FrenzyCap ETF Score: Methodology

Cost: 35%

The fund's net expense ratio ranked against every other fund in its group (US equity, taxable bond, leveraged and so on). The cheapest fund in the group scores 100 and the most expensive 0. Fees are compared within a group because a 0.60% buffer fund and a 0.60% S&P 500 fund are not the same proposition.

Liquidity: 25%

Average daily dollar volume over the last 30 sessions on a log scale: $100,000 a day scores 0 and $100 million or more scores 100. Dollar volume is a floor on tradability, not the whole story, since an ETF can be liquid through its holdings even when its own shares trade thinly.

Scale: 20%

Assets on a log scale: $10 million scores 0 and $5 billion or more scores 100. Funds under three years old lose up to 20 points, shrinking to zero by their third birthday, because small young funds are the ones that close.

Diversification: 20%

The effective number of holdings, 1 divided by the sum of squared weights, on a log scale: 5 scores 0 and 100 or more scores 100. Not scored for single-stock, leveraged, crypto, commodity, currency and volatility products, where concentration is the purpose.

Putting them together

The score is the weighted average of the components that could be computed, with the weights rescaled when one is missing. At least two are required. Each fund's page shows the four parts beside the total, so you can see which one is driving it.

What it leaves out

Bid/ask spreads, tracking difference, tax efficiency and securities-lending income all matter and are shown on fund pages where the SEC data provides them, but they are not available for enough funds to score fairly yet. Structure risks such as daily leverage, option overlays and note credit exposure are flagged on every table rather than folded into a number that would hide them.