These newer ETFs with established track records are worth a look
The article discusses Canadian-domiciled ETFs that have successfully established a track record over the past few years. It highlights the importance of evaluating these funds based on their performance during various market conditions since their launch in 2020 and 2021. The author emphasizes the significance of Morningstar ratings in identifying ETFs that are likely to outperform their peers.
- ▪Over 650 Canadian ETFs have been wound up in the past two decades, often shortly after launch.
- ▪The article focuses on ETFs launched during the pandemic that have survived and begun to establish a track record.
- ▪Only 144 of the ETFs launched in 2020 and 2021 remain today, with some receiving high ratings from Morningstar.
The Globe and Mail publishes from Canada and files mainly under world. We currently carry 1,935 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | The Globe and Mail |
| Canonical URL | https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/investment-ideas/number-cruncher/article-newer-canadian-funds-etfs-track-record/ |
| Publication time | Wed, 20 May 2026 20:41:28 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-05-20T20:45:02.977Z |
| Last seen | 2026-05-20T20:45:02.977Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | lmP91FbDB84K |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
ShareSave for laterPlease log in to bookmark this story.Log InCreate Free AccountWhat are we looking for?Canadian‑domiciled ETFs that have passed the five-year sniff test. The screenIn a recent column, we dug into the Canadian ETF “graveyard” – a reminder that not every new fund is built to last. The headline numbers were striking: 654 were wound up over the past two decades, often within just a few years of launch. That raises a natural follow-up question: What about the ones that didn’t end up in the graveyard?To answer that, it helps to rewind the clock. Cast your mind back to 2020 and 2021. Markets were anything but normal. The early days of the pandemic brought sharp investor drawdowns, followed by one of the strongest rebounds in recent memory.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Globe and Mail.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Globe and Mail
