I wanted to add this here but this post ended up in my reports. The question is how much % of the portfolio are you allocating to this one and ETF's otherwise. 

I have previously bought CNEW and later realised it's not a growth ETF. At this stage of my life, I am looking for growth assets. ASIA seems to be perfect for my risk appetite and returns expectations. However, I am struggling to find answers to the following questions: 

1. Why ETF is selling for less than its NAV- I understand the demand/supply and uncertainty on a high level because of china's regulation.  These are the only factors that it's selling for less than NAV. 

2. In terms of portfolio allocation - what is the broad consensus - ETF's are 40% of PV or less or more with an x% limit on a particular ETF. 

In my real portfolio, I don't have any ETF's but have 2 managed funds - worth 1.5x my smallcap portfolio

a relevant section from this week's lead article in the economist  regarding the outlook for Chinese big tech, 

I think I've got enough exposure with VGS. 

In China the party will remain the law. And the way that Mr Xi is using that power is making investors increasingly pessimistic. The government’s crackdown on tech darlings, from Ant, a fintech dynamo, to Tencent, a social-media giant, has served up a reminder of just how capricious its regulations can be.
Chinese officials say they are limiting the power of big tech platforms in order to to make the economy more competitive and thus more productive. Few investors buy that. Instead, the realisation has seeped in that Mr Xi’s references to communist ideology are, at some level, sincere. He appears to be uncomfortable with business leaders getting too rich. And he has made it his mission to reinforce the party’s grip on power. When he says “Government, the military, society and schools, north, south, east and west—the party leads them all,” he means it. This is not a basis for improving productivity you will find in many economic textbooks

Disclosure: this might come across as a bit of a ramble.

These comments about the ASIA ETF are very interesting. Personally, if you actually look at all the shares that make up the Tiger ETF I would argue the overall quality is just as good if not better than the NASDAQ 100 ETF when one considers the accessible market in the next 50years especially if nationalisation in TW major western countries returns and the belt and road continues to develop.

The Chinese have no intentions of destroying their top Companies. They are proud of them and excited in their position on the world stage. They have allowed them to flourish over the last 15-20yrs and they have been instrumental in helping lift 300m Chinese into middle class. 

However, what they do want to do is ensure that other companies get a chance to develop and contribute to helping the next 300m people they wish to lift into middle class over the next decade. Therefore, providing them with the same opportunity the first major international Chinese companies were given and the first 300m people could access as they climbed their way up over the last decade. Thus, they do not wish to see this monopoly and wealth continuing to grow with no control preventing many with less of a chance of moving into middle class.  

When it comes to regulation I would suggest things happen significantly quicker in China. This crack down will be all over before you know it and the western governments will still be stuck trying to decide what they should do with big tech. All the time simply posturing and doling out compromised solutions in an attempt to appease their voter base. 

In China it's simple, a company is pulled into line, a fine is administered, the fine is paid the line is re-established. As a consequence, the company now knows where it is allowed to grow and where it needs to ensure there is adequate opportunity for competition. 

The companies in the Asia Tigers 50 are not only some of the best companies in Asia but also the world. They are cash cows with access to the largest growing market. Their growth runways are also arguably larger as they have an opportunity to tap into a developing middle class in the Asian region that is only getting bigger. As time progresses support in Asia for these companies will only grow, firstly, as more people move into middle class and secondly, as more of the middle class shift to supporting home grown regional brands. Just like Micardo Librae outdoes Amazon in Latin America because they speak the language and know what the locals want. 

Anyway in summary I think much of what is focused on and emphasised is what the media perpetuates because it's the story that sells.

Consequently, I think this has provided an attractive opportunity to buy into an ETF (just compare the earning multiples of some of these juggernaughts to some of their western peers) that more than likely will be significantly more expensive in 5yrs time than it is today. 

disclosure: personal hold Asia ETF and will look to add it to my straw man account. 
 

Thank you for this research. Do you think this combination of holdings will prosper in the near term or even long term, or is the risk from government action in China a problem?