At The Money: Building an ETF with Wes Gray, Alpha Architect (January 28, 2026)
Have you ever had a great investment strategy and thought to yourself, “Hey, this is really good! It should be an ETF!” It is much easier than it used to be to create a strategy and put it into an ETF wrapper.
Full transcript below.
~~~
About this week’s guest:
Wes Gray is founder and CEO of ETF architect. He helps managers turn strategies into ETFs by providing turnkey, white label platforms to handle all of the complex and expensive office operations.
For more info, see:
Professional website
Masters in Business
Personal Bio
LinkedIn
Twitter
~~~
Find all of the previous At the Money episodes here, and in the MiB feed on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, and Bloomberg. And find the entire musical playlist of all the songs I have used on At the Money on Spotify
TRANSCRIPT:
Mutual funds, trusts, and ETFs. Have you ever wondered how these are put together? Are you an analyst, strategist, or fund manager that has a really good idea? Have you thought about launching a fund to employ that idea? I’m Barry Ritholtz, and on today’s edition of At The Money, we’re going to discuss how to build your own exchange-traded fund or ETF.
To help us unpack all of this and what it means for your portfolio. Let’s bring in Wes Gray of ETF architect. He helps managers turn strategies into ETFs by providing turnkey white label platforms that handle. Legal compliance operations, portfolio management, allowing sponsors to focus on the idea and distribution, and Wes also runs the Alpha Architect Shop as well.
Full disclosure, Wes Gray and ETF architect are helping my firm, Ritholtz Wealth Management launch a new ETF later this year.
Barry Ritholtz: So Wes, let’s start with the basics. If I’m someone with a novel strategy and a good idea for a ticker, what are the elements that determine whether or not this ETF launches or whether it just dies on the vine?
Wes Gray: It’s gonna come down to low fees, capital and passion in ETF market, as you know, you gotta have low fees for the most part, or people aren’t gonna buy your product. And low fees means you also gotta have a lot of capital to back this thing. ’cause you gotta be around for at least three to five years to tell your story and then you gotta have the passion.
You’re in a market competing with monopolies like BlackRock and Vanguard. So you gotta be someone like a Perth Toll that we talked about previously where you just have to go knock on doors and tell people why your product and your story is so great.
Barry Ritholtz: I’m curious as to the timeline from the original conception to Trading Day.
What’s a realistic timeline and where are the common bottlenecks?
Wes Gray: We generally tell folks, four months, you sign the letter of intent and you’re ready to whoop it on. We can get this thing out the door in plus or minus four months. Obviously that could go out to four years, depending on your, your own internal issues.
But we’ve got this thing, so checklist and automated. At this point, if you want to launch in four months for like a relatively straightforward ETF, that’s gonna be possible.
Barry Ritholtz: Four months seems really short, but I guess I’m imagining how long it takes to accumulate enough seed capital launch. How much money under management do you need to launch an ETF? How does that get structured? What’s the usual launch dollar amount?
Wes Gray: This is a moving target. And let’s say four or five years ago we would’ve said, Hey, 5 million minimum. Now we tell people 25 million and I’m about to probably move it up to 50 million. And, really it’s, it’s not because of the operating cost of the ETF, it’s to convey credibility to the marketplace.
We, need, like people just, everyone kind of knows like, yeah, where’s your break even? You know, ’cause I want you to be in business three to five years from now, and usually that break even in people’s minds is 25 to 50 mil. High barrier to entry just on that.
Now, how do you seed these things?
Well, there’s basically two methods. You either seed with cash. So you launch the ETF and people go open up their Schwab account and click the button and you know, pay cash to buy your ETF. Or you can seed it with property where there, it’s a little bit convoluted, but there’s this thing called Section 351 where you can actually contribute property tax free to seed the ETF.
So basically, cash or property is the two methods you can use.
Barry Ritholtz: And I’m assuming property is usually individual stocks or bonds. Is that right?
Wes Gray: You got it. So, so if you have a portfolio of securities, public securities that naturally fit in the CTF, you can contribute those tax-free. And then that, that property serves as initial seed for essentially the launch of the ETF.
Barry Ritholtz: You mentioned break even. Take me into the minutia of what the backend of this looks like – legal, audit, administration, listing distribution, marketing. What are the big costs that any ETF manager has run? Where do people kind of make mistakes with these?
Wes Gray: I’ll kind of reverse the, the question and, and let me tell you what we’ve done, the cost and what you have to do, because what you’re asking about is a total dumpster fire behind the scenes, but essentially for our platform is you show up with the spreadsheet, tell us what to do. And you go market and distribute this thing, comma compliantly. ’cause we have oversight responsibilities. That’s your two primary jobs.
We’re gonna deal with all the dumpster fire behind the scenes and the generic cost of doing this to launch an ETF, again, all sandbag for a generic ETF, just with easy numbers. You’re looking at a 50k startup, soup to nuts. Which is not the bad news.
The bad news is the ongoing. Cost to deal with all the aspects you just talked about, and you know, it’s plus or minus, but you’re looking around 200K a year. What the heck does that mean as a business, uh, setup? Well, it, you know, if you charge 1%, your breakeven is 20 million.
If you charge 20 basis points, which is a much, you know, much more marketable, your breakeven is a hundred million. And then everything in between. So, so obviously your breakeven depends on your fee, but you’re looking at 200 k burn a year on average.
Barry Ritholtz: Let’s say someone comes to you with a systematic strategy. How do they decide whether or not this is based on an index and running it fairly statically versus a more active ETF that’s run more dynamically.
Wes Gray: This advice has also changed over time. We’re we’re, in the old days, we would say, Hey, index active, there’s a bigger trade off there now.
It’s almost always the case. Just go active. Even if your strategy is a hundred percent systematic, why is that? Well, there’s just low overhead cost. I don’t have to pay for a third party index agent. I don’t gotta pay for third party service providers. And, and I also have a little bit more flexibility at the margin.
So for example, let’s say I’m on an index versus an active, and I’m doing the exact same strategy, but we know this week there’s gonna be three Fed meetings and. You know, the world’s gonna blow up. I might not wanna rebalance this week, I’ll just punt to next week. That’s easy in an active strategy, in an index strategy that’s possible — but the paperwork trail and the compliance to be able to facilitate, that’s essentially a nightmare.
Which means most index funds just follow the book no matter what, on unlike little minutiae decisions like this. We recommend active at the margin.
Barry Ritholtz: You must see a ton of different strategies. What do you see that really. Shouldn’t be put into an ETF. What, what kind of strategy, even if a manager is passionate and excited about the idea, what, what are the sort of red flags that, “Hey, you don’t want this in an ETF?”
Wes Gray: I don’t know if I’m weird or just old school or conservative, but, but if I’m not gonna recommend this to my parents or my, my grandma. Why we have this in an ETF where anyone with a Schwab account can click the button and have a party, right?
What does that mean? Things like double levered, triple levered, whatevers, uh, a lot of these gimmicky products that are extremely expensive and they have tons of embedded costs via like swaps and a lot of other things that aren’t transparent. I can’t stand those products personally.
Does that mean that people won’t do ’em? Well, of course not. If you can sell out to people that are gonna pay 1% for your stupid idea, great. But I’m not a big fan of having those products in the ETF marketplace.
Barry Ritholtz: You’re not a big fan of the inverse three x levered Bitcoin.ETFI?
Wes Gray: No, I’m not a fan. And again, maybe I’m just a funny duddy and I need to move on in the world, but I’m just kinda, old school, I like, you know, low fees, transparent, tax efficient things that people can understand, uh, that presumably add value, uh, in the long game.
Barry Ritholtz: Let’s talk about, uh, some of the block and tackling once an ETF is created and launched, how, how do you think about. What I think about as someone who was on a trading desk as good market behavior, meaning tight spreads, reasonable liquidity, especially if the ETF is holding some assets that are perhaps a little less liquid than than average.
Wes Gray: That’s a great question and, and it creates a lot of confusion in the marketplace.
There are, there’s basically two types of ETFs, one we’ll call liquidity diamonds. These are ETFs that everyone knows, right – like SPY or Triple Q – where when you go and transact in those ETFs, it’s very likely that you’re actually trading shares with someone else who actually owns those ETF shares. That’s rare. Right, because it’s just such a huge market.
The other set of ETFs, which is 99.99% of ’em is normal ETFs, where when you go access the marketplace, you’re accessing what they call primary liquidity, which means you’re asking a market maker to give you a bid ask spread.
So the vast majority of that bid ask spread. Is simple to understand. What would it cost you as a trader to acquire or dispose of that basket of securities? For example, if I’m trading the triple levered Zimbabwe Bitcoin swaps, well, my bid ask spread might be 10%. Why? Where if I’m trading a basket that’s s and p 500 stocks, even though the ETF maybe never trade, but once a year.
We could trade a billion dollars of that ETF with a couple basis points of impact. So it just depends on the underlying basket liquidity.
Barry Ritholtz: You may notice I didn’t ask an obvious question, “Hey, do you go ETF structure or not?” I think we all understand the advantages of this structure — intraday liquidity, no phantom capital gains taxes.
What might send us in a different direction, an SMA, a mutual fund to trust when is an ETF really not the right structure.
Wes Gray: Another great question. So ETFs, and unfortunately we run ETF architects, so everything should be at an ETF, of course. Right? But you know, let, let’s be honest here, the big disadvantages of the ETF structure are transparency.
And you cannot close an ETF. So if we have a strategy where transparency is just not, you know, gonna play favorably for my shareholders, ’cause I, I don’t wanna expose this to the world every single day, then obviously you can’t do an ETF for all intents and purposes. The other one is capital constraints.
So let’s say we’re trading the microcap strategy and penny stocks, where the maximum amount of capital that can go in there is called 50 a hundred mil. Beyond that I’m gonna start blowing the whole concept up. You cannot stop or close an ETF, whereas an SMA or mutual fund, obviously they, they have tools in which you can actually capacity constrained, uh, the capital you take on.
Barry Ritholtz: We have noticed just a tremendous amount of flows are going to the big three – they go to BlackRock, they go to Vanguard, they go to State Street, and broad passive indexes have dominated a lot of the flows. The exception has been these kind of new, clever, unusual, active funds that occasionally catch people’s fancy.
If you’re thinking about creating an ETF, what sort of space should you really be looking in? What sort of strategy is the best ETF alternative to the core of a lot of people’s portfolios, the big indexes.
Wes Gray: I would basically focus on things that Vanguard or iShares can’t do well, which is you can usually gonna be very boutique, very niche strategies where it takes some special expertise to put those portfolios together and or you can’t jam a trillion dollars into the strategy.
Basically be good at being a boutique, ’cause you’re never gonna beat Vanguard at delivering scale trillion dollar market beta. That’s insanity.
Anytime you have a strategy that, that Vanguard is not offering because it’s either really complex, really differentiated, hard to explain, hard to build, hard to manufacturer, or there’s just not massive scalability, that’s where you’d wanna focus.
If you can put a trillion dollars in your strategy without any breaks, it’s probably not gonna work, because Vanguard’s already doing it and we don’t wanna compete with the monopoly.
Barry Ritholtz: To wrap up, if you’re an analyst or strategist, or even fund manager, and you have a unique idea that you think will do well in the market as well, as well in the marketplace, you think others are willing to pay for it with their capital, consider launching your own ETF. You need about $25 million in assets and a cost of about a quarter million dollars annually, but the upside are potentially hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in client assets.
I’m Barry Ritholtz and this is Bloomberg’s at the Money.
~~~
Find our entire music playlist for At the Money on Spotify.
The post At The Money: Building an ETF appeared first on The Big Picture.
Recent comments