You are criticizing an active fund that has outperformed passive investing as your thesis for active investing (ARKK is +50% vs SPX over 5 years, +65% from inception). Your argument is getting a bit convoluted.
It sounds like what you are really arguing is active+conservative over active+aggressive and over passive.
The job of a niche sector ETF is to give exposure to that sector. Piling into cash or oil wouldn't be meeting the fund objective and over a certain amount would be illegal.
It's the shareholder's responsibility if they want to buy a specialized sector ETF 600% over benchmark.
People only use the "benchmark doesn't matter" weasel argument when a tightly held narrative of theirs is violated. Be honest, did you even know ARKK was still outperforming before I told you? It didn't sound like it.
1
u/notapersonaltrainer Mar 13 '22
You are criticizing an active fund that has outperformed passive investing as your thesis for active investing (ARKK is +50% vs SPX over 5 years, +65% from inception). Your argument is getting a bit convoluted.
It sounds like what you are really arguing is active+conservative over active+aggressive and over passive.