Taiwan Stock Market's active ETF product 00981A has recently sparked a wave of controversy, with intense discussions focusing on its true investment nature.

Well-known figures in the trading circle first criticized this product as a typical "matryoshka" structure—nominally charging active management fees, but actually heavily allocating to passive ETFs like 0050 and 0052. This practice is compared to "paying Michelin chef prices to eat McDonald's burgers," where investors pay for active management premiums but receive passive index exposure.

However, there are also differing opinions within the industry. DeFi commentators and researchers pointed out that through ETF allocation, one can avoid slippage costs and cleverly bypass the regulatory red line of single-stock holdings exceeding 10%. This is particularly crucial—in a market where TSMC's weight is unusually prominent, stacking multiple stocks directly can trigger regulatory caps, making ETF allocation a practical choice for tracking Beta and optimizing liquidity.

This pain point is not new. An industry insider who previously held senior positions at large asset management firms revealed that the holding limit dilemma is a longstanding challenge for many funds. The team knows they should increase TSMC holdings to better align with market trends but are constrained by regulations, forcing them to compromise by reducing holdings.

From regulatory arbitrage to liquidity considerations, the controversy surrounding 00981A essentially reflects the structural dilemma of active management in markets dominated by strong individual stocks.