Ann: Becoming a substantial holder, page-75

what have i done a 180 on specifically? it doesn't matter what you and I think (and unlike yourself I'm happy to admit where I'm wrong, including where you think I'm so wrong anywhere in here - my point was that ETF funds do notoriously lend out their stocks (I will include an excerpt at the bottom)): the fact of the matter is the following:

JP Morgan Today

The announcement was triggered because JP Morgan had stock that was previously borrowed from them returned, increasing their aggregate relevant interest above the 5% threshold, thereby requiring a Form 603 “initial substantial holder” notice. It was not triggered because JP Morgan returned borrowed stock — rather, stock was returned to them.

this vanguard announcement you have tagged me in:
This Vanguard announcement was triggered because they bought shares, not because shares were returned to them from a lending arrangement. It reflects organic accumulation of shares through market purchases, unlike JP Morgan’s notice, which was triggered by the return of shares they had previously lent out.

increase in holding= more shares bought or returned than loaned out or sold
decrease in holding= more shares sold or loaned out than bought or returned

you have it backwards (maybe I did too? I never suggested it was definitively one way or another but you die on this hill if that works for you).

On stock lending from ETFs:

Yes, ETF managers and funds very commonly lend out their stock—particularly large passive managers like Vanguard, BlackRock (iShares), and State Street (SPDR). This practice is a core part of securities lending, which enables them to generate incremental revenue for the fund and, ultimately, its investors.