Claymore Securities today launched its fourth exchange-traded fund focused on
The ETF is the first to specifically focus on
“When you look at
“In addition, they have the X factor: The Chinese consumer is coming of age, and the middle class standard of living is increasing. And that’s leading to more and more technology purchases. When you look at who dominates the technology space in
And the potential for growth appears to be explosive.
Magoon notes that while 82 percent of urban Chinese own cell phones, the statistic is at just 49 percent for rural Chinese. He cites a similar statistic on computers: 33 percent of urban Chinese citizens own computers, but that number drops to just 4 percent for the rural population.
Dearth Of China Tech ETFs
Magoon also points out that not only are there no existing ETFs focused on China’s technology sector, but that currently listed international technology ETFs provide little to no exposure to China.
CQQQ’s underlying index covers companies classified as “Information Technology” by the Global Industry Classification Standard used by Standard & Poor’s that are also domiciled in mainland China, or in Hong Kong or Macau.
The index, however, requires that Hong Kong- and Macau-based companies must generate most of their revenue through business activities in
All of Claymore’s funds focused on
CQQQ is part of a suite of China-focused ETFs offered by Claymore that also includes the Claymore/AlphaShares China All-Cap ETF (NYSEArca:
In addition to those funds and CQQQ, Claymore also has two more ETFs in registration that target
“We view investing in
CQQQ is expected to charge an expense ratio of 70 basis points.
The investment world was rocked by the news today that Hello Kitty is not actually a cat. But the pernicious mislabeling of some ETFs is even worse.
Movers and shakers in the ETF world are often just the opposite.
Be careful when making fruit-basket comparisons; you’re likely to come up with lemons.
With the S&P 500 topping 2,000, it’s worth understanding how you ended up in the wrong large-cap ETF.