Active ETFs Arrive — You're Buying a Manager's Alpha Résumé, Not a Low Fee
Taiwan's active ETFs have arrived. Choosing one means betting on a manager's alpha record, not simply buying a lower-fee wrapper.
2025 was Taiwan's active-ETF debut year. But when the vehicle changes from mutual fund to ETF, do the rules of the game change — or is it old wine in a new bottle? The standard is one word: alpha.
- Taiwan's FSC approved active ETFs at end-2024; 2025 was the debut year — Nomura's 00980A listed first on May 5, and by end-July there were six funds over NT$24bn. Fully transparent, intraday-tradable.
- But for Taiwan investors, cheap was never the point — alpha is. Paying a good manager well for excess returns is entirely fair.
- So choosing an active ETF means betting on the manager's "alpha résumé." The ETF is too new to have its own record — what you're really betting on is whether the funds the manager ran before produced excess returns (e.g., Chen Chuan-yao's UPAMC Pentium reached about +409%).
- The wrapper solves cost and transparency, but not the core difficulty of beating the total-return market. It comes back to the series thesis: real skill, and fishing in the small/mid-cap pool where alpha lives.
2025: Taiwan's Active-ETF Debut Year
Taiwan's FSC formally approved active ETFs at the end of 2024, opening a new chapter for the fund market. The biggest difference from the passive ETFs you know (0050, 0056) is that there's a "driver" at the wheel: a manager actively builds and adjusts the portfolio rather than mechanically tracking an index. The rules don't even require it to set a performance benchmark.
The first was Nomura's 00980A, listed on May 5, 2025; other houses followed on staggered dates, and by end-July 2025 there were six with combined assets over NT$24 billion. Adoption was strong. Its two big selling points: full holdings disclosure every business day (traditional active funds usually disclose quarterly), and the ability to trade intraday like a stock.
Don't Get Spun by "Low Fees" — the Standard Is Alpha
Most articles introducing active ETFs lead with "lower fees than traditional funds." That's true, but it misses the point.
For Taiwan investors, cheap was never the draw — we want alpha (excess return). If a manager can consistently beat the total-return market, I'm happy to pay a bit more — that's "paying for a pro," entirely fair. Conversely, a cheap active fund that lags the market is just "losing, cheaply." Fees only enter at the final step: when two managers are equally skilled, then you compare who keeps costs lower and eats less of your return.
With a passive ETF, you compare "who's cheapest and tracks the index best." With an active ETF, you should compare "who has the most skill." Using passive logic (compare fees) to pick active (bet on skill) is asking the wrong question.
So What You Should Really Examine: the Manager's Alpha Résumé
Here's a structural problem: these active ETFs only listed in 2025, so they have no long-term record of their own. So what are you betting on? The answer — on what the person running it achieved at other funds before. Like sizing up a new team's head coach, you look at the record they bring. Lay out the first batch's "manager résumés":
| Active ETF | House / Listed | Manager | Manager's track record (résumé) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 00981A Active UPAMC Taiwan Growth | UPAMC / 2025-05-27 | Chen Chuan-yao | Runs UPAMC Pentium Fund; cumulative return since Mar 2022 reached about +409%; nicknamed "the Jade Empress" / "Taiwan's Peter Lynch" |
| 00988A Active UPAMC Global Innovation | UPAMC / 2025-11-05 | Chen Yi-ting | UPAMC associate VP, ~18 years' experience; co-manages UPAMC Greater China Small-Mid (about +54.5% last year); overseas and small/mid-cap experience |
| 00991A Active Fuh Hwa Future 50 | Fuh Hwa / 2025-12-18 | Lu Hong-yu (Hsueh Hao-chien co-mgr) | Previously ran Fuh Hwa Fund (secondary sources cite ~+128.71% in recent years; not verified against monthly reports) |
| 00992A Active Capital Taiwan Tech Innovation | Capital / 2025-12-30 | Chen Chao-cheng | Runs Capital Innovative Technology Fund, up ~225% over 12 months vs the Taiwan market's +118%; Capital Chang-An Fund +194% over 17 months vs +102% (Capital SITE, 2026) |
| 00982A Active Capital Taiwan Strong | Capital / 2025-05-22 | Chen Yuan-yi | NCCU master's; runs Capital Oscar Fund, +137% over 25 months vs the Taiwan market's +113%; 00982A itself +167% over 13 months vs +118% (Capital SITE, 2026) |
See the point? What's really for sale isn't the three letters "ETF," it's the alpha résumés behind names like Chen Chuan-yao and Chen Yi-ting. Chen's Pentium Fund specializes in small/mid-cap growth — which maps exactly onto Part 2's finding: Taiwan's alpha isn't in large-caps, it's in the inefficient small/mid-caps. When the résumé matches the pool, the fund has a shot at real skill rather than being another benchmark trap.
It picks stocks via a manager like an active fund, trades intraday like a passive ETF, and adds daily full holdings disclosure over traditional active funds. Fees are usually below traditional active mutual funds (the Marathon's expense is ~1.74%) but still clearly above passive 0050 (~0.14%) — the first batch's management fees run roughly 0.8%–1.4%.
The Vehicle Changed; the Core Difficulty Didn't
Let's be clear: the ETF shell solves cost (cheaper than traditional funds) and transparency (daily disclosure). But it doesn't solve the difficulty running through this whole series — beating the total-return market over the long run is genuinely hard.
Recall what our first three parts proved with data:
📚 What this series has proven with data
- U.S.: Over 15 years, 89.5% of U.S. large-cap active funds lagged the S&P 500. The longer the horizon, the harder to win.
- Taiwan: In 2024, 100% of Taiwan large-cap active funds lagged their benchmark; yet about 90% of small/mid-cap funds won — alpha lives in the inefficient corners.
- The Marathon: Even the evergreen champion, measured against the total-return index, lagged the market over 5 and 10 years. "Beating 0050" is a benchmark trap.
In other words, if an active ETF just buys the over-watched large-cap heavyweights like TSMC and MediaTek, it falls into the same pit — "can't beat 0050, let alone the total-return index" — ETF or not. Its success depends not on being an ETF, but on whether the person behind it has the skill and the nerve to fish in the small/mid-cap pool where alpha lives.
So, Should You Buy an Active ETF?
This piece won't hand you a "buy" or "don't" — that's on you. But here's a thinking framework; answer three questions and you'll have your bearings:
| Ask yourself three questions | Why |
|---|---|
| ① Is the manager's alpha résumé solid enough? | The ETF is too new; you're betting on the person's past record, not the fund's history |
| ② Do they fish in the small/mid-cap alpha pool? | Taiwan's alpha isn't in large-caps; a large-cap active ETF easily falls back into the benchmark trap |
| ③ Will you honestly judge it against the total-return index? | Don't be fooled by "beats 0050"; if you're comparing, compare against the real total-return market |
If all three pass, it may be a pro worth paying for; if even one can't be answered, you may be buying another benchmark trap in a trendy wrapper. The standard, start to finish, is one thing: alpha. Fees are the small matter you check last.
This is the final piece of the main series. But the series' true coda lives in the Bonus — when retail investors inflate beta into apparent alpha with 2x leverage, that's another story altogether (see Further Reading below).
Frequently Asked Questions
📚 Further Reading
- Active vs. Passive ①: Why Can't Active Funds Beat the Index Long-Term? The Buffett Bet and the SPIVA Verdict
- Active vs. Passive ②: A 100% Wipeout — the Awkward Truth About Taiwan's Large-Cap Active Funds
- Active vs. Passive ③: The Marathon Fund "Beats 0050"? Change the Yardstick and It Loses to the Market by a Length
Investing involves risk; past performance does not guarantee future results. Please assess your own financial situation carefully.
Sources & limits: the active-ETF approval timeline, first listing (00980A, 2025-05-05), and "six funds over NT$24bn by end-July" are from Taiwan's FSC and TWSE public disclosures. Listing dates, managers, and fees are from each house's official product pages and TWSE etfInfo (data points 2025–2026). Managers' past performance: Chen Chuan-yao's UPAMC Pentium ~+409%, Chen Yi-ting's UPAMC Greater China Small-Mid ~+54.5%, and Lu Hong-yu's Fuh Hwa ~+128.71% are mostly cited from financial media and fund platforms; the "fund return vs Taiwan market return" figures for Chen Chao-cheng (Capital Innovative Technology, Capital Chang-An) and Chen Yuan-yi (Capital Oscar and 00982A itself) are from Capital SITE's official fund-manager pages (data 2026). Most of these returns are concentrated in the recent 2024–2025 period over short windows (about 6–29 months); past performance does not predict the future, and these active ETFs are 2025 products with no long verifiable record of their own yet.
Comments ()