All three ETFs trade on the New York Stock Exchange and come with a 0.75% expense ratio. Below is a deeper dive into each:
Goldman Sachs Future Consumer Equity ETF
The Goldman Sachs Future Consumer Equity ETF (GBUY) provides exposure for individuals to the future of consumers.
The fund invests in companies that align with Millennial and Gen Z's interests, as they're some of the most influential and disruptive consumers in the market.
Goldman Sachs Future Real Estate and Infrastructure Equity ETF
The Goldman Sachs Future Real Estate and Infrastructure Equity ETF (GREI) provides exposure to the unique attributes of real estate and infrastructure.
The fund focuses on firms that offer strong growth potential, low correlations to traditional asset classes and inflation-hedging benefits while being on the right side of disruption.
Goldman Sachs isn't the only firm growing its thematic ETF lineup. For instance, VanEck recently launched the VanEck Vectors Smart Home Active UCITS ETF.
Disclaimer: Community is offered by Moomoo Technologies Inc. and is for educational purposes only.
Read more
Harper lee
Aaron_Kelly
:
An ETF could charge just 0.05 and not be worth it - and another ETF could charge 1.95 and be a bargain. The fact that this one is 75bps has nothing to do with whether it's a good investment or not.
Johnny Thunders
Harper lee
:
At this moment, we have no performance to measure whether the ETF is a good or a bad investment. All we know is that they will charge .75%, which is high relative to other ETF's. Without a track record and a higher than average expense ratio, maybe we just throw this in the "Too Hard" pile to revisit later? Once we see some performance, then maybe we can then say the ETF is a bargain and worth the fee or wow, it really sucks and holders are getting fleeced in the process.
Apollod Wed
Johnny Thunders
:
"At this moment, we have no performance to measure whether the ETF is a good or a bad investment". Exactly! Which is why it is wrong to say that .75% is too high. We don't know whether it's high or not.
Aaron_Kelly : 75 bps...no thanks
Harper lee Aaron_Kelly : An ETF could charge just 0.05 and not be worth it - and another ETF could charge 1.95 and be a bargain. The fact that this one is 75bps has nothing to do with whether it's a good investment or not.
Johnny Thunders Harper lee : At this moment, we have no performance to measure whether the ETF is a good or a bad investment. All we know is that they will charge .75%, which is high relative to other ETF's. Without a track record and a higher than average expense ratio, maybe we just throw this in the "Too Hard" pile to revisit later? Once we see some performance, then maybe we can then say the ETF is a bargain and worth the fee or wow, it really sucks and holders are getting fleeced in the process.
Apollod Wed Johnny Thunders : "At this moment, we have no performance to measure whether the ETF is a good or a bad investment". Exactly! Which is why it is wrong to say that .75% is too high. We don't know whether it's high or not.
ajkZbCYC8Q : Fee on the high side, I feel.
tk0TEeeFdX ajkZbCYC8Q : Its Goldman. What did you expect? :)
NCDEH6DMn7 ajkZbCYC8Q : the know the name will get some dummies to pay
A1EIIWLU1C NCDEH6DMn7 : The irony of what you said is amazing.