你是否在少数股票上投入了过多资金——还是投入不足？多年来，投资者一直担心美国股市过度集中在英伟达、苹果和微软等寥寥几只巨头赢家股票上。但你是否反而对这些股票配置不足？
Do you have too much money in too few stocks—or not enough? For years now, investors have been fretting that the U.S. stock market is overconcentrated in a handful or two of such giant winners as Nvidia, Apple and Microsoft. Could you be underexposed to them instead?
这就是一批新型交易所交易基金（ETF）的推销逻辑，这些基金在美股各行业板块的龙头股上持有超大仓位。你是否应该买入这类ETF，取决于你的自身构建，远多于这些基金的构建方式。
That’s the pitch behind a batch of new exchange-traded funds with supersize holdings of the biggest stocks in U.S. industry sectors. Whether you should buy one of these ETFs depends much less on how they’re built than on how you’re built.
而且，大多数投资者对待所有板块基金都应保持谨慎——尤其是这些新推出的“超强版”板块基金。
And most investors should approach all sector funds with caution—especially these new extra-strength versions.
板块基金可能成为原本耐心投资者追逐短期收益这个“魔鬼般跳动的球”的“魔鬼作坊”。“超强版”板块基金可能让这种诱惑变得更加危险。
Sector funds can become a devil’s workshop where otherwise patient investors chase the demonically bouncing ball of short-term return. Extra-strength sector funds might make that temptation even more dangerous.
随着跟踪宽基股市的指数基金在近几十年蓬勃发展，仅跟踪单一细分板块（如医疗、金融、科技或能源股）的指数ETF也随之激增。据晨星数据，仅今年以来，就有420亿美元流入了科技指数ETF。
As index funds tracking the broad stock market have boomed in recent decades, so have index ETFs that track only a single segment: healthcare or financial or technology or energy stocks, for instance. So far this year, $42 billion has poured into technology index ETFs alone, according to Morningstar.
然而，板块基金是投资指数基金并不总像人们想象中那么简单的“铁证A”。
Sector funds, though, are Exhibit A in why investing in index funds isn’t always as simple as people think.
证券法规和联邦税收规则限制了ETF或共同基金在其最大持仓上可投入的资金比例。一般来说，基金单一公司持仓不得超过其资产的25%，且单个持仓超过资产5%的部分之和不得大于基金总值的一半。这些限制仅允许暂时突破。
Securities regulations and federal tax rules limit how much money an ETF or mutual fund can have in its top holdings. In general, a fund can’t have more than 25% of its assets in a single company, and the sum of individual holdings that exceed 5% of assets can’t be greater than half the fund’s total value. Those limits can be breached only temporarily.
当然，最大市值股票已成巨无霸。2024年初，苹果和微软各自占标普道琼斯信息技术指数的比重约为22%。标普不得不将英伟达的权重上限人为压低至约5%，以防止这三家公司合计权重超过50%的最高允许集中度上限。
And, of course, the biggest stocks have become behemoths. In early 2024, Apple and Microsoft each hit roughly 22% of S&P Dow Jones’ information-technology index. S&P had to cap Nvidia’s weight at an artificially low level of about 5% to keep the three companies combined from exceeding the 50% maximum permissible concentration.
随后，在六月，英伟达的市值超越苹果，正赶上指数的季度再平衡。英伟达在科技指数中的权重随即飙升至约 21%，微软权重大致保持不变，而苹果跌至 5% 以下。标普道琼斯此后调整了指数设计，以使此类变动的破坏性降低。
Then, that June, Nvidia surpassed Apple in market value, just in time for the index’s quarterly rebalancing. Nvidia’s weight in the tech index promptly shot up to about 21%, Microsoft remained about the same and Apple fell to less than 5%. S&P Dow Jones has since tweaked its index design to make such changes less disruptive.
尽管如此，前五大股票——英伟达、苹果、微软、博通和美光科技——占据了标普 500 科技板块总市值的 66%。在 State Street 的科技精选板块 SPDR ETF（俗称其代码 XLK）中，这同五只股票构成了该基金 1260 亿美元资产的 50%。
Still, the top five stocks—Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom and Micron Technology—make up 66% of the total market value of the S&P 500’s technology sector. At State Street’s Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF, popularly known by its ticker XLK, those same five stocks constitute 50% of the fund’s $126 billion in assets.
最近有几家公司推出了 ETF，试图通过利用一个监管漏洞来缓解这些怪象。将大部分钱投入另一只 ETF——这不计入集中持仓限额——让它们能够大幅提高对最大公司的敞口。
Several firms have recently introduced ETFs that seek to mitigate these quirks by hopping through a regulatory loophole. Putting much of their money into another ETF—which doesn’t count toward the limits on concentrated positions—lets them crank up exposure to the biggest companies.
本月早些时候推出的 State Street 标普 500 科技市场板块 SPDR，将其 66% 的资产配置在 State Street 的巨型 XLK 基金中。
State Street S&P 500 Technology Market Sector SPDR, which launched earlier this month, has 66% of its assets in State Street’s giant XLK fund.
这只代码为 XLKM 的新基金，仅有三只单一股票持仓超过 5%：英伟达 10.3%、苹果 9.8% 和微软 7.8%。这远低于单一持仓超 5% 的项目合计不得超过 50% 的上限。
The new fund, with the ticker XLKM, has only three single-stock positions greater than 5%: Nvidia at 10.3%, Apple at 9.8% and Microsoft at 7.8%. That’s well below the 50% maximum on holdings that exceed 5% each.
但请记住：XLKM 将 66% 的资产配置在 State Street 的科技精选板块 ETF 中。本周，那只规模更大、历史更久的基金在英伟达上的配置为 14.9%，苹果 14.3%，微软 11.3%。
Remember, though: XLKM has 66% of its assets in State Street’s Technology Select Sector ETF. This week the older, bigger fund had 14.9% in Nvidia, 14.3% in Apple and 11.3% in Microsoft.
透过这些持仓来看，这只新基金实际上在前三大股票上的配置达到了 55%。除了其自身直接持有的 10.3% 英伟达外，XLKM 通过其 66% 的兄弟基金持仓，间接又持有 9.9% 的英伟达——其余重仓股同理。
Look through to those positions, and the new fund effectively has 55% in the top three stocks. Besides its own direct 10.3% in Nvidia, XLKM’s 66% position in its older sibling gives it another 9.9% in Nvidia indirectly—and so on for each of its top holdings.
这使得这只新的、无上限的基金能够更准确地反映科技股在标普500指数中的相对规模，并使其较少受到法规对传统板块基金施加的僵化变动的影响，美国道富投资管理公司全球研究策略师主管马修·巴托利尼表示。
That enables the new, uncapped fund to reflect the relative size of technology stocks within the S&P 500 more accurately and makes it less subject to the rigid changes that regulations impose on traditional sector funds, says Matthew Bartolini, global head of research strategists at State Street Investment Management.
去年8月，VanEck开始推出其TruSector ETF，目前已覆盖标普500指数的所有11个行业板块。（截至目前，道富提供四只无上限板块指数基金。）VanEck的TruSector基金可能通过在各自板块内持有大量指数ETF（包括道富的ETF）的仓位，来增加对核心重仓股的敞口。
In August of last year, VanEck started rolling out its TruSector ETFs, which now cover all 11 industry sectors of the S&P 500. (So far, State Street offers four uncapped sector index funds.) VanEck’s TruSector funds may increase their exposure to top holdings by owning large positions in index ETFs, including State Street’s, within their respective sectors.
VanEck能源TruSector ETF将其23%的资产配置于道富的能源精选板块SPDR基金——从而间接放大了其在埃克森美孚和雪佛龙等巨头中的仓位。尽管它们在技术上属于主动型基金，但VanEck TruSector ETF力求尽可能紧密地捕捉各板块指数的回报。
The VanEck Energy TruSector ETF has 23% of its assets in State Street’s Energy Select Sector SPDR fund—indirectly pumping up its positions in such giants as ExxonMobil and Chevron. Although they’re technically active funds, the VanEck TruSector ETFs seek to capture the return of each sector’s index as closely as possible.
其他公司推出的新板块ETF同样聚焦于某一行业的核心重仓股，但采用了不同的方法。
New sector ETFs from other firms also zoom in on an industry’s top holdings, but use different approaches.
所有这些基金的共同点在于：它们在本已高浓度的基础上，进一步浓缩了配置。
What all these funds have in common is that they take an already heavy dose and make it extra-strength.
如果某板块的回报由少数同步变动的最大市值股票主导，这类基金往往在上涨市场中表现最好，在下跌市场中表现最差。
Funds like these will tend to do best in a rising market, and worst in a downturn, if a sector’s returns are dominated by a handful of the biggest stocks that move in sync.
最近，随着市场对人工智能未来回报的担忧蔓延，英伟达等巨头股价受挫——一些无上限科技板块基金的表现落后于传统同类基金。
Recently, as jitters have spread about the future payoffs from artificial intelligence, such titans as Nvidia have faltered—and some uncapped tech-sector funds are lagging behind the traditional variety.
“这些基金绝对不适合作为任何人的单一投资组合持仓解决方案，”VanEck基金产品管理总监迈克尔·科希克表示。
“These are definitely not a single-portfolio-holding solution for anyone,” says Michael Cohick, director of product management at VanEck Funds.
这一现象一直可以追溯到1929年股市大崩盘前夕。当年，公用事业基金先是繁荣、随后崩盘，资金在回报火热时涌入行业基金，又在表现转冷时迅速流出，从而锁定了严重亏损。
That’s been true all the way back to the run-up to the Crash of 1929. Back then, when utility funds boomed and then busted, money had poured into sector funds when returns were hot, then sloshed back out when performance went cold, locking in severe losses.
投资者在不那么热门的行业买入行业基金，或许会有更好的结果。今年年初，压倒性的共识是人工智能的未来不可限量。事实上，今年以来能源股的表现已比科技股高出25个百分点。
Investors might do better buying sector funds in unpopular industries. At the beginning of this year, the overwhelming consensus was that AI’s future was limitless. In fact, energy stocks have outperformed tech by 25 percentage points so far this year.
新型“涡轮增压”行业基金是一种更有力的工具，可用来聚焦某一行业最大的赢家。如果你对哪个行业将繁荣的判断正确，这可能会让你赚更多钱。难就难在“如果”这个词上。
The new turbocharged sector funds are a more powerful tool for focusing on the biggest winners in an industry. That could make you more money if you’re right about which sector will boom. The hard part is the word “if.”