Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
LIVE with the Motley Fool Asset Management Team: How to Capture the Market’s Best Stocks via ETFs
Recorded: Feb. 26, 2026 Duration: 0:35:06Space Recording
Full Transcription
Good morning, everybody. Welcome in to Wool Financial Live. I'm your host, Gov Blacksburg,
and joining me today are Shelby McFadden and Bill Mann from the Motley Fool Asset Management Team
for a deep dive discussion into this incredible market we're looking at right now, going to be
covering some of the implications from AI, going to be covering the job market and things that are
happening there, and then talking about some of this rotation that we're seeing, as well as some
of the consolidation to certain names. Let's start out with just some
quick introductions before we get into it. Shelby, do you mind giving us a brief intro?
Yeah, absolutely. Hey, my name's Shelby. I have been on the MFAM team almost five years,
coming up now in March. I started on the analyst role, just really covering general equities,
recently been promoted to portfolio manager and investment analyst on our global opportunities fund.
So, again, I cover a little bit of everything, a little bit of a journalist, but I definitely have a bigger focus in all things retail and consumer exposed.
So because of the splash zone of AI, that puts me in that as well.
But, yeah, it's been a pleasure working on this team.
Great to grow and happy to be here today. Thank you, Shelby. Appreciate it, Bill.
I'm Bill Mann. I'm the Chief Investment Strategist for Motley Fool Asset Management. I've been at
the Motley Fool family of companies since 1999. I was one of the first employees. So I've done
almost everything at different parts of the Motley Fool. I was the
first chief and founding chief investment officer for Motley Fool Asset Management, which we founded
in 2008. It's a pretty exciting time to stand up a asset management company. We can talk about that,
but I'm just excited to be here with you, Klaus. Fantastic. Excited to have both of you on.
Prior to getting into this, going to throw out a quick disclosure here because we just excited to be here with you, Klob. Fantastic. Excited to have both of you on. Prior to getting into this,
going to throw out a quick disclosure here
because we are going to be talking about some specific tickers
as well as this high-level market discussion.
So for the investors that are watching,
please carefully consider each fund's investment objectives,
risk, charges, and expenses prior to investing.
The fund's prospectus and summary prospectus
can be found right on the website.
And that website is fulletfs.com. For those that want to check it out right on there, all prospectus can be found right on the website. And that website is fooletfs.com.
For those that want to check it out right on there, all the information can be found.
So again, to obtain a funds prospectus and summary prospectus, visit the website at fooletfs.com.
And those should be read carefully prior to investing.
Excited to be working together with you all.
And a big shout out and thank you to CBOE for helping to sponsor and set up this live
stream today.
So with that being said,
we're going to get into these and the tickers specifically that we'll be talking about are
TMFC, which is the Motley Fool 100 ETF, which gets exclusive access to the top 100 largest and
most liquid US companies that are recommended by the Motley Fool, as well as TMFE, which is the
Capital Efficiency 100 Index ETF. We'll talk more about these as we get into some of the finer
details,
but want to start out high level here with yourself, Shelby, talking about this AI implication
on the market, because that seems to be the driving force that's creating the shifts that
we're seeing today. So I'll turn the floor over to you. Yeah, absolutely. And I'll try not to
monopolize the time here because it's everyone's favorite topic. So I'm not unique in this, right?
But I think probably two years ago,
maybe even a little bit more closer to when I started here, there was a question of,
are companies like Meta wasting their time? Like, let's think about this less than five years ago,
we were saying, is this CapEx reasonable? Are people gonna buy these goggles? Like,
what is the point of this? Is this the only thing that we were thinking you could spend this money on was so narrow? Right. And I shouldn't say all of us. You know, some folks had it figured out. But a lot of the retail market was just thinking, what's the point of this? Right. Five years later, we've got competing Super Bowl ads. We've got CoPilot that's absolutely putting up a force of nature against the likes of Salesforce.
up a force of nature against the likes of Salesforce. We've got companies pretty much
just doing circular investment because they're realizing the sort of environment they're in now.
And so then there was, it went from what could this even be to, well, this is everything. So
stage one was this changes the future, this broad sort of black box of disruption. And it's, I don't
know what it's going to do, but it's going to do something. So then it starts to
be, all right, well, we can sort of base it off of the backlog. We can base it off of NVIDIA sales.
As long as there's someone to sell to, everything will be fine. Then the second stage was, well,
everybody can't win. And we started to see that in January where you see, okay, well, maybe software
is going to be in a little bit of trouble here. And then it's, well, what about actually outside
of the market? What about outside of enterprise companies? What about the actual economy? So we assumed that
TFP, total factor productivity, was going to just rapidly expand. And it most likely will. I think
we'd probably be hard pressed to find a number of PhDs who would disagree with that.
But that's the long term implication, right? And so now we're in the,
well, what's going to happen to jobs? Because we've had the sort of white collar recessions before.
And part of it had to do with, well, we've replaced your job a little bit, and we don't need it. Or,
well, we spent a little bit too much buying all those chips. We have shareholders. And now we're
at a point where, well, what about the blue collar jobs or
the gray collar jobs, if you will? What about those middle parts? And that seems to be, I don't
know how many stages we're going to have, but it seems like we're in stage three. Bill, yeah, go
ahead. It's so funny because there are periods of time in which we just, we're just like, yay,
capitalism, like things are ticking along as they are. And then we come to periods of time. And I suggest that this is one of them. The, you know,
the metaverse may have been a failed one before, but the rise of the dot coms was definitely a,
you know, a third where you go back to the philosophical underpinnings of what capitalism
is and what economies are. And there is this interesting tension right now that says, okay,
AI is going to come in and steal all your jobs. And it's also going to add 1.5% annually to GDP.
Yeah. Those two things cannot happen together. Right. So you go back to, you know, we can have
our, you know, we, we, we can have our undergraduate,
you know, we've got a pot of bourbon on, you know, we're talking about Joseph Schumpeter and
creative destruction and, you know, it's going to destroy a bunch of jobs. We've seen that before.
Saw that with the.com, but new jobs are coming. Right. I tend to think. Yeah. Yeah. No, please
finish the thought. I tend to think that it's the shumpeter argument in this
case is a little tough right it's a little tough because you for the first time you're really
looking at a like for like uh you know where where knowledge economy jobs are under threat
and that's what's under threat you know you you remember the the jokes about learn to code well
i don't know if learn to code gets you there anymore.
I lasted for seven years.
I'm not even sure.
Learn to code was, I was in my undergrad before I took on economics.
I was studying international affairs and they're like, you're never going to get a job.
Well, the learn to code kids, it didn't work out that well.
It's so funny because I was an international affairs major also.
So I studied Marx.
I studied Schumpeter.
I studied Hayek.
And I think Hayek is actually the best example here.
We were getting philosophical superpowers.
Anybody on the West Coast who it's like 8.30 in the morning for, I apologize.
But Hayek basically said that the breaks on this actually comes from the fact that if jobs don't come, these investments are going to be wasted.
There's your break for AI.
And I'm not saying that's necessarily good, but there's your limiting factor.
limiting factor. Well, and it's interesting too, because I vividly remember probably maybe 10
months ago or so, there was a lot of chatter about how the EU was saying, we need to regulate this
immediately. And the United States- By this, you mean everything, but go ahead.
Well, AI, right? But everything, but specifically AI. And this is just totally objective. This is not a comment or anything. But the United States was like, no, let it run, right? Let's see what
it can do. And I have to tell you, I didn't think that we would run into any hiccups this fast. I
definitely thought it would take like a few more years before people started to think about, well,
hold on a second. What are we going to do about jobs? Now, like Bill
said, and what the numbers are showing us is that it's not dire yet. I mean, developed country,
four-ish percent unemployment, it feels uncomfortable because we're used to it being
extremely low. But it's not that far off. But it is interesting to, so much faster than we we expected be in a time where we're like,
we don't need to regulate it, but we should probably think about it. We should think more
seriously about it than just let it run. So it's interesting to be there so early.
Gov, I feel like you said good morning and then we just went off.
You just have me wondering like, who is safe?
Do we have jobs tomorrow? Who knows?
Tell me I've got some bad news.
I'm just curious, with this knowledge in mind,
how it translates into the investing side.
Because people are hearing, okay, shifts in employment, AI coming in.
Maybe specifically to start out with TMFC.
So companies are being to be, you know,
companies are being recommended by the analysts. And I think that this is an area where you can kind of take the brainpower and put it together. So I'm curious, are you seeing the makeup of the
CTF really adjust with the times of what you're talking about? So thank you for bringing up TMFC.
So clearly, you know, give a little bit of the philosophy of The Motley Fool because
it informs everything that we do.
The Motley Fool analysts, you know, who are the ones who are making the recommendations
that go into TMFC are really looking for the highest quality companies wherever they are.
And so obviously, you know, they've got plenty of exposure to
the MAG-7, have identified some of those as early as like 1998. We also do have plenty of exposure
in other parts of the market where we are looking for the highest quality companies with the best
balance sheet, the best growth prospects, things of that nature. Because it is a passive fund, it tends to lag. That's
just true of every passive fund that at the point in time in which they are reconstituted
and TMFC is quarterly, that's when you're going to find out what the market's been telling
you to some degree. But if you look at what has been working so far in 2026, it's not
so much the MAG7.
And I think that, I mean, obviously across the board,
those are the highest of high quality companies.
But I feel like there's a bit,
I guess maybe the fanciest way to put it is valuation fatigue.
You know, it's worked for so long.
But then you start to look at areas like energy,
for example, which obviously has a much bigger, quicker role to play in
the build out of our AI overlords. You've got materials, you've got consumer staples.
So we have plenty of exposure in those areas. You tend to see that happen on a little bit of a lag just given the passive construction of this fund.
But that's true of every passively constructed fund.
Shelby, you have thoughts on it as well?
Yeah, I would agree that I forget what conversation I was having, but it's kind of like if you own really any part of this market, to Bill's point, you're owning these big players.
You have to work really, really hard to avoid it. you own really any part of this market, to Bill's point, you're owning these big players, right? You
have to work really, really hard to avoid it and still be diversified and succeed, right? So there's
a number of different elements there. And what we do have in TMFC is an unsurprising representation
of the Magnificent Seven toward the top of the portfolio, because to Bill's point, they have been
the best performers. But what you also have are names that are a little bit less thought about names like
Visa and MasterCard names like Walmart, there's a little bit more chatter about them now because
people are recognizing them as compounders. And compounding is becoming a lot more valuable. Why
again, to Bill's point, people are tired of paying. And it's not just the folks who are looking for a bargain. It's
when do I ever get an opportunity to participate? And if you can't participate in the sort of
headliners, then you have to look for other companies that are doing still very well for
how long they've been in the game and for the size market share that they do have. So I find TMFC to
be, yes, it is. It can be, it's, you're going
to get a good amount of exposure to the top names of the market. But you're also going to be able to
benefit from any little sort of return to breadth that you're seeing in the economy, based off of
really high quality choices that the analysts have made and are regularly taking a look at.
So it is still a more diversified product.
And in some ways it is, it's, I always like to say it's active without breaking a sweat,
right? Like someone has made an active choice for you apart from just what you can get from
getting the S&P. So you're getting the best of both worlds of having some bottom up research
and saying, you might not have heard of this, but this is actually a phenomenal company. I could
talk to you about it for 45 minutes, but also we're going to get you
some of that cream top off of the market because we're aware that these are also some of the best
companies too. Yeah, absolutely. And it has outperformed over the last five years. If you
look at it, it's outperforming QQQ, it's outperforming SPY. Some of the names, like you did mention, people are going to be very familiar. MAG7 makes up eight of the top names with AVGO
inside there as well. And then Visa, Walmart, and so on and so forth. And a lot of people have
been attracted to this, obviously, a couple billion almost in AUM as well on that side.
How does this differ just as people think about it, TMFC to TMFE?
So TMFE is, if you overlay them, they have a pretty similar set of companies, but TMFC
is simply market cap weighted.
So it's the largest 100 companies that are recommended by Motley Fool analysts at our
sister company.
TMFE has a limit on market cap size, excuse me,
on the position size within the fund. So it's at reconstitution of 4.8% limitation. So you're not
going to have as much exposure to the biggest names on a percentage basis, but it also has a
capital efficiency overlay. So we're looking at things that companies with, you know, with high returns on capital
and ironclad balance sheets and growth that comes, you know, in a very efficient way.
So there is an overlay there that tends to, and I say tends to because it's, you know,
there's no guarantee, lower the volatility a little bit
because you're just not as exposed to single names
as you are with TMFC.
Got it.
Zooming a little bit out,
separate discussion from what we were having before,
although we can double back to AI if we want.
One of the big things I think is a topic for this year
that I'd love to hear your thoughts on,
maybe Shelby, if you want to go first,
is the new Fed chairman that is expected to come in and just overall how you think this
administration and Fed chairman affect the market moving forward. Oh, so many thoughts. Here we go.
Let's be fair. I'll be back. I remember where I was when that tweet came out and I was in a room
with a lot of financial media people and it was chaos. I mean, it was not
negative, not overly positive, but it was just kind of like, it's done, right? Like, we can all
take a breath, but also what is this going to mean? And the sort of market reaction seemed
immediately a little bit more to the hawkish side. And then as people started to really sit
and think like, who is this Kevin Warsh guy,
right? Like, let's actually take a look at what it is that he's been saying and not just say,
well, I mean, I have this one soundbite or Trump picked him. And so this must mean X, Y, and Z.
What we started to see is that this is not necessarily going to be a story of him stepping
into the building and going on an absolute quantitative tightening rampage. It's very unlikely. The things that we have to consider
here are one, the Fed system that we've been operating in has been running on ample reserves.
That's the sort of system that they've been sitting on for a really long time. In order for
Warsh to start any sort of balance sheet winding down, which is his preferred mechanism for getting to a lower interest rate environment, you can't run into quantitative tightening in this same sort of work with Treasury and somehow maintaining independence, get to a world where we have a bit less regulation so that banks are encouraged to buy government paper.
You change sort of what their reserve system looks like and you change how much the Fed then has to be involved.
That's sort of what we imagine Warsh doing. We don't imagine him doing it in June.
I think it's going to take some time. They have to take an assessment.
I would also say that my analysis on Warsh is that he's going to be a little bit more focused on market signals and corporate data. He's much more of a supply and demand sort of guy, as opposed to just looking at PCE,
looking at CPI.
So still going to be a data-driven Fed, but the data they use might be a little bit different.
But I think the TLDR is that, one, he's not coming in with any sort of wrecking ball.
Yes, he might be a little bit more
friendly to this administration, but Jay Powell was chosen by the former Trump administration,
and he's not exactly a let the economy run loose kind of guy. So I think things will be different.
I think they have some differing philosophies. But here's the other thing, that that chair is not a dictator of the Fed. He has he has counterparts to answer to.
And I don't think that there's a record of him being someone who's difficult to work
with.
He has a different philosophy, but I tend not to think we're going into this new era
of just a sort of like Fed dictator that's going to completely change our financial system.
I think he has an outlook where he wants to bring more money to Main Street, but I think
it'll take a couple of years for that to execute.
It doesn't seem like he has like that overarching personality that, you know, that like a Greenspan
had or even a Bernanke had. It seems like I think a lot of the stress around Warsh has been fear that he's going to be a company guy, that Trump obviously been much more political, overtly political about pressure on the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve chair than has been the case in the past. But let's not deceive
ourselves. Every president has really hard conversations with every federal chairman.
It just, Trump does it on social media as opposed to in the annals of the White House, in the Oval Office. It happens every time. But we've seen this
time and time again that people, once they get into those chairs, they act in ways that are not
necessarily predictable based on who brought them into that spot.
Very interesting. How do you think that he will look at this rise of AI and unemployment?
Yeah, Christ-a-tunity. Is that a word? I like that, Bill.
I tend to think he'll be excited about it because to come back to really what we're all doing this for, capitalism, I do tend to think he is more of a market-oriented guy.
And so we are kind of seeing the beginnings of the impact happen on Powell's way out.
I don't think he hasn't been thinking about it, but it hasn't been the top of his list.
And employment hasn't cratered in such a way that he's had to say what's causing this. I wouldn't necessarily expect the Fed to be coming out and saying things like, you know, the Treasury ought to make investments in this or I don't think we're going into that sort of era.
But I would imagine that he might actually be a little bit less concerned because I tend to think he's the kind of guy to say, let the market forces do what they're going to do.
Wait a few years and see what happens.
If this blows up in our face, then I have a job to do.
But if not, then the market did its own job and the economy thrives.
the market did its own job and the economy thrives. We think a little bit about the K-shaped,
you know, the K-shaped economy and what has happened in the lower leg of the K, and let's
call that the bottom 40% of earners in this country, is that AI has already impacted them.
The ones that are going to be impacted, it has already happened happened the others in that part of the market are you know
plumbers aren't gonna there's not going to be an ai plumber there's not going to be an ai
electrician there's not going to be robots i forgot about robots bill i take it all back no but
it'll be a while it'll be a while exactly. Exactly. Our robot overlords are not showing up tomorrow.
So there are elements of the parts of the economy that have struggled, that they're held pretty much harmless from AI at this point.
It's that 40 to 80 or 90 percent of the earners in the market, in the economy that do have to be
concerned. And, you know, I think that that's, you know, that that's a part of the market and
that's a part of the economy that's done pretty well. You know, and I think that's been one of
the huge challenges for the Fed up until now is that, you know, on, you know, on, on the top line,
employment, unemployment seems like it's okay,
but there have been pockets of absolute chaos within the economy
who could really use some loosening of the purse strings.
Yeah, that makes sense to me.
We've got to run for another several minutes here.
One other topic I want to make sure we touched on is where etfs like this fit into a retail investor's portfolio and i think
that the most likely thing that they're substituting in for it is going to be sp500 or broad index
exposure and we had a little interesting conversation bill that i wanted to talk more
about which is the sp500 does the opposite of what most portfolio managers do right the bigger
company gets,
more they add of it. Yet it outperforms. And maybe you could talk to a little bit about that in terms of how you think about this ETF and where it fits in and how people should think
of it versus an S&P 500. Yeah, it's really funny. If you think about what portfolio managers are
supposed to be doing, I mean, every time you have a conversation, like what's the moves?
How are you reacting to this? The S&P 500 doesn't do any of that, right? If a company gets larger,
even if you could look at it and say, oh, that's tremendously overvalued,
there's no guy named Stan Pores who's making a choice and dialing back. They're just simply
going to match whatever the market is going to tell them to do. And the really interesting thing to me is that it's worked.
And it's worked because there's a great piece of research done by a guy named Meb Faber
from Cambria Asset Management.
And he just described the power law of the market, which just shows that very few percent
of the companies that are in the market account for almost all of the gains,
almost all of them. So they tend to be high quality companies. So that to us makes perfect
sense for where you might want to remain. You want to remain in high quality companies,
even if, as has happened in 2026 so far, quality is not the thing that's performing all that well.
I mean, if you tell me,
hey, high quality companies aren't going to do that well for the next eight months,
I'm probably not going to change my mind in terms of holding high quality companies.
It is where the gains have been. So when you think about the Motley Fool Asset Management universe of ETFs, what you have to know is that at the very top line,
we have a set of companies, a universe of companies that are in our analysts' discretion,
they consider to be amongst the highest quality companies that exist. It is diverse, but it's
not fully diversified. We're not going into segments in which there are lower quality
companies. We just simply aren't going to go and try and find the highest quality newspaper company.
It's just not going to happen. It's not how we think. So when you're thinking about whether to allocate some of your funds to a monthly full asset management ETF like TMFC, the thing that you have to know is that we are going to be very comfortable with being wrong on the whole quality thing for periods of time. You've got to be comfortable with the fact
that we are not going to overreact to the market
telling us over periods of time that we're wrong
because going back and Meb's research went back decades.
We know what works.
And so that's what we focus on.
And if that is of interest to you,
then we've got a home for you.
Very interesting.
And Shelby, can you just elaborate a little bit further
on that concept of what is quality, what's not quality,
what rotationally could look like from it
and how not to get faked out by that?
Yeah, absolutely.
I think the first thing I start with is it's not finance
if we don't use sports analogies, right?
So in our house, we're big football people.
And the one thing we always say after our team gets a penalty that, of course, we don't believe that they deserved.
And then the other team has a failure is ball, don't lie.
Right.
And so similarly, in this line of work, we say cash is king.
And you might be sitting there saying, how's this guy really going to tell me that their
factor, their lead factor is going to suffer for eight months and he's fine with it?
It's because one of the main things we're looking at is cash flow, not net income, not
earnings per share, free cash flow to equity holders.
What is it?
Are they positive?
Is it stable?
If we're looking at a portfolio where we're looking at total shareholder return or dividends, are we concerned about it? That's really what matters.
It's always going to be that tangible asset. In some of our smaller companies, even though they
may not be holding up super well against the large cap because we know smalls have been getting
crushed, we've got a number of small
companies that are still growing in mid double digits and they are debt free. Now, of course,
we know that debt is a tool. So we're not sitting here saying, choose companies with no debt, but
that is remarkable. So they're producing cash based off of just the cash that they earned last
quarter. So when we then want to break into how do we get to those sorts of companies, They're producing cash based off of just the cash that they earned last quarter, right?
So when we then want to break into how do we get to those sorts of companies, our team uses a four pillar system.
First is management culture and incentives.
These things do matter.
This is not, and this is not, you know, just the sort of like ESG components.
This is truly like, do we trust these operators?
This is where we're looking at the sort of like, is this a BS restructuring program? Or is this actually a necessary cost
cutting regime that they're going into? Is this someone who is being paid to essentially just
break things and has a golden parachute on their way out? Or is there a really deep bench here?
What do we think of the board? Are people actually trying to work for the success of this company? What is their turnover? At bigger companies, it's a little bit tricky.
If you're looking at a logistics company, turnover is diluted by things like holidays.
But when you're looking at a small to medium-sized company with high-skilled labor,
you don't really want to see people leaving all the time. So those are the sorts of things we
look at. The next thing is economics, right? This is if you did the CFA exam, this is all three levels of all your pain shoved into one Excel sheet, right? So that's just the grueling part of financial statement analysis.
26, there's not that many companies that are doing something that someone else isn't doing.
So what's the reason that we should either choose them now or overweight them versus another,
or should we do a barbell? And then the last thing is trajectory. Just where are they going?
Right. Is this a company that's probably going to be around forever? Is this a company that we
think might get acquired, but we believe that it's super high quality and we are happy to be on board
for the eight year journey to them growing from $5 billion to $20 billion and getting acquired. So when we take
all of those things into account, we realize that the market doesn't oftentimes reward management
teams. Sometimes they reward outspoken CEOs, and sometimes those CEOs actually show up and do what
they said they would do. I'm looking at you, Bob Iger. Crazy work for Disney that man did. But a lot of the times they just don't really think about it.
So while the management team isn't necessarily getting penalized, they're not really getting
rewarded either. And cash tends not to be king for this market. Sometimes there's an overlap,
but a lot of times it's just what are sales growing at? Sometimes the market's not even
really looking at profitability.
So when we think about what's always going to be around, it is one, are they making real tangible money that in theory could be given back to us? And two, do we have confidence in who's at the
helm? And I think when you look at companies like the Walmarts and the Costcos of the world,
a lot of the reason that they're being treated like such high growers is because of the quality of their operators a great litmus test it is just to watch what happens to a
stock when the company announces their succession plan you can learn a lot just from that behavior
i like how shelby broke it down because she's describing yeah she's describing the spinach part
of our of our research which is the economics, which is, you know,
literally that's exactly the right description. It's all three years of the CFA, the middle part.
But then you're also talking about the, you know, lying down in a field and staring at clouds. Like,
what is this business going to be like? If you, if you jump into the DeLorean with
Dr. with Doc Brown, go 10 years into the future, what do you got? What's Walmart doing 10 years
from now? What's Microsoft doing 10 years from now, et cetera. And it's the same thing for
Walmart is my guess. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And Walmart, Walmart's such an interesting,
like it's, it's such an interesting case because it generated basically zero returns from 2000 to 2010 from a stock perspective.
But you look at the business and it was going gangbusters.
And it took that long for the market really to notice.
So, you know, our game is we're going to keep holding Walmart until, you know, until Walmart tells us that it's not, you know, it's no longer a high-quality company.
Right. Microsoft in a similar circle.
Exactly. Yeah, exactly. Amazon was too. Amazon took 15 years to hit below its all-time high and
was down 91% at one point. I mean, these are old stories, but it's the foolish philosophy to have remained focused on what these companies
were doing during that length of time. I love the approach. I think it's really,
really great. Just giving a quick share here on the screen for the audience that's watching.
For those that are curious, you've been hearing all these amazing insights and thoughts from Bill
and Shelby on here, and you're wondering, how do these things get actually put into play?
Here's where you would go check them out.
So go to the full ETFs.com website.
You can see the ones that we've been talking about here, TMFC as well as TMFE.
You can click in and see much more detail on them.
Also, of course, you can see in Shelby's name, she's got TMFG listed as the portfolio manager.
There's a bunch of others on here too that people can look through in terms of if you're
looking at some of the newer funds that are coming in, innovation, growth, value.
There's a lot to check out on here.
I've really enjoyed the time that you've both spent with me.
Wanted to check.
Bill, first, any final thoughts on this conversation?
No, I think one of the really important things for people to focus on
is not getting too wrapped up in what the market is telling you at any given moment.
I mean, we already saw this week, there was a news story and analysis that came out,
basically said that software was dead. And look, it may be that software has a changed reality, but things do change much slower than the news cycle tends to allow. So give yourself the grace to be wrong a little bit and try not to be wrong a lot.
Well said. Shelby? Yeah, I think my closing words are buckle up. Active managers are working a lot harder in
this season because there are so many opportunities. So we are not chasing anything, but we're
definitely at a sweaty jog. So stay alert and frankly, enjoy the sea of opportunity that this
market's giving us. Well said. I feel coming out of this,
I have a nice deep education as well here on the value side. I love it. I encourage people to really
think into those different methodologies that Shelby and Bill outlined as to how you should
go into this market. Do not panic in this market. Have that long-term approach. I think that that
is typically the type of person that outperforms. I want to give a special thank you to our friends
Amy and Mark over at SIBO for helping
to set this up.
And a big shout out to the whole Motley Fool Asset Management team.
That's going to do it for this stream.
Thank you to everyone on Wolf Financial Live that tuned in.
Also, we had about three and a half thousand people watch this.
Appreciate all that came.
We'll have more content later today.
And of course, we'll be dissecting Nvidia earnings later today.
So, so much more to come.
Thank you again, everybody.
We'll see you on the next show.
Take care.
