Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
I do wonder if confusing technological innovation with progress for humanity doesn’t expose an ethical failing here. Not all technological innovation has been good for humanity and regulation serves as a necessary counterpoint to prevent the worst consequences of destructive innovation or technology that can be abused to harm people.
@LewisBraham and @davidrmoran - Who is confused here? There's a lot of negative innuendo in your comments above but hopefully we demand the same from all technological innovative focused funds and their managers. In fact we should demand that of all funds.
As for what particular stocks are held in her funds, you can look up and search a statement of holdings as easy as anyone here. Or don't you do that with all of your funds?
Not trying to have innuendo in my writing, sorry. I mean that I don’t think the invention of nuclear weapons was as beneficial for humanity as that of penicillin, yet the free market tends to treat these innovations equally or, worse, favors whichever one is more profitable to sell. The subtext to the notion that more regulation is bad for innovation is that all technological advancement is good and the government should just get out of the way. Also embedded is the idea that unregulated businesses themselves don’t try to stifle innovation when it hurts their bottom lines. We probably would’ve had the electric car fifty years ago were it not for the big auto and fossil fuel companies. Government officials in the U.S. are ostensibly elected by the people who may or may not want more regulation of certain technologies. CEOs are not elected by the people and often do as they please regarding technology so long as it makes them and shareholders money. If that means developing technology that manipulates you into buying certain products, voting for certain candidates and invading your privacy so be it. If it means creating technology that stifles innovation by smaller competitors also so be it.
Lewis I agree with you and we could could apply those standards across all manner of companies and/or industries. I'm of the opinion that the chemical and drug companies are the most egregious offenders but that's just me. On the other hand I am strongly opposed to having myself tracked by the likes of Facebook, Google etc. for their purposes. Maybe what needs to be defined is what is technology or what is a technology company or what does a technology company intend to do with their technology.
Then came another sort of awakening. Wood was raised Catholic and considers herself a person of faith. She reads devotional literature and attends church. In 2006, when the housing bubble was not yet at its peak, Wood thought it was about to burst. She dramatically reduced the risk in her portfolios, and lagged behind the market. “A thousand basis points of underperformance was embarrassing,” she recalls.
When she spoke to her spiritual advisers, however, it came to her: “You cannot worship any idol, and the benchmark has become an idol.” The next year, she made back much of the loss. But in prayer and meditation, she had the following revelation: “Benchmarks are all about successes in the past. God doesn’t want us to be stuck in the past. He wants us to move into the new creation.” That’s when she knew she had to start her own company: “I felt that a start-up could go out there and spread that message very loudly,” she says, “We were putting all our chips on the table.” In 2014, Wood left Alliance Bernstein and launched her firm.
Wood named it for the Ark of the Covenant, a chest that in Jewish and Christian tradition holds the tablets bearing the Ten Commandments, although she told clients later that it was an acronym for Active Research Knowledge. She was on a mission to allocate capital to its best use—transformative technologies.
The question is how did followers get from Mother Teresa to here, to rationalizing their pursuit of extraordinary wealth as a divine vocation? I don't think it says anywhere in the bible that Amazon shall inherit the earth.
Hi @LewisBraham I've read this previous, and that she also supported Trump; but to the aspect of the "tax laws" changes that were put in place during his term. Covid, IMHO; pushed the disruption technologies forward faster than they might have traveled during normal market conditions. I've remained a "tech" investor for many years, which continued to become more apparent to me over many years from my technology background. Thus, I continued to follow technology advancements and investments. A personal view of this was combined to "discover" a best of both worlds related to the "boomers" and technology; although medical technology is not strictly related to boomer medical. I still place favor towards an investment as FSMEX or a similar etf, IHI. However, I remain fully open and aware to the some of the disruptive technology holdings found among the ARK funds. Some will flounder about and/or fail. But, I think the "themes" in place are fully valid. I/we do our best to remain informed. Conversations and questions to and with the under 40 age group helps to discover what impacts are taking place in the "financial tech." area. Hell, I/we still write some paper checks; but our first exposure with early "fin tech." was the payments we received via PayPal from our sales on eBay about 20 years ago when it was wholly owned by eBay; versus paper checks and/or VISA. We remain in interesting times, eh? Take care, Catch
I'm not debating the potential to profit off technology or technology stocks. But that technology is based on science, not religion. Economics is already called the "dismal science," because frankly its proofs are weak compared to the hard sciences and economic theories historically are made with limited data from emotional humans who do not at all behave like the hilariously out of date and unrealistic Homo Economicus most of the time. To throw religion into the mix in a tech fund unless it is specifically for some SRI or ESG purpose--i.e. my religious ethics tell me not to invest in X--seems to make an already dismal science even more dismal. And it seems morally dubious to rationalize pretty much any money management as a calling from God to me unless perhaps if you plan to give all of your profits to charity. To add Laffer's trickle down economics ideology to the mix regarding taxation when almost all of the data we do have indicates that Laffer's theories are wrong and have been wrong for forty years, yet persist as a rationalization for making the rich richer seems even more morally dubious to me. In other words, to put a holy gloss on this kind of pursuit is sadly ironic.
The question is how did followers get from Mother Teresa to here, to rationalizing their pursuit of extraordinary wealth as a divine vocation? I don't think it says anywhere in the bible that Amazon shall inherit the earth.
Har, you have not kept up with prosperity evangelism. I am going to steal your last line regardless.
All of these Revelations are dousing my interest even further. I am relieved that God is forward-looking, though.
Heck, there have been too many times over the years having a chat with those who had not yet started any personal savings/investments via a 401k, 403b or IRA and ATTEMPT to explain what the stock/bond markets are and how they may benefit from an investment..............fully and completely based on historical patterns. The whole thing is really an interesting mystery of how markets may function, where to invest, etc. Such face to face explanations are generally not so cut and dried as what one may find for a definition of stock market investing at Investopedia, eh?
"As an observer of human nature, I wonder if she will come on Cramer and keep her narrative going, max out the hubris, buying the dip in her "disruptive" companies...you think so?"
March 8th. Done.
Next stop...Arkk down 50% from highs....
Full Disclosure: I have no idea what will happen, not long, not short this fund...just seems like a rerun of the bullsheet that was seen during the turn of the century...many tech investor guru's spouting their "vision"
Fwiw to anyone, I've added on the way down; so I'm hoping for a full rebound. Today's action raises hope that the tech party isn't over just yet. I wish I could say that I did all my buying yesterday after having sold on the highs, but, sadly, that wasn't the case. It appears that Woods has done some buying within the etf FOR me, though. Frankly, my logic tells me that growth can only come from tech for at least the present. We can certainly reflate in some areas, but realistically, it's going to take time, and some of that will be value rotation anyway. Other than the rotation 'catch up', I think what has been working will continue to work for a while. As it stands, we had a nice correction. That's SUPPOSED to be healthy; we'll see...
@raqueteer “ Today's action raises hope that the tech party isn't over just yet.”... I’m of the opinion it’s not over. It’s not in a bubble. It’s where the growth is for the foreseeable future. Like @stillers - I’m riding the MS wave up and down but I’m entirely comfortable at this point.
I’m looking at ARK ETF and Eventide funds ... just like I would evaluate Grandeur. I don’t think you can evaluate her (CW) entire financial acumen based on these limited interview answers. Just like I’m open to Buzz ETF. I’m a skeptic on Buzz but I’m open to learning something new. Given my past performance....I’m likely to join the party too late as I keep looking for reasons to stay on the sidelines. Ah... that’s ok, I’ll manage.
She’s on the record for saying ARK stands for Active Research Knowledge as well<Edit add
For those who are interested Fidelity has a whole handful of Innovator mutual funds. You don't have to go with the ARK funds. Or is this whole technology innovation thesis wonk? Your choice.
@Mark - always appreciate your contributions. As a Fidelity customer... do you have some funds you like in this area? Not familiar with Innovator funds.
@JonGaltill - I started investing in the ARK funds mid-2020 so I guess you could say that those are the ones I like. BUT, the Fidelity offerings are new and some folks are just more comfortable with mutual funds v. ETF's. Here is what Fidelity is offering and you will notice similarities to ARK's funds. I guess it all depends on what an investor is most comfortable with and where one thinks they see opportunity. I get my leads from my 30-40 year old children along with a boat load of their friends and associates, what they use and what they get excited about.
1) Fidelity® Disruptive Automation Fund (FBOTX) - Invests in companies leading the way in automation, from industrial robotics to artificial intelligence and autonomous driving.
2) Fidelity® Disruptive Communications Fund (FNETX) - Invests in companies changing the way we connect and communicate, from social media to 5G-related digital infrastructure and the internet of things.
3) Fidelity® Disruptive Finance Fund (FNTEX) - Invests in companies helping to deliver more efficient and customized financial solutions, such as digital payments and internet banks.
4) Fidelity® Disruptive Medicine Fund (FMEDX) - Invests in companies that are transforming medical diagnostics, therapies, and services, from gene therapy to robotic surgery and digital health platforms.
5) Fidelity® Disruptive Technology Fund (FTEKX) - Invests in new technologies such as companies delivering cloud computing, harnessing big data, and transforming consumer experiences through internet and mobile platforms.
6) Fidelity® Disruptors Fund (FGDFX) - Brings together 5 disruptive themes—automation, communications, finance, medicine, and technology—in a single fund.
@Mark et al I've mentioned this previously, too. But, Mark's statement (below in quote) is critical if one desires to travel into the newer tech. areas; or to spend a decent amount of time paying attention to innovation, be it by Bloomberg, podcasts, Youtube, web sites or whatever you find suitable. But, being an older investor should not dismay one. There is absolutely nothing wrong with investing in a long time performance fund such as: FBALX . Me and mine will be there soon enough.
I guess it all depends on what an investor is most comfortable with and where one thinks they see opportunity. I get my leads from my 30-40 year old children along with a boat load of their friends and associates, what they use and what they get excited about.
>> the Fidelity offerings are new and some folks are just more comfortable with mutual funds v. ETF's. ... I guess it all depends on what an investor is most comfortable with and where one thinks they see opportunity.
I don't know about either of these points; the chief difference appears to be performance, and over the last 11 months the Fidos are not remotely close (rightly or wrongly) to the notionally similar ARK one.
@davidmoran I’m more comfortable with mutual funds - it’s what I know. That said, there are times I wished I could buy and sell my funds a bit quicker vs. 2 day turn around for 2 different fund family exchange . Not that I do that much. But... anyway. Perhaps that will change in the future?!?!
It’s good to be a skeptic but it’s also good to be open minded to new things.
The problem is people tend to be open minded on the way up and skeptical on the way down when the real goal is to try, difficult though it may be, to achieve some form of fundamental objectivity without even looking at past performance, as if the fund/asset class had no history of performance at all, and all you can do is try to evaluate how you will think it will perform going forward, and, more importantly, why you think that? With bitcoin, I am fairly certain most retail investors like it because it's gone up--a lot--and can't articulate why it should continue to go up, or even what purpose it serves in the world.
Comments
As for what particular stocks are held in her funds, you can look up and search a statement of holdings as easy as anyone here. Or don't you do that with all of your funds?
Don't know what to think of this success. But... I'm curious.
I've read this previous, and that she also supported Trump; but to the aspect of the "tax laws" changes that were put in place during his term.
Covid, IMHO; pushed the disruption technologies forward faster than they might have traveled during normal market conditions.
I've remained a "tech" investor for many years, which continued to become more apparent to me over many years from my technology background. Thus, I continued to follow technology advancements and investments. A personal view of this was combined to "discover" a best of both worlds related to the "boomers" and technology; although medical technology is not strictly related to boomer medical. I still place favor towards an investment as FSMEX or a similar etf, IHI.
However, I remain fully open and aware to the some of the disruptive technology holdings found among the ARK funds. Some will flounder about and/or fail. But, I think the "themes" in place are fully valid. I/we do our best to remain informed. Conversations and questions to and with the under 40 age group helps to discover what impacts are taking place in the "financial tech." area. Hell, I/we still write some paper checks; but our first exposure with early "fin tech." was the payments we received via PayPal from our sales on eBay about 20 years ago when it was wholly owned by eBay; versus paper checks and/or VISA.
We remain in interesting times, eh?
Take care,
Catch
All of these Revelations are dousing my interest even further. I am relieved that God is forward-looking, though.
@Mark, are you confused about shamanry? I ain't.
I hear you.
Heck, there have been too many times over the years having a chat with those who had not yet started any personal savings/investments via a 401k, 403b or IRA and ATTEMPT to explain what the stock/bond markets are and how they may benefit from an investment..............fully and completely based on historical patterns. The whole thing is really an interesting mystery of how markets may function, where to invest, etc.
Such face to face explanations are generally not so cut and dried as what one may find for a definition of stock market investing at Investopedia, eh?
"As an observer of human nature, I wonder if she will come on Cramer and keep her narrative going, max out the hubris, buying the dip in her "disruptive" companies...you think so?"
March 8th. Done.
Next stop...Arkk down 50% from highs....
Full Disclosure: I have no idea what will happen, not long, not short this fund...just seems like a rerun of the bullsheet that was seen during the turn of the century...many tech investor guru's spouting their "vision"
Good Luck to All,
Baseball Fan
Baseball Fan
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/cathie-wood-says-the-underlying-bull-market-is-strengthening-will-benefit-arks-strategy-over-time.html
From today:
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/09/cathie-woods-ark-innovation-fund-is-set-for-a-big-rebound-tuesday-as-tesla-other-tech-darlings-pop.html
Disclaimer: NOT an owner of any of her ETFs. Instead own several commensurate MS growth fund thrill rides.
I’m looking at ARK ETF and Eventide funds ... just like I would evaluate Grandeur. I don’t think you can evaluate her (CW) entire financial acumen based on these limited interview answers. Just like I’m open to Buzz ETF. I’m a skeptic on Buzz but I’m open to learning something new. Given my past performance....I’m likely to join the party too late as I keep looking for reasons to stay on the sidelines. Ah... that’s ok, I’ll manage.
She’s on the record for saying ARK stands for Active Research Knowledge as well<Edit add
1) Fidelity® Disruptive Automation Fund (FBOTX) - Invests in companies leading the way in automation, from industrial robotics to artificial intelligence and autonomous driving.
2) Fidelity® Disruptive Communications Fund (FNETX) - Invests in companies changing the way we connect and communicate, from social media to 5G-related digital infrastructure and the internet of things.
3) Fidelity® Disruptive Finance Fund (FNTEX) - Invests in companies helping to deliver more efficient and customized financial solutions, such as digital payments and internet banks.
4) Fidelity® Disruptive Medicine Fund (FMEDX) - Invests in companies that are transforming medical diagnostics, therapies, and services, from gene therapy to robotic surgery and digital health platforms.
5) Fidelity® Disruptive Technology Fund (FTEKX) - Invests in new technologies such as companies delivering cloud computing, harnessing big data, and transforming consumer experiences through internet and mobile platforms.
6) Fidelity® Disruptors Fund (FGDFX) - Brings together 5 disruptive themes—automation, communications, finance, medicine, and technology—in a single fund.
I've mentioned this previously, too. But, Mark's statement (below in quote) is critical if one desires to travel into the newer tech. areas; or to spend a decent amount of time paying attention to innovation, be it by Bloomberg, podcasts, Youtube, web sites or whatever you find suitable.
But, being an older investor should not dismay one. There is absolutely nothing wrong with investing in a long time performance fund such as: FBALX . Me and mine will be there soon enough.
I don't know about either of these points; the chief difference appears to be performance, and over the last 11 months the Fidos are not remotely close (rightly or wrongly) to the notionally similar ARK one.
I really like FBALX - I’m with @catch22 there.
I don’t currently own any ETFs but I do own some Bitcoin which is up 15% YTD. I’m going to start a thread on the topic.
It’s good to be a skeptic but it’s also good to be open minded to new things.