# IQ Investment Committee: 11 philosophies for ETFs

> How the IQ Investment Committee reviews an ETF: 12 seats, each applying one investor’s published principles to ETFIQ data, version 1.4 of Oct 22, 2026.

Data as of Oct 22, 2026. Rebuilt every trading night.

Version 1.4, published Oct 22, 2026: 12 seats, 12 with their method published here.

## The IQ Investment Committee: 11 investing philosophies, applied to ETFs

11 investor traditions and the ETFIQ Skeptic review an ETF on ETFIQ data, under version 1.4 of the method, Oct 22, 2026. A Chair writes the minutes.

12 Seats

11 Investor traditions

1.4 Version

### Scope

Put one ETF, several ETFs or a model in front of the committee in Ask IQ. Each seat applies one investor’s published principles to ETFIQ data. Each voting seat states one of four results; a seat whose investor judges by observation, not calculation, prints dated observations and gives none.

The committee gives no advice. It records findings, agreement, disagreement and open questions. Every figure comes from ETFIQ data and carries its date.

Each criterion is sourced to the investor’s own published words. Peer-reviewed research is a second layer on how each is measured: 8 of the 46 published criteria carry research that supports their measure, 7 carry research that weakens it, and each page says which.

Seats are named by philosophy. The investor appears as a byline and one sourced quotation: no voice, no likeness. A name comes off the day its person objects.

Lenses apply publicly known investing principles to ETFIQ data. No investor named is affiliated with or endorses ETFIQ. Not investment advice.

Choose who sits: all seats, any subset down to one, or a bench. The Chair always sits. The Skeptic sits unless you remove it.

- Cost & diversification : Low Cost, Diversification, The Skeptic

- Risk bench : All-Weather, Diversification, Macro & Liquidity, Cycles & Risk

- Income & cost : Low Cost, The Skeptic, Cycles & Risk

| Seat | Tradition | Question | Sources | Version |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Bogle-style Low Cost | in the tradition of John Bogle | What does this really cost you to own? | strong | 2.0 |
| Graham-style Margin of Safety | in the tradition of Benjamin Graham | Are you paying less than the holdings are worth? | strong | 1.0 |
| Buffett & Munger-style Quality | in the tradition of Warren Buffett & Charlie Munger | Durable, high-return businesses? | strong | 1.0 |
| Lynch-style Growth at a Reasonable Price | in the tradition of Peter Lynch | Is the growth worth the price? | strong | 1.1 |
| Templeton-style Global Contrarian | in the tradition of John Templeton | What is out of favour, and is it cheap? | strong | 1.4 |
| Dalio-style All-Weather | in the tradition of Ray Dalio | How does it fare when rates, inflation and growth shift? | strong | 1.2 |
| Marks-style Cycles & Risk | in the tradition of Howard Marks | What is the market's temperature? | strong | 3.0 |
| Druckenmiller-style Macro & Liquidity | in the tradition of Stanley Druckenmiller | Is the Fed adding money or taking it away? | interviews and writings | 2.1 |
| Swensen-style Diversification | in the tradition of David Swensen | How many real bets do you own? | strong | 2.1 |
| Wood-style Disruptive Innovation | in the tradition of Cathie Wood | Is the theme one ARK names? | firm research | 3.0 |
| Livermore-style Trend Following | in the tradition of Jesse Livermore | Is the trend with you or against you? | interviews and writings | 1.3 |
| The ETFIQ Skeptic | ETFIQ's own seat, using ETFIQ's measures | What does the name leave out? | etfiq | 2.1 |

### Definitions and method

Each seat reads a few criteria. Each criterion compares one ETFIQ measure with two thresholds, and the seat page says whose each threshold is.

Supports (ETFIQ) The seat's criteria, read on ETFIQ data, point the same way as the investor's published principles. Mixed (ETFIQ) Some criteria point each way, or the figures sit between the seat's two thresholds. Challenges (ETFIQ) The seat's criteria, read on ETFIQ data, run against the investor's published principles. Not enough data (ETFIQ) Too little of the seat can be measured for this subject. Does not apply (ETFIQ) The subject is outside the seat's scope (a T-bill fund on the trend seat, a bond fund on Templeton's); the seat gives no reading.

### How a seat reaches its state

Each criterion reads one measure against the seat's two thresholds: Supports where the supports condition holds, Challenges where the challenges condition holds, Mixed between them, Not enough data where the measure is missing. A criterion whose scope does not cover the subject is left out, and a seat whose scope does not cover it does not apply. The seat's score is the weighted mean of its readable criteria at +1, 0 and -1. A criterion marked veto that Challenges makes the seat Challenge, whatever the rest reads or could not read. Otherwise the seat reads Not enough data when the criteria it could read carry less than half of its weight, or when a criterion marked required cannot be read; it Supports at 0.5 or more and Challenges at -0.5 or less, and is Mixed between. A criterion that caps the seat keeps it from Supporting when it Challenges. A criterion the seat needs keeps it from Supporting unless it reads Supports itself. A seat that reads a fund's holdings states its own rule on its page.

In compare mode each seat orders the funds by its state first (Supports, then Mixed, then Challenges, then Not enough data) and by its score within a state, highest first; a tie is broken by the seat's tie-break measure. A fund the seat Challenges never ranks above one it Supports. A line marked like for like that one fund in a comparison cannot read is read on none of them.

### How the seats are tested

Every voting seat carries 3 to 5 textbook cases with the result it must give, such as a 0.03% index fund for the Low Cost seat. A seat that misses its textbook case does not ship. A seat that observes carries cases proving it gives no state. Each seat page lists its cases.

### What this cannot tell you

- Whether to own a fund. The committee applies principles to data; it does not know your goals, taxes or other holdings.

- What the investor would say. A seat follows published principles, never the person’s view of any fund.

- What ETFIQ data does not carry. Each seat page lists what its method needs and cannot measure.

### How to check any of this

Every seat, criterion, threshold, weight and test case is in one file . The committee reads that file, and so does this page.

Every published figure is free as JSON on the open data page . Use ETFIQ's figures with attribution and the as-of date. Issuer data stays under its owner's terms. Independent code recomputes every number nightly from the raw sources, and the statistics page shows the result. Errors are listed on the corrections page .

A figure marked ETFIQ is one ETFIQ computed. Every other figure is the issuer’s or the exchange’s, and is labeled that way.

### Where to next

---

Source: ETFIQ, independent ETF data. Recomputed nightly from public filings and prices.
Cite: ETFIQ, The IQ Investment Committee: 11 investing philosophies, applied to ETFs, data as of Oct 22, 2026. https://etfiq.com/investment-committee/
Licence: https://etfiq.com/license/ Figures ETFIQ computes are free to use with attribution: ETFIQ (etfiq.com). Issuer data stays under its owner's terms.
HTML: https://etfiq.com/investment-committee/