Seeking Alpha
, ETF Trends (262 clicks)
ETF investing
Profile| Send Message|
( followers)  

The choices you have when it comes to investing in commodities are exploding. We’ve laid out the differences between the various types of commodity ETFs – futures, physically-backed, equities – but let’s talk about the pros and cons of getting commodity exposure in ETFs and mutual funds.

Two of the most promising options for investors seeking exposure to the world of commodity producers are the Market Vectors-RVE Hard Assets Producer ETF (HAP) and the Fidelity Global Commodities Stock Fund (FFGCX). So which fund is more likely to come out ahead?

Don Dion for The Street breaks it down. Both funds are relatively new to the markets. HAP is the older of the two, making its first appearance in late August 2008. FFGCX made it to market in March 2009.

FFGCX boasts $392 million assets under management while HAP has $100 million.

HAP comes out ahead on price, charging a 0.65% expense ratio. FFGCX, being actively managed, charges a 1.42% expense ratio. If you intend to hold it less than 30 days, you’ll be dinged a 1% short-term trading fee on top of that. Ouch.

Where FFGCX does come out ahead is on flexibility. With a passive ETF like HAP, the holdings are the holdings. If one or two shares are underperforming, they still remain. Active management in the mutual fund leaves in the option to eliminate or reduce exposure. But is that worth the hefty price tag?

Tisha Guerrero contributed to this article.

Disclosure: None

Source: Investing in Commodity Producers: ETFs vs. Mutual Funds