etf-tracking-qualitylisted

# ETF Tracking Quality Read-only. `reference/READ-ONLY-POLICY.md` (hard rule) and `reference/RESEARCH-STANDARDS.md` (the mutual fund/ETF peer framework — judge a passive vehicle on tracking, not returns — plus data efficiency, completeness checklist, disclosure) apply. Steps name capabilities — resolve each against `reference/BROKER-CAPABILITIES.md`. `stock-research` treats an ETF as an instrument with a price. This treats it as a *wrapper*: on the same index, two ETFs hold the same thing, so the only differences that survive are cost, tracking, and what the user pays to get in and out. Groww's ETF screener is dead (see **Tool availability**) and no configured broker publishes iNAV, TER, or tracking error — expect the web for those, labelled and dated. ## Steps 1. **Pin down the index and the order size.** Which index (or commodity, or bond basket) the exposure is meant to be, and roughly how much the user intends to put in per trade and how often — a 6bps TER gap and a 30bps spread rank differently for a monthly ₹10,000 buy than for a one-off ₹10 lakh. Ask if it isn't stated; **Deployable capital** in `PORTFOLIO-PLAN.md` often already answers it. 2. **Build the same-index candidate set** — the symbol-search capability filtered to ETFs, plus the web for names it misses, and the index funds tracking the same index. Keep it to ~5–8; more is noise, since the underlying is identical. 3. **Cost and tracking, web-sourced and dated** (AMC factsheet, AMF