Name: Beyond the Index: Five Ways to Access Nasdaq-100® Innovation
Uploaded: 2026-09-17T18:31:24.638Z
Duration: 53 min 8 s
Description: Beyond the Index: Five Ways to Access Nasdaq-100® Innovation

Transcript for "Beyond the Index: Five Ways to Access Nasdaq-100® Innovation": Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Sanjana Prabhakar, senior research specialist at Nasdaq. I want to welcome you to our webinar today entitled Beyond the Index, five ways to access Nasdaq hundred innovation. I'm gonna kick off the webinar with an introduction into the Nasdaq hundred. The Nasdaq hundred has been a standout performer over the last twenty years with a compound annual growth rate of 16.8% per year through the end of August. This is nearly 1.5 times the return of the S and P 500, and strong performance is often attributed to the innovation premium. The idea that companies that invest more in r and d produce strong growth that leads to better fundamentals that ultimately drives investment performance. One of the most important changes in markets over the last several decades has been the transition So, from a tangible, I don't know, like, economy a draft, intangible asset economy. In 1975, I've read about 83% data is S and P five hundred's market value was tied to tangible assets such as factories and inventory. users. You know, we're calling 2020, premium users relationship has effectively. reversed with approximately 90% of market value linked to intangible assets, So, that's what I, came up with. intellectual know, it looks, patents, and research and development. really good. So I can definitely the Nasdaq, hundred afterwards. is comprised of only companies just pull the Nasdaq Stock examples in The here. And before I do, that, I'll just take a step back. questions about how we investors can access the innovation premium internationally. One way is to use patent valuation data to identify some of the most innovative international companies, and the Nasdaq International Patent Leaders Index does just that. And the PACER, Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF, PATN, is the ETF that tracks the index. We'll dive into number of these strategies, including the PACER Trend Pilot 100 ETF, PTMQ, the PACER Nasdaq 100 top 50 cash cow growth leaders ETF, QQQG, the Pesa Cash Cow's 100 Nasdaq 100 rotator ETF, QQWZ, and the Pesa Metatora Nasdaq 100 dividend multiplier 600 ETF QSIK. A. quick background into BATN, the ETF we'll be spending a majority of time on. It starts with a broad international universe, the Nasdaq Global ex US Large Mid Cap Index, and applies an objective patent value screen determined by IPR strategies and delivers a focused portfolio of 100 large and mid non US companies. And here to help us break it all down is Sean O'Hara, president, PACER ETF Distributors, and Sal Bruno, head of America index insights at Nasdaq. Welcome, Sean. Welcome, Sal. It's my pleasure to introduce both the speakers. Sean Ohara is the president of PACER ETF Distributors. He began his career at PlanCo in in 1985, where he spent twenty two years as a wholesaler, divisional manager, and managing director of the national wholesaler team. In 2007, Sean joined Joe Thompson again, cofounder of PlanCo at Pacer Financial to serve as a national wholesaling company for various products, including exchange traded funds, exchange traded notes, annuities, and SMEs. In 2015, Joe and Sean cofounded PASER ETFs. And under their combined leadership, PASER ETFs has become one of the fastest growing US ETF companies. Sean often appears on Fox Business Network, CNBC, and various other news outlets to give insight into the market, and he's a graduate of the Catholic University of America. Sal Bruno is a senior director and head of Nasdaq in Index Insights Americas, where he leads the development of research, analytics, and investment insights designed to help clients and investors better understand Nasdaq indexes and the applications and investment strategies. With over nineteen years of experience spanning index creation, ETF management, quantitative research, investment strategy, development, and investor education. Sal has developed and managed rules based index methodologies and investment strategies supporting $4,500,000,000 in ETF assets at IndexIQ, who previously managed 6,500,000,000 in mutual fund assets at Deutsche Asset Management. He's also taught portfolio management at two universities, Hofstra University and Fordham. He holds an MBA in finance and economics from NYU, Stone, and a bachelor's in applied economics and business management from Cornell. Before we dive into today's discussions, discussion, I just wanted to get a few housekeeping items out of the way. CE credits, for live attendees, we have received your CFP or CIMA number from the registration page, and we'll process it after the webinar concludes. For on demand viewers, kindly answer the 10 questions CE quiz. There are materials related to today's presentation available for download on the console on the right. Please look at it at your leisure. There will also be a survey after the webcast that I would appreciate your attention to as it only makes these events better and more relevant to you. And we'll also try to leave room for questions, so please use the q and a box on the right to enter your questions. With these comments out of the way and without further ado, I will turn it over to Sal to walk us through the Nasdaq International Patent Leaders Index. And following his remarks, Sean will discuss PATN, the PACER Nasdaq International, Patent Leaders ETF and how investors can access the strategy. And we are a great user if you're a great user. If you're a great user, if you're a, great user, and I'm. just here. My name is Hugo. Thanks for Thank you, Sanjay. Thank you to everybody for taking the time to hear about this really interesting and exciting strategy that we're thrilled to partner with. We're talking about the Nasdaq international and leaders index. So Sanjay alluded to sort of the Nasdaq one hundred. She talked about some of the performance numbers. But as we know, Nasdaq one hundred is based upon companies that are listed just on the Nasdaq Stock Exchange and tends to be predominantly US companies. So practice, how do you capture the innovative spirit of the net effect on an international basis? That's what we're gonna be talking about today.... Not something that we should find product, but just something I'm thinking through. Right? I open the asset for harder methodology. And how do we do this? --. So why do we want to try and replicate the Nasdaq one hundred? Well, the bottom line, this one has been very strong over the last twenty first years. So you look at the performance, the cumulative returns of the Nasdaq 100. It's basically what that was just turning 35% through the end of June relative to the S and P 500. That was up 627%, and it's even outperformed growth indexes from S and P and and Russell growth is roughly 900%. So very strong performance in in... As f 100. That performance news comes from fundamental outperformance. So not only has the index done up, it's done working because fundamentals have been improving. So we'll be looking at revenue, earnings, free cash flows. All of these have grown on a compounded basis year after year more than two times as fast as the S and P 500, and that's really what drives the price of the index, the the returns of the index. So in the short term, the other things can drive stock price within index levels. But at the end of the day, fundamentals are... Will strive it. And you can see the the performance here from a fundamental perspective been very strong. Questions or thoughts. So where is that coming from? A lot of it comes from these companies that are actually investing much more in research and development. So if you're looking at the Nasdaq 100 relative S and P looking at a weighted average annual r and d expense, it's basically 20,000,000,000 versus 16,000,000,000. Now if if you take into account the fact that almost half of the market capitalization of the S and P five hundred is actually Nasdaq 100 companies. So if you remove those out, the remainder of the S and P 500 is basically spent around $845,000,000,000. So it's about 13 x expenditures on r and d if you look at it on a dollar basis. If you scale it by percentage of sales, it's around five and a half. And when you get to that, well, if you look on the right hand side, you see the growth in value of patents. This is what we really wanna talk about today. The value of the patent portfolio for Nasdaq 100 companies over the last eighteen plus year has grown over a thousand percent. For the S and P 500, taking out the overlap with the Nasdaq companies, it's grown about 325%. So three times faster growth in the value of the patent portfolios coming from the r and d spend. And r and d spending itself has been increasing. So the purple bars look at the top quartile of r and d spenders, and you can see how they've gone from around 12% back in the late two two thousand and two thousand nine time period. And then they're running at about 17 to 18%. The top quartile is... They're spending even more than they had been spending, and they spent significantly more than quartiles two through through four, which is the green bar. Correct. That... That's good to know. Those things. Sanjay alluded to some of these numbers in terms of growth of intangible assets. Yeah. But, basically, what we're talking about here is a transition of the type of the economy. The economy in the nineteen hundreds had been much more about. Plumbers, industrials, financials, etcetera. The the companies that are dominating the economy today are much more oriented towards technology and innovation, and therefore, you see the rapid increase and the meaningful increase in the growth range of the intangible assets, which have been fairly broadening markets and stock prices. So why do we wanna invest in companies that spend on research and development? Out of line, they outperform. If you look at the blue bar, we did a certain... A study that looked at across the full of universals of US and global stocks, companies that you segmented by their r and d expenditure. The blue bar shows the top quartile high performing. They're up 904. You take top quartile of r and d spenders. Whether you... Once you're out of a quartal, whether the quartal is two through four or you spend zero on r and d, they're basically around 300%. So about three times the return, two and a half to three times the return for companies that are spending time the most on r and d. And for patent filings, there's a single company that... If you look on the left hand side from 2008 to 2024, the growth in all over large caps, we've seen patent filings about 33%. Those that just filed no patents only grew by small percentage Sales growth is about four tiles through 61%, which is actually what we've done with the rest of the the quartiles two through four. So you could see that the value. the value of patent portfolio in terms of the... As a growth signal, these companies are really driving faster growth. So let's dive a little bit more into the Apple index. So how does it work? We start off with the Nasdaq Global ex US QFR Dimit Cap, And then we work with with IPR. So IPR is a firm that started in 2015, and they really are focused on providing what is the valuation for different patents. Yeah. Most of their work is developed around being the patent value for companies that are going through M and A where there needs to be valuation work to determine how much company might be worth to have significant patents on there in the balance sheet. We've been partnering with them for the last several years to develop this index, and it becomes the core for this investment strategy. So the way it works is they basically take all of the patent files from the US Patent and Trademark Office as well as global peers, and then they they basically build that evaluation model. They look at five different categories, 27 different indicators across five different categories, where you're from legals, where it's things like, has the patent been applied for? Has it been granted? Would the claims coverage? What's the main term on the patent? Things like technical quality. So looking at some quality of the patent, is it transferable, the best transferability to other sectors, how broad is it, assignee, things like who has... Who can this be assigned to, who are the inventors, who actually owns the patent, And then market attractiveness to market coverage, looking at sort of the opportunities, the anticipated market size. And the KKs... And, basically, what they're trying to do is if you think about when you're buying a home, you're trying to do comps. So you're trying to figure out what's the value of this house. You look at comps of all the houses that are sold. Very similar concept here. You look at that on patent. You look at other patents that are similar in terms of evaluation, in terms of their... Of these characteristics made from the value from that. So we start with the patent portfolio. We start with patent characteristics. We take the top 100 out of the Nasdaq Global ex US large and mid cap index. Applying basically, looking at an eighty twenty rule, if you look at the weight of the top 100 names in this index, basically, the the base index, they represent about 25% of the market capitalization, the top 100 names out of the broad front index. But they actually represent 88% of the tax valuation. So this is a classic eighty twenty rule where 8080% or more of the value comes from about 20% of the global ex US market cap, which is the top 100 companies. Looking at the r and d expense expense by by ranking bucket, around half of the top 100 make up about half the value of the patent ranking. And these companies, if you look on the right hand side, spend significantly more on research and development. So the top 100 companies spend about 2,400,000,000, which is about three times a year to the next 100, which is three times as much as the next 100, which is three times as much as at the bottom. So you get sort of exponential effect of the r... Average R and D expense per company. Looking at the back tested performance, if you look at the blue line, that is the back tested performance for the Nasdaq international patent leaders. It has performed very well over the backtest period from 2013 through 2024, where it was up a 179% relative to a 100% for the MSCI ACWI x US and the x US growth and 89% for the x US. A 100% for EFA, 89% for the SCI AccReX US. So very strong performance in the back period. And if we compare folks in just on EFA, it has outperformed in 10 out of the last twelve calendar years, which is actually very similar to the performance profile we see for NDS versus S and P 500. Importantly, this does not come with higher volatility. It's about the same level of volatility, but you're getting higher returns that lead to a higher sharp ratio. And then... And we've seen some of this just carry through from the on the live period where both in the end of twenty twenty four through 06/30/2026, the international business has been up 85%, which has basically been doubling the equity ex US and more than double the ex US growth as being the... Has actually tripled the performance of the S and P 500. But what's really interesting about this is if you look at the growth in the valuation, you are... You have stronger growth characteristics in terms of sales per share, earnings per share, cash flow per share. The patent leader index is growing significantly faster on metrics relative to the MSCI, but it's actually less expensive, especially when you're looking at next twelve months. So if you're looking at price to sales, price to earnings, or price to cash flow on a forecasting basis, Running anywhere from a 25 to 23% discount from evaluation relative to the MSCI. Yeah. That makes sense. Looking at sector distribution, it is overweighting technologies. You have 42% technology. That is less than you get for the Nasdaq 100, which has this update on June 30 with 69% technology. The other sectors that have significant exposure would be industrials, consumer discretionary, not in health care. We fund requests as much as... In terms of looking at it by country, Japan is is 25%. That is the largest country followed by South Korea, Taiwan, Switzerland, and China. And about a third of the index is actually over $500,000,000 in market capitalization, a little bit more than a third of the 100,000,000,000... The 500,000,000,000. These are very large cap companies that we're dealing with here. And the top holdings are names like Taiwan Semi, Samsung Electronics, SBA, and Linux. These are obviously old technology, semiconductor type companies. That's in holding. It could be some discretionary. We see some health care names. Novartis and Rosario at least coming in. Nestle, obviously, with some discretionary or Toyota Motor. So these are some of the top names that are built into the index. I'll turn it over to Sean now to talk about the ETF... The ATM that tracks this in there. Great. Thanks, Sal. And, first, I wanna thank Barbara who asked a question. Will you share the deck? Of of course, we will. But I also wanna encourage folks who are listening to type in on the q and a tab questions as we go forward. We have a phenomenal relationship with, the folks at Nasdaq. Let me go back one. Alright. So, this started with a conversation. So we meet with the folks at Nasdaq on a quarterly basis, and we throw ideas around. And one of the things that came up in one of our discussions, about two and a half or three years ago is why isn't there a Nasdaq one hundred for international? And and the Nasdaq folks said, well, nobody ever asked us that. And so we said, well, we're asking. So we went on this path of trying to build what we thought was the right strategy that would be similar to what the Nasdaq is here in The US by using international names. The problem, I think, that most people have with international investing is that, there's just not as much innovation or growth in the middle, if you will. In other words, they some people say, well, The US, The US, innovates, China imitates, and then Europe regulates and litigates. And so the when you have a broad based index, you're seeing here on the slide, for example, what the MSCI index looks like, and you have these big overweights to financials. We don't have very much financial exposure here because they're not just very innovative companies. And so when we when we sat down and ultimately built the index with the Nasdaq folks, the IPR piece, the patent value piece of it was really, really important because what we think we're getting is international innovators. And anybody who's seen the the Nasdaq ads on television know that that's what they preach and that's what they think is at the core of their DNA, if you will. And so we were excited to be able to launch the product. We saw the performance, I guess, a little earlier. It's been a phenomenal performer. You know, international has been great this year for sure, but this is absolutely, you know, more than doubled what's going on in these broad based indexes. And then and we think it's probably, you know, an international strategy because it's based on innovation and research and development that actually could potentially keep pace with The US markets, which, you know, as you allocate to international, we tend to do it when, you know, it's out of favor or it's coming back up, and then we sort of switch back. And so for those folks who are looking for, like, a really differentiated approach to international investing, PATN is a is a great choice because we're not going to be like the broad based indexes that have these 25% weights to, you say, financials, for example. So if you're looking for growth in your international portfolios to allocate to, PATN takes the DNA of what it makes the Nasdaq the Nasdaq, which is innovation, and it basically imprints it into this index methodology or this index construction. So this is your slide, Sal? Or me? No. This is me. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Yep. Take What I'd like to do is go a little bit deeper into the Nasdaq 100, and that really sets the stage, I think, for the next set of conversations and products that Sean will talk about, which are really actually built... That are not limitations of the Nasdaq 100. They actually use the Nasdaq 100, so we thought it'd be useful to go a little bit deeper here. So dig... Digging deeper into the performance of the Nasdaq 100, not only has it outperformed cumulatively, it's actually been very consistent 14 out of the last eighteen years. And, again, this is similar to the performance we saw for the patent leaders index relative to EFA. So trying to keep in that in that similar vein. Interestingly, the volatility has been about 3% higher, about 23% versus 20%, but you are getting... You're getting more excess return. Only 16.7 annualized versus 11.3% annualized. Looking at the volatility a little bit further, you can look at standard deviation, but another way of looking at this implied volatility. What we're looking at here is the blue line is basically the implied volatility in the Nasdaq 100. The gray line is the implied volatility in the S and P five hundred. And the blues are a little bit above the grays on a on a pretty regular basis. But what's important is when things go wrong, when volatility spikes, look at 2008 with COVID in 2020, basically, the grays and the blues go up together, and they come back down together. So when you're looking at risk on a day to day basis, Nasdaq will be a little bit more volatile. But during periods of stress, volatilities actually look very similar to each other. And, importantly, the Nasdaq 100 recovers a lot quicker. So we looked at the last eight times where we had a 15% or larger drawdown. And in seven out of those eight periods, the Nasdaq one hundred actually recovered faster than the S and P five hundred and, in fact, recovered about 25% faster on average. So we talked a little bit about the sector decomposition when we looked at the pie chart. As of the end of of June, it's about 69% technology that has fallen back a little bit now with some of the more recent headwinds. So they're about to see. And I alluded to this earlier, but I wanted to spend a moment talking about it. So the evolution... So the markets have changed over time, and this gets to the the value of the intangibles. When you look at kind of what's become more important in the marketplace and you look at the overlap between the S and P 500 and the Nasdaq 100, on the left hand side, you see back in 2001, there's about a 15% overlap in terms of market capitalization. That's now 52%. So it's gone up by threefold. On the right hand side, you can see back in 2,002, 53 companies that were in the Nasdaq 100 were also in the S and P 500. That number is now 88. So almost all of the Nasdaq one hundred companies are in the S and P 500, but when you take into account the significant outperformance in the Nasdaq one hundred, that tells you that many of the other stocks are actually not contributing all that much. Some of that is financials. Sean talked about the lack of innovation in financials. Nasdaq one hundred is the 100 largest names on the Nasdaq stock market excluding financial companies. So that's part of the Alright. I'm assuming that's the original. Is it a true large cap where we look at average, median, or smallest market cap relative to the S and P five hundred? It's consistently larger than the S and P five hundred. Well... And I'll conclude this part by just basically showing a slide that shows the size of the Nasdaq one hundred ecosystem. This is important because some of the products shown we talked about use some of the the products on the right in purple, some of the derivatives. So if you take the actual cash invested in ETF in in the Nasdaq one hundred products, whether it be ETFs mutual funds, or you take the notional value of derivatives, which are the purple products, it adds up to about $1,400,000,000,000 of market value that is tied to Nasdaq 100 in one in one shape or form. Importantly, if you look at the value traded of Sorry. My Internet froze for a moment. I'm back. Alright. So, the next ETF that we wanna talk about, that is one of the different ways to play the Nasdaq story is QQQG. At Pacer, we're big believers here in free cash flow. We apply free cash flow a couple of different ways to to build product. One, we use free cash flow yield on the value side as a what what we think is a potentially better metric than traditional price to book, if you will. On the other side, we use free cash flow margin, which is the free cash flow company generates divided by the sales, which is really just an effective measurement of how much sales does a company have and do they make money on the stuff that they sell. Sales growth is typically used quite often in growth indexes, although the research that we have would would say that if you're focused on sales growth and sales growth alone, you actually don't create alpha. It actually puts a drag on the portfolio. So with the Nasdaq 100 top 50 cash cows growth leaders ETF, QQQG, we take the 50 companies in the Nasdaq 100 that have the highest free cash flow margin. And you can see on the slide in front of you that you you pick up a pretty significant, about 30% higher free cash flow margin. So to sort of make this, understandable, then if you were in the orange cohort of stocks, for every dollars worth of new sales or revenue, those stocks are creating 26¢ worth of excess free cash flow. You know, the fastest growing companies out there, one of which would be like an NVIDIA, their free cash flow margin is, like, north of 50%. So the advantages of free cash flow margin is that you have less debt, for example. You don't need to finance your growth. You have the ability to reinvest that excess free cash flow in future business growth. You can buy back stock with it, if you will, or you can start to pay dividends, which we're starting to see some of the bigger tech names do today. And so we take that approach here with, the Nasdaq. We start with the Nasdaq 100. We then pull out the 50 companies with the highest free cash flow margin, and then we momentum weight the names. The the key to the story here is look. I mean, as Sal said, there's, like, $1,400,000,000,000 already benchmarked to the Nasdaq. If you own any growth story, whether it's the Nasdaq 100 or, you know, the Russell growth or the S and P growth or you have an active growth manager that runs money for you, you have plenty of exposure already to the Magnificent Seven names, which have been great for a long time. A little bit in the near in the near past here, not so great because of all the CapEx and worries about that. And so adding your growth strategy to your portfolio that has more exposure to those Mag seven, to us, doesn't really provide much diversification. The second piece of it is that when you weight by momentum as opposed to market cap, you're taking the companies that you identified who are growing the fastest and giving them the bigger weight. So when you look at, for example, the exposure to the Mag seven or the concentration, in QQQG, we have 4.7% of the portfolio in in the Mag seven versus 35% for the Nasdaq 100. And any growth manager that's benchmarking to things like this is probably gonna be closer to the Nasdaq exposure than ours. Interestingly enough, when you look at the weights of the top 10 names in our portfolio relative to the Nasdaq, we think this is the story. So you take a name like Western Digital, where it has about a 1% weight in the Nasdaq, it's got a 6% weight here. Or you take a name like Monolithic Power Systems, again, we have 10 times the weight exposure to that name. And by overweighting these names that are in the Nasdaq 100, which are all large cap companies, but not weighting by market cap but by momentum weighting. We're putting the bulk of the assets in the fastest growing names, which has been a real driver for performance. And so when you look at the performance, of this product year to date, I think it's about 50% higher than the Nasdaq 100. Year to date, it's up 36% through the end of June. I looked at it the other day. I think the Nasdaq was up about 18. We're up about 27%. So, again, about 50% higher return. But what you're doing is you're still leaning on the Nasdaq and the innovation that makes the Nasdaq the Nasdaq. Well, we're just simply reordering the names or reweighting the names in the portfolio on something that's not traditional market cap and then skinnying down the list of 50. The analogy that I use to make people understand this is that like, say Sal and I had a big family, and we were gonna have our our 30 or our 100 best friends over for a Thanksgiving dinner. And we prepared the dinner, and then Sal and I ate 50% of the food. The rest of the folks would be sort of left with less than what they want. And so when you look at the Nasdaq, one of the things we think is the key here is that there's a lot of names in the Nasdaq 100. Were it not market cap weighted would actually give the investor at the end of the day a much higher return. But because it's it is market cap weighted and we're not using this free cap and traditional Nasdaq's not using this free cash flow margin screen, we don't get enough exposure to those names. And so what we wanna do is get maximum exposure to the names in the Nasdaq, the 15 names that have the highest free cash flow margin, and then we rebalance on a quarterly basis. So it's like we run a draft every quarter, and we pick the 50 best names based on that metric. And the beauty of doing this in an ETF is that you can do this without creating capital gains because of the an ETF's unique ability to rebalance through custom in kind creation and redemption baskets. So if you're looking for a great growth story to complement what you already own or you're concerned about your overconcentration to those seven big names, here's a way to get the growth that you're seven big names, here's a way to get the growth that you want without simply replicating exposure to the seven names. You're gonna get very little exposure to the Mag seven in this portfolio. The second strategy after patent is another US strategy. This sort of takes what we think is maybe the best growth index out there, which is the Nasdaq 100, and we think one of the best value strategies out there, which is our cash cows value series, q q o c o w z, and then we're just simply rotating the portfolio. So we take take a look every single month, whichever one of those two indexes has the highest relative strength growth, That's what we're gonna own for the next month and so on and so forth. For those who are sort of wondering, like, how's this done here lately, we've been in the value sleeve here for, I think, about three months. So, we were early in the value. It went to the growth for a little bit. Now we're back on the value side. But, again, we can do this sort of toggle back and forth, if you will, inside of an ETF, without having to worry about the taxation. And then here's a long term backtest for you to look at from Nasdaq and us. 16% on this cows versus a cows, Nasdaq rotation strategy versus eight and a half of the S and P 500. You don't suffer a greater maximum drawdown. You have a little higher volatility, but I would argue it's probably the good kind of volatility. In other words, it's created by having excess returns over time. So if you are doing it on your own, which a lot of financial advisers do and doing this rebalance from, you know, overweight growth, overweight value back and forth. Here's a way to just put a simple solution in your portfolio that'll do it for you. And then the component parts, we think, as I said, we think they're probably, you know, the best growth index is obviously the Nasdaq 100 over the years. And we think the cows index on the value side, which has added three or 400 basis points excess return versus the Russell value over its life, is the is is perhaps the best value index. And so when you look at number of switches over that long that backtest, again, the large longest exposure for CALC was twenty eight months. The largest exposure for the Nasdaq was thirteen months. It would have made, about a 164 different trades over that twenty six year period. The average length of time that it stays in each one of those is about 4.2. And then, the Nasdaq total time in the months, we would have been I'm sorry. I misread that. We would have been in in the cows a hundred and sixty four months. We would have been in the queues a hundred and fifty months, and then you can see those durations, as well. And the performance, as I mentioned earlier, is pretty attractive given what's going on. And then for those of you, who are starting to get a little nervous, this is our oldest product with Nasdaq. It's the one we started our relationship with. It's a trend following strategy. I like to think that this is sort of like the Nasdaq 100 for baby boomers. You know, those baby boomer clients who who have made it, if you will. They're now in retirement or near retirement and have to live on their money. They're constantly worrying if the market's gonna go crashing down and then they'd have to change their lifestyle. This is designed really for them. The Nasdaq Pacer Nasdaq 100 Trendpilot 100 ETF, PTNQ works like a traffic light. And so if you know how a traffic light works, it's green, yellow, and red. Green means go, yellow means slow down, and red means stop. So we use the Nasdaq 100, two hundred day moving average. If the Nasdaq is above that moving average, we own the Nasdaq outright exactly how it's prescribed from the Nasdaq. Excuse me. If the Nasdaq 100 falls below its two hundred day moving average for five consecutive days, that's our first signal to sort of reduce the risk, if you will. So half the portfolio will go into t bills. And if you look at the arrows, the only box that really has two arrows or two directional arrows, if you will, is that yellow one. So from there, we'll wait to see what happens. And this is meant to be a long term trend following strategy, so we don't wanna be too overreactive. If we're in that yellow box, which is fifty fifty and the Nasdaq pops back above its moving average, we'll move the rest of the money back into the Nasdaq. However, if the Nasdaq two hundred day moving average starts to roll over, that's our second risk signal. At that point, the portfolio would go to 100% t bills, and then the only place for it to go from there would be back into the Nasdaq one one hundred, and it would do so when the Nasdaq went above its two hundred day moving average again for five consecutive days. Again, this is really a risk mitigation strategy. I'm not necessarily trying to beat the Nasdaq over time. What I'm trying to put into the strategy is a risk management protocol for folks who are concerned about excessive downside volatility. When you think about the Nasdaq, and you look at them, I think South did a great job sort of extolling the virtues of the Nasdaq, but, you know, historically, they've had better earnings growth, better revenue growth, and better dividend growth. When you look at the Nasdaq the Pacer Nasdaq one hundred ETF versus the Nasdaq, we're about 8% annualized since 1999 versus, nine. So maybe we give up a 100 basis points worth of the, the excess return. But when you look at sort of that best and worst calendar year, we're capturing the majority of the upside, and we're significantly reducing the downside. And where it can be really important is when you start to talk about that baby boomer, the Nasdaq for the baby boomer, you know, that sequence of returns risk is really, really critical to folks. So it's pure we have just side by side putting a $100,000 into the, Nasdaq 100 at the beginning and then starting to take withdrawals, you wind up, with essentially, the same amount of, income paid out, but you have a significantly different ending value. It's a $270,000 ending value by using the TrendPilot version, then it and it'd be a 194,000, based on the, the Nasdaq 100 and the performance you can look for. And then for income investors. Sean, sorry. Yeah. Sean, sorry if I may. As you dive into the final product, QSIX, it would be great if you could also speak to how you see financial advisers using the products in their portfolios and maybe, speak to some of the tap taxing implications that might be relevant. Sure. So if I go back to the beginning patent, we see advisers taking a portion of their international exposure and using patent as a replacement for what would be traditional international investing, which has been frustrating. Over time, we think we can take some of that frustration out. When you think about QQQG, again, there's a lot of folks that talk about, you know, what I call the elephant in the room, which is concentration risk to the mag seven. If you wanna take some of that concentration risk out, you can use QQQG as a, as a replacement or complement to your long only growth equities. We see that happen quite often for QQWZ, which is the rotation strategy. We see in advisers who are trying to simplify their lives by not having to make the active calls to be overweight growth or value at any given point in time. They use QQWZ as a way to get that exposure. And then TrendPilot, as I said earlier, you know, we see it use either one of three ways. One is as a complement to your long on the equity portfolio for those clients who are really risk averse and worried about, you know, the next, quote, unquote, bear market, which will happen someday. We see it as a somewhat of a replacement for fixed income because yields have not necessarily been attractive. And then we see it being used as as a sleeve of their alternative sleeve in people's portfolios where you can own an ETF as opposed to maybe owning something that's a partnership or are there some other type of traditional, alternative. And so that's how we see them being positioned, if you will. So QQQG, QG I'm sorry. Patent complement to your international, QQQG complement to your traditional growth, QQWZ uses as a way to sort of put some of the, overweight and underweight strategy of being overweight growth or value at any given point in time. And, PT and Q has said, you know, the Nasdaq 100 for baby boomers. As far as taxation goes, because we are an exchange traded fund, and because, again, we're afforded certain additional flexibilities under the Investment Company Act, we can rebalance portfolios, without creating capital gains, which is a really, really big, topic these days. There's lots and lots of strategies out there where folks say, we're, you know, we're gonna help you harvest your losses and all this other nonsense. I think it's just much better not to pay tax on capital gains every year until you decide to sell your fund, and that's really what you get with an ETF. So whether we're moving from the Nasdaq to T bills or the Nasdaq to the cows or whether we're rebalancing any of the other strategies, we're able to do that without creating capital gains through custom income creation redemption baskets. So I hope that answers your question on that. And then q six is a sister product that we built with Nasdaq to another one that we have. We call this our dividend multiplier series. The the goal of q six is to to provide a distribution yield that is equal to six times the dividend yield of the Nasdaq 100. So right now, I think the Nasdaq yields, like, 75, 80 basis points. You're talking about a 5% cash flow here. The way we do that is we sort of deconstruct the index that the Nasdaq is always gonna be comprised of stock gains or equity appreciation and dividends to get your total return. We reduce the equity exposure. We used the difference as collateral. With that collateral, we enter into dividend futures contracts to create the mechanism that allows us to make those distributions. What's great about this relative to some other strategies that are designed to give you income is that there's always this sort of trade off that you make. Right? If I want income from my equity portfolio, traditionally, I would buy dividend producing stocks. They don't necessarily have much growth, or I would be, buying, you know, some kind of a covered call strategy. The covered call strategies produce great income, but they really, really throttle your growth. So for those who know, like, QYLD, after the call, just run a comparison of q six versus q QYLD, and you'll see why we do what we do. But the idea is to give that client who needs cash flow the cash flow they want or need without creating too great of a burden in terms of future growth of capital. And the interesting thing about the income we pay out is about 95% of it is tax free. So you're getting almost a 5% distribution from a Nasdaq portfolio that's got 85% of the return potential, and that is giving and that's being given to you mostly tax free, which means, you know, the taxable equivalent yield would be much higher. And then I made the point about, you know, dividend producing strategies. Well, here's an example of, you know, US dividend growth total return versus q six. And again, big, big outperformance mostly driven by the fact that we're not buying stocks that don't have great growth potential. We're buying the Nasdaq 100 as the base for our our capital growth, and so that gives us the best of both worlds, if you will. And then when you think look at the performance, you know, going back, the Nasdaq one year is 34. You're getting 31% total return here. You're getting a little lower risk profile than the Nasdaq, and you're getting a very, very attractive distribution yield on this portfolio. So, we do have time for questions, I think. If anybody has any, again, go to your q and a box and you can type them in, and we'll take a peek and see if anybody's there. And I guess I'll turn it back over to, either you, Sujana, or to Sal. Yeah. Thank you very much, Sean. That was a fantastic overview of, the four products. And, thank you very much, Sal, for, your, insight into, BATN and NQIBL, as also and and also your overview of the Nasdaq 100. I'm sure our audience is, has learned a lot from today's presentation. Before we go into q and a, I'd, quickly like to launch a few, polling questions. And, if you can take your time to answer them, that'll be great. So our first question is, which theme are your clients most interested in currently? Is it, AI and technology innovation, value and attractive valuations, dividend growth and quality income, emerging markets growth, diversification, or lower correlation to US markets? If you can take your time to, vote, that'll be great. That's great. Now time for a second question. What is the most common concern you hear from clients? In your view, is it market volatility, current equity valuations, finding sources of steady income or changing interest rates? If you could take your time to make your vote, that'd be great. If anybody's not sure how to place you both, on the right hand side, next to the q and a and the dots says a code until you open that up, and you can select which option you want and then submit. And we never did that? We have just one more question after this, and then we have time for, some questions. Gotcha. Okay. Okay. Okay. I think we, that would be our last polling question. We do have a little bit of time for q and a. So my first question to both the presenters would be, in your view, how is Nasdaq unique versus other index providers? No. This is good. I think, you know, to to to us, you know, the lesson we learned in in building patent together was that is that the innovation, is really the differentiator. You know? We study lots of. things here at Pacer. And over the years, we've studied, you know, r and d as an impact on returns and came to the same conclusions that Sal did in some of his earlier slides. And so when you think about the Nasdaq, I always think about innovation, and innovation drives future growth. So I think that's what sort of differentiates, the Nasdaq. And then the second thing, I guess, would be one of the other complaints about some of the broad based indexes is that we don't really, So we don't really the Nasdaq doesn't focus on specific sectors like some of the broader markets do. So, you know, when you have materials and you have industrials and you have real estate and you have utilities and some committee is, you know, sort of saying, you know, we have to have something in each one of these. That's more constraining for total return, we think, than the way the Nasdaq's. I don't know. Oh, before you drop, did you look at the, I think I'm gonna take a time. Okay. Yeah. That's would. think... We had yeah. Sorry, sir. Please go ahead. Yeah. I think being on the Nasdaq side, I think one of the things that... How we do ourselves and what differentiates us, especially as we're based on the Nasdaq, what Huddl is, the unique relationship between the exchange and the index. And that is really why we will one drive the other. So you think about the Nasdaq one hundred, it is only made up of companies that are listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange. That interestingly, some of the biggest, most innovative companies in the world actually choose to make the Nasdaq one hundred their home, so that's why they're eligible to get excluded in the Nasdaq one hundred. So if you think about that, if there are, say, eight of the largest companies in the world in The US and and they choose where they're gonna list, with some US stock exchange on the Nasdaq, what's the chance that all eight of those would take one exchange, Nasdaq? It's less than half of 1%. So we don't think it's random. We think it gets to... And I think this reinforces Sean... Sean's point of there's a spirit of innovation. We think that sort of permeates everything we do here at Nasdaq, whether it be the types of companies that choose to want to list here Exactly. Or the way that we just want our index and focus on those. And then we think that that's really... You know, we call ourselves on the index side of the blueprint for tomorrow because the economy has evolved over the last forty years. But I alluded to that earlier in nineteen hundreds. It was much more energy industrial financials. Now it's more technology innovation. And importantly... And then, Sean, you brought this up. We don't screen for individual sectors. Now we do tend to be a little bit overweight technology because that's where a lot of the innovation is coming. But when you think about innovation and technology, in my opinion, most companies that are successful are technology companies in some way, shape, or form, whether they're formally classified as a technology company by GICS or ICD or whatever set of classification we want to use. So think about a company like Walmart. So... Most people will not think of Walmart as a cutting edge cutting edge innovative subsidy, but they actually are quite innovative, and they do employ a lot of technology. And they did actually change their listing last year to join the Nasdaq exchange, and then now part of the Nasdaq one hundred index. But Think about how they're using technology in terms of using AI to optimize their their warehouses, using AI agents to help for shopping, using drones for home delivery. It's still very cutting edge stuff. So, really, if you think about it, technology innovation permeates every sector in every country that wants to be successful. And therefore, we don't we don't exclude or select by certain sectors. We let go to markets kind of place way out, and that... That's what the terms are the allocations. We did have a question on, so I wanna thank the person for asking about, allocation or implementation. So I'll just go through it again real quick. Right? So p a t n, that's our international strategy. That's the patent levers. That's meant to be a complement to traditional, international exposure based on innovation and hopefully, over over time, you know, potentially higher returns. Then you have QQQG, which is a solution to overconcentration to this MAG seven without really sacrificing the growth, QQWZ. And so that would be part of your core growth portfolio, let's say. QQWZ is, meant to sort of automate, if you will, that overweight to underweight growth or value strategy by using relative strength in the two indexes, the cows index and the Nasdaq 100. And then, PTNQ is, as I said, I think the easiest and best way to describe it is is the Nasdaq 100 for baby boomers. And so it becomes a risk mitigation strategy. You can either tuck it in your equity portfolio, use it as a part of your fixed income portfolio or part of your ALTS exposure. And then q six, you know, is really targeted at these strategies like covered calls or dividend strategies where the investors looking for income from their equity portfolio. There there's there's not many attractive ways to do that when you buy dividends. As I say, you forgo a great deal of growth. When you use covered calls, you really forgive for forgo all of your potential growth, and and within q six sort of solves that problem by keeping both components. You get a very attractive, distribution yield, and you get the growth of the Nasdaq, underneath that. So I appreciate the question. That's great. Thank you very much, Sean. Looking at the clock, we'll need to wrap up the presentation, shortly. I'd like to once again thank today's presenters, for their preparation for today's webinar, and to Michelle and Sierra from the Nasdaq marketing team for organizing today's webinar. Any unanswered questions will be sent to our teams and someone will, reach out. A gentle reminder to fill out the survey. We would love to hear your feedback. And once again, we hope that we exceeded your expectations today, and this concludes, today's webinar. Thank you.