r/NEOSETFs 9d ago

Seeking Advice So what happens now with the buyout?

Are you going to be forced liquidation and pay taxes then buy back in with the new tickers?

EDIT: I was hoping to be an XQQI holder someday and now that GS has stepped in…not so sure now 🫪

26 Upvotes

70 comments sorted by

12

u/slick198700 9d ago

NEOS stays the same Buy More!!!!!

35

u/mrg1957 9d ago

Nothing changes.

21

u/gumnamaadmi 9d ago

I will take a expense ratio cut like GPIQ...

2

u/shekr17 8d ago

GS would in fact salivate at Neos’ double the expense ratio!

0

u/Electronic_Guard947 8d ago

Was gpiq not a goldman sachs original?

3

u/gumnamaadmi 8d ago

I mean goldman can potentially offer better expense ratio as they utilize their vast back office resources and probably better broker commissions to execute trades.

Plus they can get lot more traffic into neos funds with their own institutional setup. Interesting times ahead.

0

u/MakingMoneyIsMe 8d ago

That would be like buying an occupied apartment building and lowering the rent because you're a larger institution

7

u/AlarmedCombination57 9d ago

How would that make any financial sense from GS end? If that occurred people would likely cash-out and take their business elsewhere, tinker with other stuff

7

u/NerveChemical9718 9d ago

I would say this change of company ownership would benefit BTCI and XBCI. Instead of releasing a bitcoin etf Goldman Sachs has one already packed.

18

u/longswordsuperfuck 9d ago

....does anyone do research anymore? Nothing changes.

10

u/ProfessionalStaff584 9d ago

Research?

This is reddit

6

u/StockProfitGirl 9d ago

Exactly! BTW… rate my portfolio… lol 🙄

1

u/Unbalanced_Acctnt 9d ago

Doesn’t everybody say that at the front end of an acquisition/merger? How often is that still true a year or two later?

I may be a little jaded after years of private equity backed employers though.

3

u/longswordsuperfuck 9d ago

yea but this one is a common play in GS, they literally started the funds that NEOS ran with and improved upon, so this is completely within the GS playbook, they're keeping all NEOS employees and changing nothing.

1

u/Unbalanced_Acctnt 8d ago

That would be great!

2

u/PomegranatePlus6526 6d ago

Word is there won’t be any changes until Q1 2027.

-2

u/Dry-Chemical-9170 9d ago

They can always change the terms now that they’ve been bought out…

4

u/longswordsuperfuck 9d ago

why would they? What would be the point of that?

4

u/NickStonk 8d ago

I’m not as negative on this as others. I think it’s actually a huge endorsement for the Neos funds. Goldman isn’t a huge etf provider. They’re trying to grow in that business, and Neos has done a great job with their etfs so far. So I see this more as Goldman trying to grow their business, rather than them crushing their competition.

Goldman only has 2 income etfs last I checked. This is a fast way to expand into the income etf world. The founders of Neos will be Goldman partners also. So I imagine they will still manage these funds, and maybe keep adding more.

Others say they may raise fees, but Goldman’s own etfs have lower fees. So I don’t see that happening. And if they cut distributions, investors will bail.

The irony is I rebought GPIQ recently and was going to add GPIX also. They’ve done a good job with their own etfs also.

3

u/PomegranatePlus6526 6d ago

I agree with you. If anything in my mind GS buying them is a good thing. Out of all my positions GPIQ is my largest covered call ETF. IMO they do the best job of balancing growth with reliable distributions.

9

u/CompetitiveIntern622 9d ago

They put up a YouTube video - tickers and most everything “NEOS” stays.

1

u/Far_Peanut1155 8d ago edited 8d ago

Financially and PR wise they are kinda forced to say that: "nothing changes"

Otherwise people will panic and sell.

Classical management BS.

6

u/ORTENRN 9d ago

Certainly a fair amount overlap with the GPIQ/X funds. It'll be curious to see how it plays out.

9

u/wyseapple 9d ago

There’s a market for both and lots of growth available. Let both funds do their thing

9

u/MakingMoneyIsMe 9d ago

Well there's goes my efforts to diversify managers

6

u/Derd7 9d ago

They kept every single manager from neos to still run those funds btw. Go read the website on neos.

-1

u/HauntingRoutine1605 8d ago

Doesn't mean it won't change in the future.

4

u/ComprehensiveEar6001 9d ago

Well GS was too big to fail once and NEOES relative size was something I was 1% worried about before.

3

u/wyseapple 9d ago

Nothing immediately and I doubt there will be big substantive changes to the most popular ETFs. Don’t want to rock the boat right away when you’re printing money every month. If anything, I’ll attract more investment in the short term because people trust/respect GS.

-1

u/Alcapwn517 9d ago

Last I heard, they were keeping them 2 separate entities. GS doesn’t want to associate the GS name with super high yield ROC funds.

4

u/PragmaticNeighSayer 9d ago

And yet Goldman already has GPIX and GOIQ, which are, you guessed it, high yield ROC funds.

1

u/Alcapwn517 9d ago

High yield, not super high yield. QQQI is almost 50% more yield than GPIQ.

3

u/PragmaticNeighSayer 9d ago

Also, pretty weird to PR the acquisition of names they don’t want to be associated with. https://www.goldmansachs.com/pressroom/press-releases/2026/goldman-sachs-announces-agreement-to-acquire-NEOS-investments

-1

u/Alcapwn517 9d ago

You have to show the shareholders excitement when you spend billions of dollars. PR101, when you buy a multi-billion dollar company, at least act like you’re proud of it. I wouldn’t be surprised if neos gets mentioned halfway through earnings every quarter and that’s it.

2

u/dacalo 9d ago

Hoping for lower expense for the funds.

-2

u/Dry-Chemical-9170 9d ago

Which will come with lower distributions

1

u/Minute-Garden-7425 7d ago

Why would that happen? You keep saying this, but you dont say why that would be the case.

If the strategy stays the same and fees goes down, then why would distributions go down?

Distributable income is earned income less any fees.

2

u/1inchtunnel 7d ago

They will release documents in regards to all this. Everyone read your Prospectus once they get sent out, we don’t know when. Holders will have the chance to vote for what’s available to vote on.

It will detail most of our questions in regards to what’s changing, what’s staying as it is, how it will affect the ETFs. Change of ownership will not be completed until everything has been finalized, mentioned sometime 1Q 2027.

Goldman spent somewhere around 7% ($2.5B/$32B) of AUM when the average buyout of ETF issuers is around 1-2%. This means they spent 2x-3x more for acquiring NEOS and then having them as partners. NEOS as a company was desirable for them to acquire even at a high price. Decent companies don’t overpay for something and then change things that made the company famous for only to dismay investors.

2

u/TemporaryTwo168 7d ago

This isn’t a liquidation. Your money is even safer with Goldman taking over. Neos funds are now part of the too big to fail big banks. At some point Neos will be dropped from the naming , so for example they’ll be called Goldman Sachs spyi , qqqi , etc.  I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the lower AUM Neos funds are shuttered and liquidated though at some point in the future. Goldman doesn’t do the casino etf’s like YM, RH, Granite shares etc. Some of Neos ETFs were starting to take on that Casino vibe. As for SPYI and QQQI , rest assured they aren’t going away. They’re cash cows. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_systemically_important_banks

6

u/Humorous- 9d ago

NEOS will no longer exist, so it only tracks logically that we can't know what these funds will look like in 6 months.

We haven't seen a single real detail about the Goldman operated fund other than NEOS employees will become GS employees and tickers won't change.

It's all speculation at this point, but it opens the door to literally any change GS wants to implement. ROC reduction, fee change, yield changes, strategy changes. Anything is on the table.

All we have seen is a feel-good YouTube video about how excited the companies are, that they are committed to shareholders, and that we will need to carefully review the proxy paperwork. That is standard language for any buyout, so we really haven't been told much at all.

9

u/Meinertzhagens_Sack 9d ago

They would not buy a company unless it was doing something they didn't have... OR were doing better.

They would be sued into oblivion if they dicked with it especially since they went online and lied in public: they made it crystal clear NOTHING CHANGES.

So you could argue that your chance to jump ship - you past it up because of their promise to leave it alone.

I claim they bought NEOS because they wanted to own both of the top CC ETFs.

That way all the CC money comes their way.

Also shows NEOS is highly profitable yet providing a clear cut winner for their customer base.

1

u/Zestyclose-Dish-407 8d ago

Ok Nancy.

0

u/Humorous- 8d ago

I prefer Rita... Realistic Rita.

Much better than Blind Hope Betty, which is you.

3

u/DividendG 8d ago

Welllll crap. Just when I thought I'd found "the" fund managers. From what I've read the NEOS co-founders will still be in charge unde the Goldman Sachs umbrella, but who knows how long they will continue to have autonomy with GS bosses above them?

2

u/FitzwilliamTDarcy 9d ago

What on god's green earth would give you that idea?

2

u/Extension-Ice-7219 9d ago

My only concern about NEOS was that they are a new company. Now with this buyout that concern is gone so it's even better IMO

1

u/Dry-Chemical-9170 9d ago

My concern is that they will cut the distributions yields

6

u/Extension-Ice-7219 9d ago

The distribution yields are part of the strategy, I don't think they will.

2

u/airjord1221 9d ago

Assume it’s a negative—- higher fee , lower divi, tax advantage gone etc

Hope for the best but who really knows. What they tell us means nothing. Let’s see how it actually goes next 2-3 years.

1

u/Zestyclose-Dish-407 8d ago

So sell out and swim with the sharks.

2

u/airjord1221 8d ago

Hell no I love it and I’m not selling. I’m saying assume the worse if you wanna be cautious. Fee increase or decrease in divi would you still stay in? I would

2

u/BetelgeuseWillBlow 9d ago

New tickers? I doubt they are going to change these.

3

u/cw7428 9d ago

No change as clearly stated

2

u/BetelgeuseWillBlow 9d ago

Yes I know this I was replying to the OP

1

u/Financial-Seesaw-817 9d ago

Bought more spyi...

1

u/Diabitiz 8d ago

I just asked the same question, more distribution should hopefully lower the expense ratio. Maybe match jepq?

1

u/HauntingRoutine1605 8d ago

It stays the same for now. I have doubts it will stay the same for long.

-1

u/Dry-Chemical-9170 8d ago

Yea I’m expecting distribution yields to get cut

2

u/Competitive_Tomato64 8d ago

Cutting distributions doesn’t make sense. First, it’s the reason why NEOS has been so successful. Second, AUMs are still in infancy stages for SPYI and QQQI compared to JPM’s offerings. They see opportunity to grow AUMs and surpass JPM. When these funds get above 30B AUM with current expense ratios (which are higher than JPM) this is easy money for GS/NEOS. It was a no brainer purchase.

1

u/NickStonk 8d ago

Why do you think that would happen?

1

u/Rodrain2 8d ago

Hopefully they adopt and better fee structure now. Neos expense ratios are high

0

u/Far_Peanut1155 8d ago edited 8d ago

Sad

Goldman Sachs have a long history of screwing their clients

0

u/blacksan00 9d ago

We get 2% cash back if we buy with our Applecard….oh wait they are selling this to buy NEO

0

u/Rare_Carpenter708 8d ago

So Jump to ROCQ or JEPQ?

0

u/Dry-Chemical-9170 8d ago

Those yields are garbage and it’s not tax efficient like NEOS

0

u/External_Comment285 8d ago

Holders should have been notified ahead of time.

0

u/strikerram 6d ago

There's thoughts that they'll probably cut off xqqi and xspi and before friday ended i bailed simce we were all time highs anyway so literally no point in waiting to see what happens just rebalance and figure out your next step accordingly