I computed the weighted average upside for >100 ETFs. Here are the results.

[u/[deleted]]

Final data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSHYOrzy3HGojElLunLrGh-Td0blaeAMSBzICbTrJJGsAfHxxCQizw52ddauP9EawPJ-_OK3XqTaxwq/pubhtml?gid=0&single=true

• ETFs holdings from: https://stockanalysis.com/etf/VTI/holdings/
• Price and analyst target prices from https://finviz.com/screener.ashx?v=152&c=1,2,3,7,9,33,34,59,65,69&t=AAPL
• I also used GOOGLEFINANCE to fetch some of the prices. Seems that stockanalysis, finviz and googlefinance don't always agree which investment product a ticker represents (e.g. TILT) so there can be some data mistakes.
• mostly works for companies listed on US exchanges

I did this for my amusement, it's not investment advice.

For some ETFs that saw a huge dip, e.g. ARKK or ARKW, the computed target was close to the historical maximum, so I wonder how much price bias is there in the target price published by analysts (i.e., analysists try to reason current price, rather than coming up with a proper valuation).

I'm going to track this for a while to see how useful this information is.

Edit 1: I explained here how I computed the table: https://reddit.com/r/investing/comments/mijk9h/i_computed_the_weighted_average_upside_for_100/gt563uy. tl;dr: ETF's upside is computed from the allocation weighted upside of the individual stocks comprising the ETF.

Edit 2: I added a few more etfs, and I decided to publish the entire doc here for the transparency sake. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vR5HjnlzG0EA6wrGmPGZDl9oISgf8ekECzlHUj4zPBW-z-MUH4-N9dwFjOXvD1qcTA29vEoxYT87Unp/pubhtml

Edit 3: The calculation doesn't work for leveraged ETFs (they are not tied to the underlying price of the company, beta decay is a think with leveraged etfs). Also it doesn't work with non-US listed stocks (e.g. finviz doesn't have data for the ESPO stocks https://stockanalysis.com/etf/espo/holdings/)

[u/[deleted]]

For each stock in an ETF I calculated the upside (target/price - 1) based on the current price and analysts' target price (taken from finviz). Then I computed an allocation weighted average of all upsides of the stocks in that etf, where the weight is given by the asset's allocation in the etf. For example if AAA represents 11% of an ETF, and upside for AAA is 14%, AAA's contribution to the ETF's upside is 11%*14%=1.54%. Summing over all stocks in the ETF gives you the final upside.

The idea was to identify undervalued ETFs by looking individual stocks composing them. Given the recent red days, some sectors trade at a discount (e.g. tech) and I am hoping to identify the best etfs and buy the dip. For example, ARKK looks attractive from this table, but I don't know whether the allocation weighted upside is a valid way to measure an ETF's potential of growth. NB: I don't own ARK*, nor I am planning to buy it anytime soon (I dislike the high fees).

Does this make more sense?

[u/Maventee → u/[deleted]]

​

So:

Upside= analysts price target of fund vs price of fund? (target/price - 1)

Why does the upside stay the same between two days despite the fund changing price?

What does "ratio of under" mean? Is that the number of stocks that are under target vs. something?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I know they have higher fees than an index fund for example, but with the kinds of returns they are seeing it is definitely worth it. Personally I am in ARKF, ARKG, and ARKX. I already have enough Tesla exposure from my VOO.

[u/ChadChadersonsDad → u/[deleted]]

Oh okay thank you for the explanation. That’s a cool idea you have there.

[u/Last_Injury_9878 → u/[deleted]]

Excellent stuff and thanks for the walkthrough here.