Your Complete Guide to Index Investing with Dan Bortolotti

Vanguard’s One-Fund Solution

2018-05-29T22:14:22+00:00 February 5th, 2018|Categories: ETFs, New products|Tags: |216 Comments

It was one of the great mysteries in the Canadian fund market: why had no one created an ETF version of the balanced index mutual fund?

These days you can find ETFs focusing on just about every sub-sector of the market, and a pile of others with active strategies that make particle physics look easy by comparison. Yet until last week, no one offered an index ETF that included a simple mix of global equities and bonds. That’s shocking when you consider the balanced mutual fund is a staple in the industry, with over $766 billion in assets as of December. That’s more than five times the assets held by all Canadian ETFs combined.

That yawning gap has now been filled with the launch of three new ETFs from Vanguard. The new family of asset allocation ETFs are built using seven other ETFs. The Vanguard Conservative ETF Portfolio (VCNS) holds 40% stocks and 60% bonds, while the Vanguard Balanced ETF Portfolio (VBAL) uses the opposite proportion. The most aggressive version, the Vanguard Growth ETF Portfolio (VGRO), is 80% equities. All three ETFs carry a very competitive management fee of just 0.22%.

The reaction to the launch of these new funds was swift and overwhelmingly positive. Indeed, they’re probably the most important new ETFs to be launched in Canada in the last couple of years. So let’s spend some time considering whether they’re right for your portfolio.

What’s under the hood

Each of the new funds is built from four equity and three bond ETFs: the only difference is the proportion allocated to each. You can find the specific breakdown in the ETFs’ marketing brochure.

Let’s look at the equity component first. The underlying holdings include the Vanguard FTSE Canada All Cap (VCN) and Vanguard U.S. Total Market (VUN) for North America. For overseas stocks, the funds hold the Vanguard FTSE Developed All Cap ex North America (VIU) for western Europe, Japan and Australia, and the Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap (VEE) for China, Taiwan, India, Brazil and other developing economies. All of these underlying ETFs use plain-vanilla, cap weighted indexes of large, mid and small-cap stocks.

While my model portfolios assign one-third each to Canadian, US, and international equities, the Vanguard ETFs allocate things a bit differently. In all three ETFs, Canadian stocks make up 30% of the equity allocation, while the US gets about 38% and overseas stocks get the other 32%. The international allocation is then subdivided with 77% in developed markets and 23% in emerging.

On the fixed income side, the new ETFs use a mix of Canadian and foreign bonds. About 59% of the fixed income in each fund is allocated to the Vanguard Canadian Aggregate Bond Index ETF (VAB), with another 18% to the Vanguard U.S. Aggregate Bond (VBU), and about 23% to the Vanguard Global ex-U.S. Aggregate Bond (VBG). These latter two funds use currency hedging, which is essential for foreign bonds.

What to make of Vanguard’s decision to include US and global bonds? As I’ve written before, I’m agnostic on this question: since interest rates in foreign countries do not move in lockstep with those in Canada, a global bond allocation might reduce volatility, but the benefit is modest, and if you’re managing your own portfolio it’s not worth juggling three funds. However, if there’s no additional work or cost involved, then it’s probably just fine to include US and global fixed income.

Kudos to Vanguard for sticking to the core asset classes in these funds, for using traditional cap-weighted indexes, and for setting a long-term asset mix that won’t change based on economic forecasts. They could have tossed in their new factor-based ETFs, or dividend-focused funds, or given the manager a wide berth to tweak the allocations, but they didn’t. That was a wise choice, because trying to improve on this simple model is, in my opinion, the biggest knock against many of the competitors to these new ETFs, including the iShares CorePortfolios (CBD and CBN), which hold REITs, high-yield bonds, preferred shares, and track fundamental indexes. The same criticism can be levelled at many robo-advisors, who can’t resist adding unnecessary asset classes that sound sophisticated but do little more than pile on cost and complexity.

The appeal of one-fund portfolios

A couple of years ago, my model ETF portfolio evolved to includes just three funds instead of five, as the launch of new “ex-Canada” equity ETFs allowed investors to get US, international and emerging markets in a single fund. These new Vanguard asset allocation ETFs makes life even simpler by rolling the whole portfolio into a single fund. That should reduce the number of trades you need to make, and remove the need to rebalance. (The fund literature is not specific about how often this will occur.)

There are other advantages to a one-fund solution as well. When your portfolio includes a different fund for each asset class, it’s easy to dwell on the individual parts rather than the whole. (“My portfolio returned 8% last year, but Canadian stocks didn’t do as well as international. Maybe this year I should put less in Canada.”) With a one-fund portfolio, you’re less likely to fall prey to these distractions and stay focused on the long term.

The new Vanguard ETFs are also much cheaper than other one-stop solutions, such as the Tangerine Investment Funds and robo-advisors. The obvious disadvantage of ETFs is that you usually pay a commission to buy and sell them, whereas index mutual funds and most robo-advisors don’t have trading costs. But if you’re now able to use only one ETF per account, you may still come out ahead even if you’re paying $10 per trade.

Consider the Tangerine funds, which are simple, convenient and well diversified, but carry a relatively high fee of 1.07%. A $50,000 holding in one of the Tangerine funds would carry an annual fee of $535. If we tack on a couple of basis points for taxes, the new Vanguard ETFs should have an MER of about 0.24%, giving that $50,000 holding an annual fee of just $120. Even if you spend another $10 per month on commissions your all-in cost would still be less than half as much as the Tangerine option.

The new balanced ETFs offer a similar cost advantage over robo-advisors, most of whom add an additional 0.50% fee to the cost of the underlying ETFs. One of the primary advantages of robo-advisors over do-it-yourself options is the automatic rebalancing, but now that this feature is built in to the Vanguard ETFs, the value offered by a robo-advisor is somewhat less than it used to be.

Not so fast

Since the ETFs were announced on February 1, my inbox has been bursting with emails from readers who want to know whether these funds have revolutionizing index investing in Canada. Many seem to think virtually every other option—Tangerine, the TD e-Series funds, robo-advisors, and even portfolios of individual ETFs—have become obsolete overnight.

Now there’s no doubt the Vanguard asset allocation ETFs will have broad appeal for investors who want to keep things simple without paying more for convenience. But before you liquidate your portfolio and go all-in with a brand new ETF, make sure you consider the big picture.

One of the key benefits of mutual fund options such as Tangerine and TD’s e-Series is that they allow you to set up pre-authorized contributions, and these get invested automatically. (This is also true for robo-advisors, though they use ETFs rather than mutual funds.) Don’t underestimate the importance of disciplined savings and systematic investing. If you use an asset allocation ETF instead, you’ll need to make a trade every time you add money to your accounts. Even with a one-fund portfolio, you can easily fall into the trap of wondering whether this is the “right time” to buy.

The point here is that if you are successfully using one of these other options and you’re not enthusiastic about buying ETFs, don’t feel pressured to switch.

And while a one-ETF solution is a great choice for investors who hold all of their investments in TFSAs and RRSPs, those with larger portfolios may want more flexibility. Traditional bond funds, for example, are a poor choice in taxable accounts, and all of the new Vanguard ETFs include a significant amount of fixed income. If you have a large non-registered account you’ll want to consider using individual ETFs for each asset class for more tax-efficiency.

These new Vanguard asset allocation ETFs are a welcome addition to the marketplace, and if you’re looking for an easy way to get started with ETFs, you just found it. But always remember that investing is about process, not products. Cheap and easy solutions certainly help, but in the end it’s up to you to stay focused on saving, investing with discipline, and tuning out the noise.



  1. Greg February 5, 2018 at 8:25 am

    A great move by Vanguard. I think they will really shake up the Canadian ETF space and now other issuers like Tangerine and TD will have to compete by lowering fees. I just wish they would enter the Canadian mutual fund market and offer the same funds with a mutual fund wrapper. Many people don’t want to deal with brokerages and commissions.

    The writing is on the wall for the 2%+ mutual fund companies who have filled their pockets with our money for decades.

  2. Brendan February 5, 2018 at 9:32 am

    Now the real questions! Will the one-fund portfolios be joining the ranks of the 3-fund models and the link to Justin’s 5-fund models, on your model portfolios page? And, will BlackRock be coming along with a competing line of products? Exciting times indeed.

  3. George February 5, 2018 at 9:48 am

    Any idea of how the distributions will be paid out?
    Canadian dividends, foreign dividends, interest payments?

  4. Matt February 5, 2018 at 9:55 am

    Thanks Dan! I was looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the new ETFs. As someone who was patiently waiting (still paying off debts) to enter the market with a CCP Assertive ETF portfolio I believe that the VGRO ETF will be an appropriate substitute for me.

  5. Les February 5, 2018 at 10:04 am

    Hi Dan – these new ETFs are very interesting, but I still prefer your 3-ETF portfolios (I like how they include emerging markets equities).

  6. Canadian Couch Potato February 5, 2018 at 10:49 am

    @George: The distributions from these funds will be a combination of all three, and this will be broken down on your T3 slip if you hold the fund in a taxable account. (Although, as outlined in the post, I wouldn’t recommend that.)

  7. Rob February 5, 2018 at 11:22 am

    Thanks for the post, Dan. For the investor who has a higher risk tolerance or longer time horizon, would it be better to stay in one of the three fund portfolios? Assuming a disciplined and emotionless approach, it appears that the higher equity allocation in the three fund portfolio would outweigh the benefit of the lower MER in the single fund?

  8. Justin February 5, 2018 at 11:34 am

    Thanks for your thoughts. I’ve been waiting to see them. So it looks a like a great product for an all-in tax-sheltered account, but if you have a taxable account you might want the freedom to split up assets.I keep my bonds in RRSP, and my stocks in TSFAs. So I probably will keep with the multiple ETFs.

  9. Lance February 5, 2018 at 12:14 pm

    Could you give a quick coles notes on how withholding taxes will work if these new ETFs are held in non-registered, and the different registered accounts (eg RRSP, RESP, TFSA)?

    Also, when the ETF pays dividends, will these dividends have differing components, like capital gains, eligible canadian dividends, foreign income, etc?

  10. Canadian Couch Potato February 5, 2018 at 12:25 pm

    @Lance: My colleague, Justin Bender, is preparing a blog that will touch on the foreign withholding tax implications of these funds. I will provide a link when it’s ready.

    Yes, as with any multi-asset-class fund the distributions will include a mix of interest, Canadian dividends and foreign income, as well as capital gains. This is irrelevant in RRSPs and TFSAs. You would receive a T3 slip with the details if you hold the ETFs in a non-registered account.

  11. Esther February 5, 2018 at 12:46 pm

    Great post Dan! I was really curious to see what your thoughts were about this new ETF. I’m still new to ETF’s but you’ve made it very easy for me to follow and understand and I’ve learned so much over the past year and so.. .So thank you for that! =)

  12. Matt February 5, 2018 at 12:50 pm

    Out of curiosity, if I wanted to have a risk level between the VBAL and VGRO what would be the best way to achieve this? Would it be purchasing both VBAL and VGRO to hit my desired fixed income percentage? Or should I purchase VGRO along with ZAG? I’m 27 and always anticipated trying to keep my fixed income percentage close to my age, as I’ll be new to the market and don’t want to overestimate my risk. I also have quite a long horizon for investments, so maybe the 20% fixed income of VGRO is appropriate given the convenience of a 1 fund portfolio.

  13. Dan February 5, 2018 at 1:41 pm

    Can you address Garth Turner’s (I’m sure he’s not the only one) comments about liquidity issues and the risks of having all your money in one ETF. Also, where does diversity fit ito all this?

    Thanks for all your thoughtful work.

  14. Peter February 5, 2018 at 2:15 pm

    First time poster here… been reading your blog for some time & thinking it’s time to act based on this post & returns from 2017 BMO Portfolio Accts. Basically, have investment account made up of approximately 40% Cap Preserv’n & 60% Cap Apprecia’n; all in BMO Funds with total annual fees at $10,200 w/Value Increase at 8.54% before fees & taxes.
    Preservation portion of acc’t is made up of Fixed Income/Canadian at 28%, Non Can at 4% & Non Traditional Cap Preserv at 9%.
    Capital Apprec Can Equities at 27%, US Equities 20%, Non NA 11%.

    Overall portfolio broken down as 85% Non-Reg & 15% TFSA & RRSPs. All have same % distributions.

    Overall suggestions & questions for BMO rep???

    Thanks, Peter

  15. Colin Percival February 5, 2018 at 2:55 pm

    One downside to this which I don’t see mentioned above: Vanguard will have to occasionally sell some asset classes in order to rebalance, and in doing so, they’ll realize capital gains. Those of us who “rebalance through cash flows” will pay less tax in the long run because we postpone realizing capital gains.

  16. Julian February 5, 2018 at 3:26 pm

    This news is quite interesting! I’ve been passively following your earlier posts regarding other Vanguard funds, though I’d already committed to a model portfolio from before the newer Vanguard funds. It’d be interesting to see how these new “ETF of ETFs” perform in the upcoming months.

  17. Jake February 5, 2018 at 3:56 pm

    Went through 08/09 and now yet another ugly week for the markets. Looks like yet another example of the big institutions holding back the memo about the shape of the economy. For an economy that is suppose to be doing well, stock market drops don’t make sense. While us 9-5 hard working folks, the ones selling today could care less about our hard earn money. I’ve been thinking about it for awhile, the past week has me putting any future money in GIC’s, we are told to get in stocks to keep pace with inflation, not sure how someone is suppose to do that when markets drop 8% in a week, sure hasn’t been any deflation per the stores I go to, my power bill, insurance etc.
    As with anything, the rich who run the markets tell us fools to put money in the stocks to shoot them up then while we are working 9-5 they sell.

  18. Eric February 5, 2018 at 4:13 pm

    Thank you for your analysis Dan. Do you know how frequently these funds will be re-balanced? Is it every time it goes a certain percentage off the target, or every so many hours/days/months?

  19. Sara February 5, 2018 at 4:35 pm

    Today Feb.5 the market had a ‘flash-crash’ at 3pm, then at 4 PM there was a huge price peak for VBAL, VGRO, VCNS (of the order of 4% price jump within a few minutes). I suppose they suffered from their popularity, perhaps many people had set automated trigger rules for buying?
    I too find these offerings attractive, and had been considering using trigger buy rules – but fortunately I had absorbed your warnings about buying without using a limit, and was still pondering if and how to set up a trigger rule. So… I guess a big Thank you is in order !

  20. Greg February 5, 2018 at 4:39 pm

    Upon closer inspection, when you consider the withholding tax in registered accounts and the premium bonds in non-registered accounts, it doesn’t look that appealing unless you really want an easy, one fund solution. Also, the yields on international bonds are terrible.

  21. Michael February 5, 2018 at 4:51 pm

    Hey Dan,

    What would my strategy be if I expect to hold VGRO in TFSA/LIRA (2 accounts that receive one time large contributions) but expect to have to open a non registered account in 5 years from now. Would there be a way to keep the VGRO in the TFSA/LIRA and do something else in a non registered account that is beneficial for tax purposes? Or would you say to have a diverse ETF portfolio right from day 1 that will take into account the non registered account 1 day?

  22. Vin February 5, 2018 at 5:35 pm

    Does it matter if we switch to one ETF portfolio for TFSA/RRSP now with markets down or any other time? I plan to sell VCN/XAW and buy VGRO on the same day. I mean is the price point of VGRO in sync with the current market?

  23. Jason February 5, 2018 at 6:45 pm

    @Jake: well, good luck with your market-timing. While you’re sitting on your fixed income, read more of this blog, and consider whether you’ve appropriately assessed your risk tolerance.

  24. Que February 5, 2018 at 6:50 pm

    @Dan: You say, “… in my opinion, the biggest knock against many of the competitors to these new ETFs, including the iShares CorePortfolios (CBD and CBN), which hold REITs,…”
    It wasn’t all too long ago (a couple years?) you had REITs in your model portfolio, and it sounds now like you are suggesting they are a bad idea, if so, can you elaborate?

  25. Jason February 5, 2018 at 6:52 pm

    FWIW, my balanced (60/40) basically-couch-potato portfolio dropped exactly 3% between January 28 (my last account snapshot) and today. If you saw 8%, your asset allocation must be quite a bit different, and clearly it is not tuned to your risk profile.

  26. Canadian Couch Potato February 5, 2018 at 7:28 pm

    @Rob: If want an asset allocation other than 40%, 60% or 80% equities (the targets for the three new ETFs) then you would have to use the three-fund portfolio. If you have the discipline to manage that well, then you would enjoy the benefit of the lower MER. But the enthusiasm these funds have generated suggests most people would rather manage one ETF than three, even for a slightly higher cost.

  27. Canadian Couch Potato February 5, 2018 at 7:54 pm

    @Matt: Juggling two of these funds to get 70% equities seems unnecessary. You may as well use the three-ETF portfolio, which adds just one holdings and would be much less confusing.

    @Dan: I have not heard Garth Turner’s comments, but I don’t see how liquidity is an issue here. Neither is diversification. Holding one of these ETFs is just as liquid and just as diversified as holding the seven underlying ETFs individually.

    @Peter: I would like to help, but I don’t know any details about your situation or the specifics of your current portfolio. It would be inappropriate for me to give you any specific advice.

    @Colin: I’ve tried to stress that these ETFs are not a good choice in non-registered accounts because of the fixed-income component. They really should only be used in registered accounts, where capital gains distributions are irrelevant.

    @Eric: It is not clear from the fund literature what the rebalancing schedule will be. If the ETFs gather a lot of new assets they can rebalance with cash flows, too, so you may not see them ever get too far away from their targets.

    @Greg: The issues with premium bonds in taxable accuunts and foreign withholding taxes in RRSPs are no different from the three-ETF model portfolio, or the TD e-Series funds, or Tangerine. I think it’s important to remember that these ETFs will never be optimal. That’s not what they’re designed for. They are designed precisely for investors who “really want an easy, one fund solution.”

    @Michael: I think this is a decision you can make five years from now when you have to start using a non-registered account. By that time you may be more comfortable with ETFs and better prepared to use a more custom solution rather than just using one ETF.

    @Que: It’s not that there’s anything specifically wrong with REITs. It’s just that they aren’t necessary, and it is nice to finally see a balanced ETF portfolio that includes only the basics and not a half-dozen other secondary asset classes.

  28. Jimmy February 5, 2018 at 8:49 pm

    Worth switching mawer104 for VGRO?


  29. Wayne February 5, 2018 at 9:12 pm

    Looking for retirement income. Have you calculated the anticipated distributions from each of them.

  30. Donna February 5, 2018 at 9:27 pm

    How is it possible that VGRO closed up 1.31 % today ??

  31. James February 5, 2018 at 10:42 pm

    Excellent article Dan, thank you for getting it out so soon and as always taking the time to respond to your readers questions. These are interesting tools to add to the couch potato tool kit.

  32. Dylan February 6, 2018 at 12:30 am

    I’m a Canadian currently studying in the US. I’ve got about $15,000 just sitting in a chequing account in Canada (I KNOW) that I’m looking to invest. Currently torn between ETFs and TD mutual funds (I bank with TD).
    Since I’m studying in the US, I don’t really have a Canadian income. No monthly contributions or anything, so I don’t have to worry about tons of trading fees. My gut tells me I should get a simple 3 fund ETF portfolio and focus on minimizing fees to maximize returns.
    On the other hand, I’d be responsible for, let’s say annual rebalancing, without much extra income to back it up.
    Should I just suck up the fees and stick with eSeries? Or would something like Vanguard’s one fund solution be better?

  33. Caltran February 6, 2018 at 2:38 am

    People really do not understand what bonds do, do they?

  34. Jasmin L February 6, 2018 at 6:46 am

    Too bad there is no 100% equity option…would have been more useful for non-registered accounts (combined with a more tax-effective bond ETF)..

  35. Ron W February 6, 2018 at 7:36 am

    Is it known yet if there will be a DRIP option for these ETF’s? If so, will the DRIP option offer partial shares vice only whole shares & cash? Thanks again for your excellent BLOG!

  36. Canadian Couch Potato February 6, 2018 at 8:07 am

    @Ron W: DRIP eligibility is generally up to the brokerage, not the ETF provider. And partial shares are almost never an option with ETFs.

  37. John February 6, 2018 at 9:19 am

    I buy shares of cbn etf. It’s the same idea, 80 % equities 15-20 fixed. Pays a monthly distribution plus I set up a PACC which is a monthly contribution with no fee. Plus I also drip it. The fee is higher, around 0.80 % but I’m quite happy with the returns over the few years I’ve had it. Diversification throughout the globe

  38. Ryan Bernier February 6, 2018 at 10:32 am

    Another great article with insightful analysis. Thanks Dan!

  39. caltran February 6, 2018 at 11:06 am

    @Jasmin L: There’s already a diversified equity ETF: XAW

  40. Phil February 6, 2018 at 11:41 am

    It appears there is a premium of 11.88%, 2.56%, and 5.39% for the VCNS/VBAL/VGRO. Is it recommend to wait and see if these premiums are lowered or dropped before making an initial investment for someone without any current investments?

  41. Brian February 6, 2018 at 12:17 pm

    Now if Vanguard or Blackrock could come up with a global balanced fund that pays a monthly distribution of dividends, interest & even a bit of ROC, for retirees looking for a one stop monthly income, they would win the Nobel prize for Finance.

  42. Landon February 6, 2018 at 12:48 pm

    Hi Dan,

    I’m a long time reader of your blog and utilize your model portfolios in both registered and non-registered accounts. I’m currently sitting in cash in my RRSP and have been thinking of buying some VGRO, instead of using the CCP 3 ETF portfolio. I’m aware of the higher MER, but the simplicity and not having to re-balance is a real draw to these. My question is for sums $200k + in a registered account. Is this a good solution, or should I stick with a multi-ETF portfolio. Thank you in advance for your reply, keep up the excellent work you do.


  43. Miwo February 6, 2018 at 1:00 pm

    HI Dan,

    I plan on using VGRO in my CCPC account as well as in my TFSA. I have minimal issue with the taxation since my other option was to buy laddered GIC’s. I am GIC laddering in my RRSP. I like the one stop solution for saving me from myself and decision making. I applaud Vanguard for making a global asset allocation model available investors such as myself. I look forward to Justin’s in depth review of the VGRO ETF.

  44. Mike February 6, 2018 at 1:18 pm

    Confused….an ETF that holds other ETF’s? Are there not MERs charged in the holding ETF’s , and now an additional MER? Could someone explain this? Thanks

  45. Greg February 6, 2018 at 3:23 pm

    @Mike:. There are never duplicate fees charged in a fund of funds.

  46. Kay February 6, 2018 at 10:03 pm

    Dan, thank you very much for your insightful articles. A question please — my employer offers an RRSP plan that invests the contributions in LifePath Index 2040 Fund ( How do I figure out the MER for this ETF? Unlike the ETFs that you recommend, this one does not have the MER explicitly stated, and I am confused about the other fees listed. I’m guessing that’s not good news, and am considering whether it’s worthwhile to transfer the funds to my self-directed RRSP.

  47. Canadian Couch Potato February 7, 2018 at 8:25 am

    @Kay: Group plans like this don’t have a single MER: the fees depend on the employer. Some employers cover all of the admin costs of the plan, making the MER effectively zero. Other employers cover little or nothing, and the MERs can be 1.5% or more. You should be able to get this information from your HR department or by calling the plan administrator. If your employer is matching part of your contributions then it is probably worth taking advantage even if the fees are relatively high.

  48. Ryan February 7, 2018 at 12:15 pm

    Hi Dan,
    First, thank you for all the wonderful info you provide here!
    With all the options these days, I’m a little overwhelmed as to what I should do next. I currently have $150k in a registered Tangerine Balanced Growth fund (1.07% fee – 75%/25%). I’m looking to reduce the fees I pay and was considering Wealthsimple Growth (0.4% fee – 80%/20%). However, VGRO (0.22% fee – 80%/20%) seems like an even better option. I would buy VGRO in my registered Questrade account. Are there any better options considering the size of my portfolio and foreign withholding tax implications?
    Thanks, Ryan

  49. Canadian Couch Potato February 7, 2018 at 12:49 pm

    @Ryan: Thanks for the comment. With Wealthsimple, don’t ignore the cost of the ETFs: your all-in cost will be closer to 0.60%. Foreign withholding taxes are not going to be a big factor at this point: they would be a bit lower with Wealthsimple (because the use US-listed ETFs) but more or less the same with the Tangerine and Vanguard options.

    If you are prepared to buy a single ETF at Questrade, that will certainly be your cheapest option.

  50. Ben February 8, 2018 at 2:43 pm

    Hi Dan,

    I have appreciated your website and podcast for a number of years. Thank you for the excellent content.

    My question is in the context of a registered trading account (Questrade in my case). Assuming I am satisfied with the allocation of the Vanguard single ETF fund, is there any compelling case to still go with the 3 ETF allocation? Does a 3 ETF system result in lower fees?

    Thanks very much!

Leave A Comment