VistaShares

This address is how we stay in touch with the professionals who follow our work.

VistaShares delivers innovative Liquid Alternative investment solutions for today's investors. VistaShares ETFs are actively managed by industry and investment experts, offering a number of distinct strategies. Supercycle® Growth Equity ETFs seek exposure to technology-driven economic Supercycles® that the adviser believes may offer long-term growth potential. Target 15® option-income ETFs seek to generate monthly income while complementing a core equity portfolio. Income is not guaranteed and will vary, and the Target 15® name refers to the strategy's objective rather than a guaranteed or promised return. Investing involves risk, including possible loss of principal. There is no guarantee that any investment objective will be achieved, and past performance does not guarantee future results.

What this address covers

Notes from this address cover thematic funds and the trends behind them, with space, robotics, defence and power as the recurring subjects. Each is a story about decades rather than quarters, and each is carried by companies whose fortunes can swing sharply in the short run even when the long-run case is intact.

The interest here is in how those stories become portfolios: the screens, the weightings, the rebalancing rules and the trade-offs between a fund that captures a trend closely and one that is easy to own beside everything else.

Those trade-offs decide what a client actually experiences, and they are set long before the first market move that tests them.

Four trends, four different clocks

Trends run on different clocks, and the clock matters as much as the idea. Space runs on launch schedules, satellite replacement cycles and a mix of government and commercial customers, with long stretches of investment before revenue arrives. Many of the companies are young, small and still proving their business models, which makes the trend volatile even when progress is steady.

Robotics runs on industrial capital spending. Factories buy automation when labour is scarce, when the economics of a production line change, or when a manufacturer moves production closer to home. That spending rises and falls with the industrial cycle, so a trend with a strong long-run case can still have years when orders slow sharply.

Defence runs on government budgets and procurement programmes that can last for decades. Orders are large and visible, and contracts are long, which gives the trend a steadier rhythm. But budgets are political decisions, and changes in priorities can shift spending between programmes quickly.

Power runs on utility planning, regulation and the pace at which new generation and grid capacity can be approved and built. Demand is rising, but supply moves at the speed of permits and equipment lead times.

Understanding which clock a trend runs on helps explain why a fund built on it can move sharply in ways that have little to do with the strength of the long-run story.

Those clocks also interact with the wider market. Young, small companies in trends like space tend to be sensitive to interest rates and to how readily investors will fund businesses that are still years from profit. Established firms in defence and power tend to be more sensitive to budgets, regulation and the price of the inputs they use.

So a portfolio holding several thematic funds is not necessarily diversified across trends. If most of them rely on small, fast-growing companies, they may all respond to the same change in financing conditions at the same time, whatever their trends are called.

Matching the clock of a trend to the time horizon of the client holding it is one of the more useful exercises an adviser can do, and it usually says more about fit than the trend's long-run case does on its own.

None of these clocks can be hurried by enthusiasm. Launches slip, factory projects wait for financing, procurement decisions take years and grid projects wait for permits, so the pace at which a trend turns into revenue is usually slower than the pace at which it turns into headlines.

None of this argues for or against any one of them. It argues for knowing which clock a fund is running on before judging how it has done over any particular stretch of months.

A fund that blends several of these clocks can smooth some of the swings, but it also blurs the story, and it becomes harder to say which part of the fund is doing the work in any given year.

Purity, breadth and the trade-off between them

Every thematic fund makes a choice between purity and breadth. A pure fund holds only companies that earn most of their revenue from the trend. It captures the trend closely, but the companies tend to be smaller, younger and more volatile, and there may be only a few dozen of them. A broad fund includes large companies for whom the trend is one business among many. It is easier to trade and steadier, but much of what it holds would be in a core index fund anyway.

Neither choice is wrong. A pure fund answers the question of how to own the trend itself. A broad fund answers the question of how to tilt a portfolio towards it. The danger is buying one while expecting the other: a pure fund can be far more volatile than expected, and a broad fund can turn out to be a more expensive version of the market.

Space and robotics are trends where the choice is stark, because many of the companies that are purely exposed are small. Defence and power have more large, established firms with heavy exposure, so a fund can be fairly pure without being as concentrated in small companies.

The holdings list and the revenue exposure figures that many index providers publish show where on that spectrum a fund sits.

Knowing where it sits makes it much easier to judge how the fund is likely to behave beside everything else a client owns.

Overlap is the practical test of where a fund sits. Comparing its holdings with a broad index shows how much of it is already owned elsewhere, and how much is genuinely new exposure. For a broad thematic fund, that overlap can be large enough that most of what a client is paying for is a different weighting of companies they already hold.

For a pure fund the overlap is usually small, but the liquidity of the holdings becomes the question instead. Smaller companies can be harder to trade in volume, and in stressed markets the fund's price can move further from the value of its holdings than it would for a fund of large companies.

Many investors end up somewhere in between, holding a fund that mixes a core of established companies with a smaller allocation to purer, younger ones. Knowing roughly what that mix is helps set expectations for how the fund will behave in both strong and weak markets.

Neither end of the spectrum is wrong. The useful thing is to know which end a fund is on, and to make sure that matches what the position is meant to do in the portfolio.

Where a fund sits can also drift over time, as companies grow, merge or change what they sell, so it is worth checking again at each review rather than once at the start.

Whose address this is

vsharesboard.com belongs to VistaShares, and every message that comes from it is ours. What we publish is not kept here: it lives on our main website, vistashares.com.

If a message from vsharesboard.com reached you and you want to confirm it came from us, write to info@vistashares.com or call (844) 875-2288.