Skip to Content
scroll

Stocks vs ETFs

Our Q&As are emailed in our Saturday Morning Report, find the answer to this question below.

The Latest Q&A

Question asked

Stocks vs ETFs

Following your comments relating to MVB vs Stocks I wondered about the same being applied to MVR. (acknowledging that MVB is restricted to one sector and MVR is many). I came up with a list of 9 constituent stocks and asked my new best friend Grok to review the list and compare/contrast etc with the ETF and expectations of future outperformance. It came back and basically said Im an idiot. MVR already restricts stock to max 8% and unless Im a fortune teller rejigging the percentage of sector/stocks etc is a pointless exercise and gave another half dozen reasons to abandon this exercise. Any general thoughts on Groks response ?

Answer

Hi Kevin,

AI (Grok in your case) can throw up some interesting replies at times, with accuracy not always on point.

The VanEck Australian Resources ETF (ASX: MVR) provides diversified exposure to Australia’s largest listed resources companies, including miners and energy producers across iron ore, gold, copper, lithium, coal and oil & gas – the first issue for MM is our research throws up very different opinions across the resources space.

  • MVR’s 0.35% fees create a “slowly but surely” drag on performance – e.g. YTD MVR is +11.15% compared to its benchmark +11.52%.
  • The ETFs largest holding is Woodside (8.3%) – above Groks 8% and above BHP’s 7.9% and Santos/RIO at 6.4%.

Hence the resources ETF is more weighted towards iron ore and oil & gas than copper & gold, plus you pay for the weightings – it’s not for us as we prefer to have greater flexibility around our exposures.

chart
image description
VanEck Australian Resources ETF (MVR)
image description

Relevant suggested news and content from the site

Back to top