Home Viewpoints

TOPICS
401(k)
Bond Fund
Bonds
COVID-19
Commodity Investments
Corporate Bonds
Cybersecurity
Equity Fund
Equity Investing
Europe
Events
Exchange-Traded Funds
Federal Reserve
Financial Markets
Financial Stability
Fixed Income
Fund Governance
Fund Regulation
GMM
Global
Government Affairs
ICI Global
IDC
IRA
Index Fund
Interest Rate
International
Investment Education
Investor Research
Money Market Funds
Mutual Fund
Operations and Technology
Policy Research
Proxy Voting
Retirement Policy
Retirement Research
Savings
Shareholder
Target Date Funds
Taxes
Trading
Treasury
ARCHIVE
A Proposal that Should Be Popped
By Paul Schott Stevens
December 15, 2016
The following ICI Viewpoints is a letter to the editor by Paul Schott Stevens, president and CEO of the Investment Company Institute, in response to an op-ed published on December 7, 2016, in the New York Times, “A Monopoly Donald Trump Can Pop.”
Millions of Americans could lose the low costs and broad diversification of fund investing under the dangerous proposal outlined in the op-ed by Posner, Weyl, and Morton.
Their work rests on untested academic theories and flawed assumptions. Asset managers do not move in lockstep or pursue identical strategies. Within a fund complex, dozens or hundreds of funds pursue specific objectives for thousands of clients.
Funds invest in companies in many different markets. Gains in one industry would not help index funds if they come at the expense of other fund holdings. Consider the op-ed’s reference to airlines: the five airline companies in the S&P 500 are only 0.64 percent of the index’s market value. Why would an S&P 500 index fund manager want an airline company to engage in behavior that hurts the remaining 99.36 percent of its portfolio that pay for airline services?
Public policy cannot be driven by academic literature neither peer-reviewed, nor tested. Millions of middle-class Americans ultimately would pay the price.
Paul Schott Stevens
President and CEO
Investment Company Institute
TOPICS: Bond FundEquity InvestingExchange-Traded FundsFinancial MarketsFund RegulationMutual FundTrading
The Taper Tantrum—Take II
By Shelly Antoniewicz
December 13, 2016
Long-term interest rates in the United States have been on the rise since summer 2016—slowly creeping up from July through October, and then jumping after the presidential election. Thus far, the response from bond mutual fund investors has been subdued. Nevertheless, various commentators—from the vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Board to the multinational Financial Stability Board—have expressed concerns that bond fund investors may rush to redeem shares to avoid portfolio losses stemming from unexpected increases in interest rates.
TOPICS: Bond FundBondsFederal ReserveFinancial MarketsFinancial StabilityFixed IncomeFund RegulationInterest RateMutual FundTreasury
Investor Protection Priorities for the New Year
By David Blass
December 12, 2016
The following ICI Viewpoints is adapted from a presentation that ICI General Counsel David Blass gave to the Investor Advisory Committee of the US Securities and Exchange Commission on December 8, 2016. Visit this page to read the entire presentation.
If I were to poll ICI members about next year’s priorities, I am sure we would receive consistent feedback: give us an opportunity to implement all the rules that have been imposed on us. New rules from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) covering data reporting, swing pricing, and liquidity risk management will require huge expenditures and years of work to implement fully. And they were adopted in the aftermath of two rounds of money market fund reform, as well as many other rules applicable to the fund industry adopted by other regulatory agencies.
TOPICS: Financial MarketsFinancial StabilityFund RegulationOperations and TechnologyShareholder
Pages 1
Copyright © 2021 by the Investment Company Institute