STI ETF vs Nikko AM STI ETF

(07-10-2013, 01:34 PM)Vseeker Wrote: I think it been reclassify as EIP much earlier than Sep2013
today you can still use 100% of investible CPF OA for these two ETFs, as compared to 35% for direct stocks investment.
NB: first $20k in CPF OA cannot be use...

STIETF can be considered as among the bluest of all SGX listed bluechips... esp. for retail investors lacking the knowledge+experience and with limited fundsize...
no disrespect intended...

I think you must be referring to the Nikko AM STI ETF. The date I got from the SPDR ETF was from their own press release dated Aug 2013 (link here):

We, State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited (the “Manager”), the manager of the Fund, wish to
announce and notify holders of units of the Fund of the following changes to be made to the Fund with
effect from 27 September 2013 (the “Effective Date”).

kazukirai,

I'm sorry.. you are correct that "SPDR STIETF" have only been reclassify in Sep2013...
my mind got twisted-up , was thinking more of the introduction of EIPs by MAS sometimes back in 2012...

in my view, STIETF should not get "dump in" as a SIP product to begin with... it's sheer idiotic to excluded alot of small retail investors from this ETF,
when they are allowed to freely speculate in so many other forms of garbage out there !!

(07-10-2013, 05:43 PM)Vseeker Wrote: kazukirai,

I'm sorry.. you are correct that "SPDR STIETF" have only been reclassify in Sep2013...
my mind got twisted-up , was thinking more of the introduction of EIPs by MAS sometimes back in 2012...

in my view, STIETF should not get "dump in" as a SIP product to begin with... it's sheer idiotic to excluded alot of small retail investors from this ETF,
when they are allowed to freely speculate in so many other forms of garbage out there !!

No worries, good practice for me to fact check too.

My shallow understanding is that the SPDR STI ETF used some derivatives to reduce tracking errors and maintain liquidity or something to that effect which was the reason for it being classified as an SIP while the Nikko AM one was an EIP much earlier.

But yes, I totally agree that there are much more hot potatoes out there than the Index ETFs which are not synthetically replicated (i think this is the term). It was totally ridiculous that they were initially classified as SIPs along with futures and warrants.

Anyone from compliance background or otherwise that knows why these were considered SIPs in the first place?

these two guys gg to get their board lot size reduced to 100units..
wonder any impact on the posb/ocbc regular monthly index buying scheme

(07-10-2013, 10:35 PM)pianist Wrote: these two guys gg to get their board lot size reduced to 100units..
wonder any impact on the posb/ocbc regular monthly index buying scheme

i guess shouldnt be much as it is a regular saving concept... i am currently using phillip securities's share builders plan... it is on the SPDR STI ETF instead of Nikko AM STI ETF