Convert Your SMA to an ETF with Tidal
Tax Benefits, Transparency, and Market Access

Research

In just three years, assets in income-oriented option strategies have quadrupled to $230B. Retail investors are enjoying distributions and convenience with payouts that align with real-world expenses. The growth highlights just how powerful consistent income can be in today’s markets.
Single stock leveraged ETFs have become a mainstream tool for traders seeking bigger, faster gains. Issuers are rushing to meet demand with products tied to the market’s most talked-about names. But with greater earning potential comes greater risk, and many investors underestimate how quickly these funds can cut both ways.
Many assume that being the “adviser” in an ETF structure guarantees influence over the fund. In practice, the real levers of control are hidden in trust management and governance, legal agreements, and operational frameworks. This article breaks down the three operational paths to launching an ETF and why the adviser vs. sub-adviser debate often misses the bigger picture.
Since the start of September 2025, the ETF industry reflects a dynamic blend of enduring investor priorities and emerging themes reshaping the landscape. U.S. ETF assets have reached $12.5 trillion, with year-to-date net inflows of $784 billion, already outpacing the $593 billion gathered during the same time span in 2024.
From U.S. equities to complex strategies, ETFs consistently prove more tax efficient than peers. But efficiency depends on smart management, especially for asset classes like bonds, emerging markets, or crypto. With the right execution, ETFs offer the opportunity to transform structural quirks into investor advantages.
A Section 351 conversion aligns investor tax priorities with the ETF’s structural advantages. For managers, it enables scale and speed-to-market across strategies that can’t easily be replicated in SMAs. Understanding the regulatory thresholds and market mechanics is essential before moving forward.
In today’s uncertain markets, investors are no longer content with riding out volatility unhedged. Whether seeking to protect against drawdowns, smooth income, or build more outcome-focused portfolios, derivative-based ETFs are emerging as essential tools. From buffer strategies to income overlays, these vehicles allow investors to stay exposed to markets without giving up control over risk.
As demand for yield climbs and fixed income regains its footing, investors are increasingly turning to private credit. Once the domain of institutions and hedge funds, this trillion-dollar asset class is rapidly becoming more accessible through exchange-traded funds (ETFs). But as private credit enters the ETF mainstream, some industry insiders are raising a cautionary flag: just because it can be wrapped in an ETF does not mean it should be.
Thematic ETFs took center stage in the U.S. ETF market over the past few years, but 2024 was a stark reminder that not all themes have staying power. As investors recalibrated amid interest rate uncertainty, macroeconomic resets, and headline fatigue, some of the buzziest ideas of the past cycle saw significant outflows. Meanwhile, a more selective class of strategies emerged as winners, revealing an important shift in how U.S. investors are approaching thematic exposure.
For many asset managers entering the ETF world for the first time, the question of control is front and center. Who actually owns the fund? Can I be replaced? What decisions can I make? What am I liable for? These concerns often arise from a lack of clarity around how ETFs are structured under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (‘40 Act).