EXCHANGE-TRADED funds are popular, but their complex structure makes them difficult to understand. A question I hear frequently: Are exchange-traded funds (ETFs) more tax-efficient than traditional mutual funds?
The evidence suggests they are. One recent study found that ETFs distribute capital gains to shareholders much less frequently than traditional mutual funds and, when they do, those gains are smaller. It’s worth understanding why that’s the case.
Let’s first look at the mechanics of a traditional mutual fund. For simplicity, assume there are just two investors—Smith and Jones—in a hypothetical mutual fund. Also assume that the fund itself owns just one investment: stock in ABC company. The fund purchased these shares several years ago and has a significant unrealized gain on the stock.
Now, suppose Jones wants to redeem his investment in the fund. To meet this request, the fund manager will need cash. Where will it come from? The manager will have to sell some of the fund’s ABC shares. The fund can then send Jones a check to meet his redemption request.
As a result of the ABC sale, the fund will realize a profit. Because mutual funds are collective enterprises, that profit must be shared pro-rata among the fund’s shareholders. That will happen the next time it makes a capital gains distribution.
Unfortunately for Smith, those distributions typically occur only once a year, near the end of the year. By then, Jones will be long gone. Result: Smith alone will bear the tax impact caused by Jones’s earlier decision to redeem his investment. Keep in mind that, while Jones will sidestep the fund’s taxable distribution, he may also face taxes—but his tax bill would result from selling his fund shares for more than he paid.
The above example is greatly simplified. In an actual fund, there would be thousands, if not millions, of shareholders. Because of that, the decision by any one shareholder to redeem his or her investment would likely have scant impact on other shareholders. Still, when it comes to traditional mutual funds, there are no guarantees: You’re always taking a chance tax-wise.
Now, let’s look at how this same situation would work out if Smith and Jones were instead shareholders in an ETF. In this case, if Jones wanted to redeem his investment, he would follow an entirely different process. Rather than asking the mutual fund company to redeem his shares, as in the above example, he would instead sell his ETF shares to someone else.
How would that work? As indicated by their name, exchange-traded funds are bought and sold on stock exchanges. Selling ETF shares looks exactly like selling shares of, say, Microsoft. If you wanted to sell them, you wouldn’t ask Microsoft to redeem them. Instead, you’d simply sell your shares to another investor via a stock exchange.
The way ETF shares are sold makes all the difference. When Jones sells his ETF shares to another investor, it has no impact on the fund itself. Unlike in the above example, the ETF’s manager wouldn’t need to sell anything. That means there would be no tax impact—for Smith, Jones or anyone else—just as there’s no impact on Microsoft when one investor sells his shares to another.
What happens if there’s no one who wants to buy an ETF investor’s shares? There are two answers to that. The first is that, theoretically, an investor like Jones might be stuck. It’s unlikely, but it’s possible. That’s one reason I recommend sticking with the largest and most actively traded ETFs.
The second answer: There is a process for redeeming ETF shares, even when there are no buyers. Institutions that have the status of authorized participants (APs) can turn in a block of ETF shares and receive, in exchange, all of the fund’s underlying holdings. In that way, ETF investors have an escape valve of sorts. Individual investors can’t directly redeem ETF shares like this, but APs are always monitoring exchanges. They’ll start buying up ETF shares when they see that demand from other buyers is weak.
When this process occurs, APs are redeemed “in kind.” They receive the underlying holdings of the fund, not cash. Result: Because none of the fund’s holdings need to be sold, no tax liability is generated. That is what makes ETFs inherently more tax-efficient than traditional funds.
This isn’t to say that ETFs never generate capital gains. Whenever there are changes to a market index, such as the S&P 500, all funds based on that index—including ETFs—must make corresponding changes. That can generate some unavoidable gains, though these changes are infrequent and usually minor.
Also, while they’re a minority in the ETF universe, some ETFs are actively managed. They’ll have a much higher level of portfolio turnover than index-based ETFs and thus generate more gains. That’s why, just as I don’t recommend actively managed mutual funds, I don’t recommend active ETFs.
In these two situations, ETFs may not have an advantage over traditional funds. But they’re also no worse. Overall, because of their exchange-traded structure, ETFs are fundamentally more tax-efficient than traditional mutual funds.
Does this mean you should immediately sell any mutual funds you own and switch to ETFs? Definitely not. Before doing anything, I would weigh three factors.
First, you’ll want to consider whether you have a gain on your mutual fund shares. If so, you wouldn’t want to reflexively sell.
Second, remember that ETFs’ tax advantage only matters in taxable accounts. If you hold a traditional mutual fund—or virtually any other investment—in a tax-deferred account, such as a 401(k) or IRA, you aren’t taxed each year when you receive capital gains distributions.
Finally, it’s worth remembering that mutual funds carry a structural benefit of their own. As I described above, ETFs’ tax advantage derives from the fact that they can be bought and sold on exchanges. It’s a quick and easy process. It’s not, however, guaranteed. It requires that there be a buyer for every seller.
Consider what happened on the afternoon of May 6, 2010. I certainly won’t forget that day. I was at my desk, placing trades, when the broker’s website slowed down. Then, out of the blue, the market went haywire. Among other things, the prices of many individual stocks dropped to just a penny a share. Many ETF prices also fell to irrationally low levels. Within 30 minutes or so, everything was back to normal. But if you had been trying to sell an ETF that day, it would have been a scary episode. By contrast, an investor trying to redeem shares in a traditional mutual fund would have been insulated from the problem altogether.
That episode is now known as the flash crash. A blue-ribbon commission at the SEC later issued a detailed report to help investors understand what had happened. The report deconstructed all the contributing factors. In the end, though, the precise cause doesn’t really matter. The most important thing is simply for investors to understand that something like this can happen.
Similar episodes have occurred since 2010. In August 2015, another flash crash affected the U.S. market. In May of this year, a flash crash hit European stocks. I believe investors should have confidence in ETFs. Still, no investment structure is perfect.
Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam’s Daily Ideas email, follow him on Twitter @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Do you enjoy HumbleDollar? Please support our work with a donation. Want to receive daily email alerts about new articles? Click here. How about getting our newsletter? Sign up now.
Another great article, Adam!
Many domestic Vanguard equity index funds switched from MSCI indexes to CRSP indexes in 2013. To my knowledge, none of these mutual funds made capital gains distributions in 2013 or in subsequent years. In 2021, Vanguard International Dividend Appreciation (VIAAX, VIGI) switched from a Nasdaq index to an S&P index. VIGI was estimated to pay capital gains of $5.23 (6.02% of NAV) on 12/23/2021.
1) Why did this international fund make capital gains distributions while the domestic funds did not?
2) Are there any differences involving in-kind creation/redemption baskets or heartbeat trades for international vs. domestic funds?
Enjoyed the article. Been using etfs almost exclusively for quite some time. Agree that liquidity can be a concern when dealing with smaller sized etfs. Flash crashes, while exceedingly rare, are primarily a concern for day or short term traders. Some liquidity and flash crash concerns can be addressed through use of limit sell orders vs market sell orders. For long term investors, the extra tax efficiency and generally lower fees for large well establish (especially index) etfs make them a compelling choice.
If you have a Vanguard mutual fund in a Vanguard brokerage/taxable account, you can convert that fund into its Vanguard ETF equivalent without it being a taxable event. You cannot make that conversion if your Vanguard mutual fund is in another brokerage account.
I could be wrong, but I think that Vanguard has a patent that makes their mutual funds and ETFs essentially the same. They are unique in this way, and if you have Vanguard mutual funds in a taxable account this is one other reason not to sell mutual funds just to buy equivalent Vanguard ETFs.
I also read that the Vanguard patent expires in 2023 and other mutual fund companies are expected to follow suit with implementing something similar.
One possibility: increased regulatory scrutiny because of the increased losses in tax revenue.
My question: Since Vanguard allows you to convert from mutual fund to ETF, for free and with no tax consequences, would it make sense to preemptively do so now?
Adam wrote about this last week:
You fail to mention one important point. Why do Authorized Participants buy and sell ETF shares? Well, when the trading price of an ETF falls below NAV, the APs buy up the shares at a price below NAV, turn them in, receive stock, and sell it at a profit. Whose money are they receiving? Why, the money of the retail investors who were forced to sell their ETF shares below NAV.
This is generally presented as a benign phenomenon – the APs arb the shares to insure that the trading price equals the NAV. But this mechanism can be enormously profitable to the APs, and can cost retail investors a lot of money. How much? That is one number you will never see in any prospectus. But if we see many new ETFs being promoted with huge ads in expensive publications, we can conclude that someone is making a lot of money.
ETFs + “flash boy” front running = $ billions out of investor pockets each year
Thank you for your time and knowledge that you share through this website.
Excellent explanation of these issues. Thanks!