The Harry Dent exchange-traded fund from AdvisorShares is overpriced and doesn’t fit into the way most investors use ETFs, Heather. It’s also one of the more interesting ETFs to come along in a while.

We’ve covered the debut of the Dent Tactical ETF (NYSEArca: DENT) closely on IndexUniverse.com. We wrote about the launch here, and ran an in-depth interview with Harry Dent, one of the fund’s portfolio managers, here.

The idea is simple: Two well-known market forecasters, Harry Dent Jr. and Rodney Johnson, will actively manage a portfolio by “identifying, through proprietary economic and demographic analysis, the overall trend of the U.S. and global economies and how consumer spending patterns may change based on this analysis.”

That sounds like a fairly normal active strategy. What makes DENT interesting is that the two managers will implement their strategy using ETFs. DENT, in other words, is an ETF-of-ETFs.

That’s interesting because it solves one of the major headaches of creating an actively managed ETF: front-running. It’s difficult to front-run trades in liquid ETFs, provided you know how to trade those ETFs appropriately. DENT is a nice solution.

That’s doesn’t mean I’m a huge fan. For starters, DENT is much too expensive. With an expense ratio of 1.56 percent, DENT is the highest-priced ETF ever, far surpassing the Market Vectors – Vietnam ETF (NYSEArca: VNM), with its 0.99 percent expense ratio.

Then, again, that may not be the right comparison. I actually don’t think that DENT is competing with other ETFs. It’s in a whole different market.

For most investors and financial advisers, ETFs are building blocks. They are designed to offer focused exposure to specific markets and asset classes. Investors use them to create portfolios based on their own personal views of the market. The task of generating alpha lies with the end investor (or their adviser).

DENT doesn’t fit into that model. The managers of DENT have complete discretion. They can go to 100 percent cash if they want. As a result, there’s no way to fit the product into a traditional asset allocation strategy. You have no idea what DENT will hold tomorrow.

DENT is actually competing with traditional active mutual funds. Or, perhaps, in a more interesting twist, it’s competing directly with financial advisers. Viewed from those perspectives, the 1.56 percent expense ratio is at least a little more reasonable.

The average actively managed equity mutual fund charges 1.13 percent, according to Morningstar. As an ETF, DENT should be more tax efficient than traditional mutual funds, perhaps making up the gap.

The more interesting comparison is with a financial advisor. DENT is effectively taking over the portfolio management task from the financial adviser. The fund charges 0.95 percent for that service (the remainder of the 1.56 percent is made up of underlying fund fees and “other” expenses).

Is 0.95 percent ridiculous for asset allocation management? No, but it’s not cheap either. There are plenty of excellent ETF-focused financial advisers charging fees closer to 0.75 percent or 0.50 percent.

Like everything, the proof will be in the pudding. If DENT can deliver great returns for a number of years, investors may embrace it. But I bet most will take a wait-and-see attitude, and watch how the returns roll in. If the fund were a bit cheaper, more would make the jump. But with a premium price, you’re going to want to see proof of premium performance before you buy in.