What are active ETFs and how are they reshaping how Americans invest? 37%

By Eric Revell74%

4/22/2026, 6:00:11 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Optimism Bias, and Bandwagon, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 27.9% saturation with 119 hits. Analysis detected 401 faulty-reasoning hits from 427 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 43.6% and a BS Rank of 37% (13,844 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 63.30% of the article peer group.

Investors are flocking to actively managed exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and recently pushed the amount of assets in the investment class above a notable milestone. 
Actively managed ETFs surpassed $1 trillion in assets under management in the U.S., as investors look to find investment options that may outperform passive ETFs that track an index. 
"Active ETFs are exploding because investors want the best of both worlds, Wall Street strategy with Main Street pricing," Ted Jenkin, managing partner for Exit Wealth Advisors, told FOX Business. 
"You're getting flexibility to navigate volatile markets, potential tax efficiency, and in many cases a real shot at outperforming the index instead of just riding a mutual fund." 
The ETF market has grown across both actively and passively managed ETFs, but the two types have important distinctions. 
COULD S&P 500 ETFS ALONE FUND YOUR ENTIRE RETIREMENT? 
While passively managed ETFs are designed to track a benchmark such as the S&P 500, actively managed ETFs aim to outperform a given benchmark by having the portfolio manager adjust the investments within the ETF based on research or strategies they're utilizing. 
"Both approaches serve an important role for retail investors  the difference comes down to intent," Charles La Rosa, vice president and head of ETFs at Gabelli Funds, told FOX Business. 
"Active ETFs seek to provide thoughtful security selection, risk management and potentially differentiated outcomes, particularly during periods of volatility or in less efficient areas of the market," La Rosa said. 
US ETF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT TO MORE THAN DOUBLE TO $25T BY 2030, CITIGROUP SAYS 
Fidelity Investments said that there are two types of actively managed ETFs that differ in how they disclose their holdings. 
Traditional actively managed ETFs, as well as passive ETFs, disclose their holdings on a daily basis, whereas semi-transparent active ETFs disclose their holdings on a quarterly basis. 
GOLDMAN SACHS COMPLETES INNOVATOR CAPITAL ACQUISITION, LIFTING ETF ASSETS TO $90B 
Research from the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Division of Economic and Risk Analysis noted that last year, as active ETFs surpassed the $900 billion level, passive ETFs had over $8 trillion in total net assets. 
The SEC's research also notes that active ETFs had higher expense ratios than their passive peers, with asset-weighted passive ETF having operating expenses at 0.12% of net assets versus 0.49% for active ETFs as of 2024. 
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE 
Equal weighted ETFs in both categories had higher expenses, with passive ETFs at 0.45% and active ETFs at 0.70%. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 2.6%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 4.7%FoxBusiness: 3.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.6%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.0%FoxBusiness: 3.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 27.9%Eric Revell: 11.0%FoxBusiness: 12.9%Framing Effect27.9%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 13.6%Eric Revell: 9.5%FoxBusiness: 8.8%Optimism Bias13.6%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.7%FoxBusiness: 2.0%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 6.9%FoxBusiness: 7.9%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 2.5%FoxBusiness: 4.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.5%FoxBusiness: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.6%FoxBusiness: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.1%FoxBusiness: 3.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 2.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.5%Eric Revell: 6.7%FoxBusiness: 7.2%Appeal to Authority10.5%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.2%FoxBusiness: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.6%Eric Revell: 4.2%FoxBusiness: 6.3%Hasty Generalization6.6%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 12.6%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Bandwagon12.6%This article: 20.6%Eric Revell: 3.4%FoxBusiness: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion20.6%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.9%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 2.1%FoxBusiness: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.2%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.9%FoxBusiness: 1.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 2.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.1%

427 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers62%attributed speech163writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageTed Jenkin • 30 words • 0.0% coverageTed Jenkin • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageCharles La Rosa • 31 words • 0.0% coverageCharles La Rosa • 30 words • 0.0% coverageCitigroup • 15 words • 0.0% coverageFidelity Investments • 20 words • 0.0% coverageFidelity Investments • 27 words • 0.0% coverageGoldman Sachs • 11 words • 0.0% coverageSecurities and Exchange Commission • 36 words • 0.0% coverageSecurities and Exchange Commission • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ted Jenkin

100%flagged-word coverage
58 attributed words22% of attributed speech51% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.5 ptsWriter: 5.5%Ted Jenkin: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.