EarthNvstr1 schreef: ↑5 februari 2022, 17:55
Een aantal basis gegevens:

Code: Selecteer alles

			IWDA		IMIE
ISIN			IE00B4L5Y983	IE00B3YLTY66
AUM			44.880.525.505	420.790.000
COMP			 1.549		 1.807
P/B			   3,22		   2,66
P/E			  23,37		  16,74
INDEX			MSCI World	MSCI ACWI IMI
INDEX COMP		 1.542		 9.296
INDEX MCAP TOT (mlj.)	59.059.927	75.808.813
INDEX MCAP AVG (mlj.)	 38.300		  8.154

Verdeling geografisch:

Code: Selecteer alles

(%)		IWDA	IMIE
USA		68,01	59,84
...

Verdeling top holdings:

Code: Selecteer alles

(%)		IWDA	IMIE
Apple		 4,83	 3,84
...

			IWDA		IMIE
ISIN			IE00B4L5Y983	IE00B3YLTY66
AUM(milj.)		59.453		834
COMP			1.511		2.626
P/B			2,91		2,45
P/E			19,29		16,38
INDEX			MSCI World	MSCI ACWI IMI
INDEX COMP		1.511		9.204
INDEX MCAP (milj.)	52.795.005	66.153.068
No1 geo			USA 69,64%	USA 61,52%
No1 asset		Apple 5,21%	Apple 4,19%

EarthNvstr1 schreef: ↑21 oktober 2023, 19:27 IMIE is goed bezig https://www.ssga.com/nl/nl/institutiona ... tf-spyi-gy
Zowel AUM als aantal componenten is rustig aan't stijgen.

I read IWDA's financial report of 2023, so you don't have to.

You know how they say: "Don't invest in something you don't understand."

Me neither. So I'm working on understanding what I'm already investing in. Cue me taking on the silly idea this afternoon on reading the 1408 page (!) report of what IWDA did last year with the money I'm investing in them.

Underneath a summary of my findings, so you don't have to do the same.

1. Page 4. The fund is Irish, and most people working and subcontracting are, but there is a lot of London involved as well. The big names behind seem to be BlackRock, J.P. Morgan, State Street, Deloitte and Citibank. Funnily enough, I thought it was administered by BlackRock, but it's actually State Street doing the administration. The assets are also being held by State Street.
2. Page 5. There was a change of chairs. The chair is now William McKechnie. Man has a linkedin saying he's a professor at College of Europe in Bruges.
3. Page 9. They lowered the TER on a bunch of bond ETFS. Not IWDA unfortunately. They also launched some silly ETFs like equal weighted SP500 and Blockchain.
4. Page 12. IWDA aka "iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF" is index tracking, non-replicating. It's not an article 8, or 9 fund, so cannot be called ESG.
5. Page 14. An explanation of the relations between tracking difference, tracking error and TER (Total Expense Ratio). "The TER expresses the sum of all fees, operating costs and expenses, with the exception of direct trading costs, charged to each Fund’s assets as a percentage of the average Fund assets based on a twelve-month period ended 30 June 2023.", "Fund returns disclosed are the performance returns for the primary share class for each Fund, net of fees", "Realised tracking error is the annualised standard deviation of the difference in monthly returns between a fund and its benchmark index."
6. Page 16. The numbers are for July 2022 to June 2023. The fund IWDA returned 18.58%. The benchmark is 18.51%. The tracking difference before TER was 0.27%, the tracking error after was 0.05%. So the IWDA outperformed the index. The reason for that is threefold.
1. There is a net income difference. Page 18. "Comprising of withholding tax rate differential, tax reclaims and income timing differences between the Fund and the benchmark index." I think this refers to the bilateral tax agreement between Ireland and the US which allows dividends to only be taxed at 15%, while the index accounts for a 30% tax.
2. Securities lending. More later.
3. Investment techniques. Page 18. "Comprising of cash management, trading costs, currency hedging, futures held and sampling techniques." I guess this is saying that when you are not perfectly replicating, you might accidentally make a profit.
7. They anticipate a tracking error up to 0.1% in the future. Notably, that is lower than the TER.
8. Page 31. The board is attending all their meetings. Except Jessica Irschick. I can already see I am a lot like Jessica.
9. Page 33. The board believes everybody in the board is paid fairly. "The maximum amount of remuneration payable to the Directors is determined by the Board and is set out in the prospectus of the Entity."
10. Page 56. Lots of bladibla later, IWDA grew 8.29B USD. It paid 128M in taxes. It has 1B operating income and 94M operating expenses.
11. Page 69 (nice), They started the year with 41B in assets. They added 8.2B in asset growth. 8.5B worth of shares were created, and 1.4B worth of shares were removed. The total number of assets in the fund is now 56.4B (I checked, that's 41B+8.2B+8.5B-1.4B).
12. Page 82. Of that 56.4B, 192M is held in cash. 99.5% of the fund is held in assets. Like any good WSB autist, they also report spending 694k on margin cash.
13. Page 96. IWDA had a VaR (Value at Risk) of 2.57% in 2023, down from 4.28% in 2022. Defined on page 95: "A 99% one day VaR means that the expectation is that 99% of the time over a one-day period each Fund will lose no more than this number in percentage terms." If you ever want to understand why we had a subprime financial crisis in 2009, this is why.
14. Page 101. The assets are held at State Street Corp. It get's an S&P rating of A. Cue the famous blind lady scene from the movie "The Big Short"
15. Page 103. On the 30th of June 2023, 5.3B worth of assets from IWDA were actually loaned out, for which they had received 5.9B worth of collateral. That's 9.4% of all IWDA assets, if my math is not off. It's a number which has almost doubled since 2022. The collateral is held in the following places: Bank of NY Europe, Euroclear or J.P. Morgan Chase Bank N.A.
16. Page 124. Nearly 100% of the assets are valued at level 1, which means they are assets of which they are pretty sure of the stock price. Sometimes that can be a problem due to limited liquidity, but that's no issue for IWDA.
17. Page 133. IWDA made 5M interest on its cash, received 1.05B worth of dividends. It notably also made 11M as income from lending securities. That's 0.02% on it's assets. That's quite low, in my opinion.
18. Page 147. Details on the losses made. Derivatives are mentioned, which I'm surprised by. It looks like 0.4% of assets are held as financial derivatives.
19. Page 160. 128M USD was donated to various governments around the world in the form of withholding taxes. This is after taking into account bilateral agreements.
20. Page 167 and page 176 have receivables and payables, but this is just accounting stuff afaik.
21. Page 180. "The authorised share capital of the Entity is 2 subscriber shares of a par value of EUR1.00 each and 500,000,000,000 participating shares of no par value." That's an odd way to structure the company? Maybe it's for shielding purposes?
22. Page 188. If the company would have gone bankrupt on June 2023, the holders of IWDA would be entitled to 54.6B in assets, or 84.28 USD per share. If I look up the stock price of IWDA on June 30th 2023, it closed at 84.26 USD, so that's pretty close! It traded between 83.34 and 84.41 USD that day.
23. Page 198. The subinvestment manager is "BlackRock Asset Management North Asia Limited and BlackRock Asset Management Deutschland AG"
24. Page 201. "The total income earned from securities lending transactions is split between the relevant Fund and the Securities Lending Agent. The Funds which undertake securities lending transactions receive at least 62.5%, while the Securities Lending Agent receives up to 37.5% of such income". So whoever is organising the securities lending, get's to keep 37.5% of the profit for 0% of the risk. That's rich. I wonder who it is.
25. Also page 201. The directors were paid 65 700 euro in fees. The auditors 313 000. That all seems cheap to me.
26. Moving along 500 pages. From page 789 to page 811 is a list of all assets held in IWDA on the 30th of June 2023. It's also clearer what the derivatives are. They are Forward currency contracts and Euro Stoxx / SP500 futures. Those are totalling 0.03% of assets. 99.47% of assets are stock exchange listed securities. Notably, 0.51% of assets are "Other assets", I'm curious what is meant here.
27. Page 1161. A list of companies which had the biggest change in number of assets.
28. Page 1181. IWDA paid 3.7M in transaction costs. That's much cheaper than what I get at my broker.
29. Page 1191-1195. If you want to know how the bankers get paid, this has the answer. For all the funds in iShares, the manager's staff got 220.4M. 118M fixed and 102.4M variable. 3940 people were paid here. The senior management got 21.6M. People with an impact on the risk profile got 30.8M.
30. Page 1196. The securities lending agent is "BlackRock Advisors (UK) Limited"! Those are the guys making 37.5% on the securities lending. So via this loophole, BlackRock is making 37.5% / 62.5% x 11M = 6M per year on IWDA, its own fund. Bankers. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
31. Page 1204. The people borrowing shares from IWDA. BNP Paribas, Societe Generale, etc. Natixis is the only one I don't know. BNP is holding 1.39B in loan, with 1.545B in collateral
32. Page 1231. 4.7B in collateral is in the form of equities, 1.1B in the form of fixed income assets, probably bonds.
33. Page 1242. of this collateral, most of it is in Japan (484M), followed by Apple (184M). So it's not concentrated anywhere in particular.

My learnings:

As always, another pointer that the TER doesn't really make a difference. It's the index itself first, and then the tracking error you should look at.

I'm surprised how much securities lending is being done, for how small a difference in income. I can see why it's profitable for BlackRock to do it, as they seem to siphon some money there. All in all, it looks like it is all done for quite paltry sums of money.

Bae1 schreef: ↑29 april 2024, 08:16

EarthNvstr1 schreef: ↑20 februari 2022, 12:38

L8Fish schreef: ↑20 februari 2022, 08:24 Dan loopt het absoluut gezien wel op. IWDA doet ook aan securities lending wat 0.01-0.02% voordeel oplevert. Ik heb ondertussen ook wat SWRD gekocht (ter 0.12%).

Jij ziet securities lending als een voordeel, ik zie dat eerder als een nodeloos risico en dus een nadeel

Tarbo schreef: ↑21 februari 2022, 11:52 Een enkele globale ETF die de developed market en de Emerging Markets omvat is inderdaad zeer eenvoudig als je bijvoorbeeld maandelijks een bedrag in een globale ETF wil steken.

Zelf ben ik echter voorstander van een IWDA + Emering Markets. Dit omdat ik er persoonlijk van overtuigd ben dat de EM de komende tien jaar een mooie inhaalbeweging gaan maken. Wellicht zal het gewicht van de EM in die globale ETF dan ook wel toenemen als dit het geval zou zijn.

Verviertig schreef: ↑18 oktober 2024, 09:44En maar wat kabbelen... 2021 tot nu... amper winst.

vidar schreef: ↑18 oktober 2024, 19:34

Verviertig schreef: ↑18 oktober 2024, 09:44En maar wat kabbelen... 2021 tot nu... amper winst.

Koop jij enkel bedrijven in landen waar alles momenteel hoog gewaardeerd is, en geen waar bedrijven momenteel ondergewaardeerd zijn?
Lijkt me niet de beste strategie.

vidar schreef: ↑20 oktober 2024, 08:13 Ik geef gewoon mee dat het achterblijven van EM tov DM eerder een reden is om ze net wel in je portefeuille op te nemen.

Verviertig schreef: ↑18 oktober 2024, 09:43

EarthNvstr1 schreef: ↑20 februari 2022, 12:38

Jij ziet securities lending als een voordeel, ik zie dat eerder als een nodeloos risico en dus een nadeel

Waarom zou dat een risico zijn? Het is lending, dus men moet zich verantwoorden.. is het trouwens niet zo dat jij je broker de toegang geeft maar je broker verantwoordelijk is om dit te corrigeren als het misgaat?

EarthNvstr1 schreef: ↑20 oktober 2024, 15:46

vidar schreef: ↑20 oktober 2024, 08:13 Ik geef gewoon mee dat het achterblijven van EM tov DM eerder een reden is om ze net wel in je portefeuille op te nemen.

Lijkt mij ook.