Skip to Content
ETF Specialist

Strategic Beta: Taking the Alpha Out of AlphaDEX

At first blush, this fund's strategy appears complex, but it is essentially a combination of traditional factors and equal weighting.

Mentioned: , , , ,

Perhaps the biggest surprise in fund flows for exchange-traded products during the past year is the strength of First Trust. The firm has catapulted itself from the 11th largest provider of exchange-traded products to the sixth largest in just one year. Much of the strong flows are accumulating to funds that have been around for years. What has changed is the increasing acceptance of strategic beta. While they may track an index, strategic beta funds are active, so it is no surprise that investors might take a wait-and-see approach before investing, particularly when the methodology appears to be complex and untested. However, of the 23 First Trust AlphaDEX market-cap and sector funds (excluding the international AlphaDEX funds), the average Morningstar Rating is 4 stars, which is truly impressive. Unlike some single factor funds, the methodology behind AlphaDEX is fairly opaque, but their performance warrants a deep dive. 

Starting with either a market-cap segment or a sector, AlphaDEX funds group all stocks into a value bucket or a growth bucket based on the S&P style designation. Separate models are applied to the value stocks and to the growth stocks. Stocks that S&P classifies as core take the higher score from the two models. The model used on value stocks includes book value/price, cash flow/price, and return on assets. Growth stocks are scored using three-, six-, and 12-month price appreciation, sales/price, and one-year sales growth. What is unique about this approach is that value models typically would not use return on assets, which is usually regarded as a quality measure and growth models typically would not use sales/price, which is more of a value measure. While traditional style funds typically split stocks into separate value or growth groups, this fund retains top-scoring stocks from both models. The result of using different models for value and growth stocks and using unique factors is a balanced portfolio with only a slight tilt toward value, yet with growth characteristics similar to a blend fund. 

Michael Rawson does not own (actual or beneficial) shares in any of the securities mentioned above. Find out about Morningstar’s editorial policies.

Transparency is how we protect the integrity of our work and keep empowering investors to achieve their goals and dreams. And we have unwavering standards for how we keep that integrity intact, from our research and data to our policies on content and your personal data.

We’d like to share more about how we work and what drives our day-to-day business.

We sell different types of products and services to both investment professionals and individual investors. These products and services are usually sold through license agreements or subscriptions. Our investment management business generates asset-based fees, which are calculated as a percentage of assets under management. We also sell both admissions and sponsorship packages for our investment conferences and advertising on our websites and newsletters.

How we use your information depends on the product and service that you use and your relationship with us. We may use it to:

  • Verify your identity, personalize the content you receive, or create and administer your account.
  • Provide specific products and services to you, such as portfolio management or data aggregation.
  • Develop and improve features of our offerings.
  • Gear advertisements and other marketing efforts towards your interests.

To learn more about how we handle and protect your data, visit our privacy center.

Maintaining independence and editorial freedom is essential to our mission of empowering investor success. We provide a platform for our authors to report on investments fairly, accurately, and from the investor’s point of view. We also respect individual opinions––they represent the unvarnished thinking of our people and exacting analysis of our research processes. Our authors can publish views that we may or may not agree with, but they show their work, distinguish facts from opinions, and make sure their analysis is clear and in no way misleading or deceptive.

To further protect the integrity of our editorial content, we keep a strict separation between our sales teams and authors to remove any pressure or influence on our analyses and research.

Read our editorial policy to learn more about our process.