduciary duty of care. Investors, clients, advisors and analysts deserve the latest in technology to get the diligence required to make prudent investment decisions.

Figures 3 and 4 show the rating landscape of all Mid Cap Blend ETFs and mutual funds.

Figure 3: Separating the Best ETFs from the Worst Funds

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 4: Separating the Best Mutual Funds from the Worst Funds

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

This article originally published on July 17, 2019.

Disclosure: David Trainer and Kyle Guske II receive no compensation to write about any specific stock, style, or theme.

[1] Harvard Business School features the powerful impact of our research automation technology in the case New Constructs: Disrupting Fundamental Analysis with Robo-Analysts.

[2] This paper compares our analytics on a mega cap company to other major providers. The Appendix details exactly how we stack up.

Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.