RE:RE:RE:RE:Back for good :)I think many folks here also own some of those. I have or had positions in most, and point out fundamental differences between them and EATS.
1) Access to sustainable food bio-technology space, which those companies don't offer. In particular, for the retail investors this is your only way to get a piece of Eat Just, Sing Cell, and Turtle Tree Labs, which have massive disruptive potential. Think BYND 3 years ago.
2) Several of those companies mentioned (e.g., BYND and TTCF) are already estrablished and their potential upside looks okay, but modest in comparison to emerging disruptive technologies.
3) The mngt team at EATS is positioned to seize on opportunity. Although mngt at those companies are also innovative and have great growth potential, the EATS thesis offers greater flexibility to seize emerging opportunity. A lot of investors in this sector are interested in opportunity, and EATS offers a compelling thesis for that.
4) Diversity - its a one stop shop. Even if you bought all those stocks, you'd end up with a series of stocks with different caps, but that are in practically the same space. At EATS, you get varying (still mostly small) caps, but across several quite unique sectors (plant based, bioplastics, and food biotech). They are all blown by similar (ethical investment), climate change and environmental policy) tailwinds but at the same time different tailwinds. If plant-based marketting (e.g., VERY) tail winds fade, food biotech may remain compelling (due to food security, enthusiasm for disruptive technologies), as almost surely will bioplastics (regualtion, and single use plastics ban) tailwinds.
Best to diversify well beyond EATS. I agree with that. But imo EATS offers a compelling niche and very attractive opportunity not matched by the basket of your favourites.