Author Archives: Scalper1

Are Momentum ETFs Delivering Momentum Returns?

We consider a popular momentum ETF and illustrate that its historical performance is almost entirely attributable to passive exposures to simple non-momentum factors , such as Market and Sectors. Investors may thus be able to achieve and even surpass the performance of popular momentum ETFs with transparent, passive, and potentially lower-cost portfolios of simpler funds. Attributing the Performance of Momentum ETFs to Simpler Factors We analyzed the iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (NYSEARCA: MTUM ) using the AlphaBetaWorks Statistical Equity Risk Model – a proven tool for forecasting portfolio risk and performance . We estimated monthly positions from regulatory filings, retrieved positions’ factor ( systematic ) exposures , and aggregated these. This produced a series of monthly portfolio exposures to simple investable risk factors such as Market, Sector, and Size. The factor exposures at the end of Month 1 and factor returns during Month 2 are used to calculate factor returns during Month 2 and any residual (security-selection, idiosyncratic , stock-specific) returns un-attributable to factors. There are only two ways for a fund to deviate from a passive portfolio: residual returns un-attributable to factors and factor timing returns due to variation in factor exposures over time. We define and measure both components below. iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Performance Attribution We used the iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF as an example of a practical implementation of a theoretical momentum portfolio. MTUM is a $1.1bil ETF that seeks to track an index of U.S. large- and mid-cap stocks with high momentum. The fund’s turnover, around 100% annually, is about half that of the theoretical momentum factor. iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Factor Exposures The following factors are responsible for most of the historical returns and variance of MTUM: MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Significant Historical Factor Exposures Click to enlarge Source: abwinsights.com Latest Mean Min. Max. Market 88.44 84.12 65.46 96.03 Health 23.73 30.28 23.73 34.94 Consumer 74.02 32.53 13.10 74.06 Industrial 1.69 9.71 1.13 24.51 Size -10.47 -1.04 -11.09 7.67 Oil Price -2.90 -2.45 -4.94 -0.04 Technology 17.72 16.56 1.50 32.29 Value -4.86 -2.13 -8.00 5.20 Energy 0.00 1.86 0.00 4.12 Bond Index 6.51 1.08 -22.90 23.64 iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor : Active Return To replicate MTUM with simple non-momentum factors, one can use a passive portfolio of these simple non-momentum factors with MTUM’s mean exposures as weights. This portfolio defined the Passive Return in the following chart. Active return, or αβReturn, is the performance in excess of this passive replicating portfolio. It is the active return due to residual stock performance and factor timing: MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Cumulative Passive and Active Returns Click to enlarge Source: abwinsights.com MTUM’s performance closely tracks the passive replicating portfolio. Pearson’s correlation between Total Return and Passive Return is 0.96. Consequently, 93% of the variance of month returns is attributable to passive factor exposures, primarily to Market and Sector factors. Once passive exposures to simpler factors have been removed, MTUM’s active return is negligible. Since MTUM’s launch, the cumulative return difference from such passive replicating portfolio has been approximately 1%: 2013 2014 2015 Total Total Return 16.73 14.62 8.50 45.18 Passive Return 16.06 16.48 4.55 41.34 αβReturn 1.11 -2.46 2.54 1.12 αReturn 3.91 0.05 0.29 4.27 βReturn -2.71 -2.52 2.23 -3.05 This active return can be further decomposed into security selection (αReturn) and factor timing (βReturn). These active return components generated low volatility, around 1% annually, mostly offsetting each other as illustrated below: iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Active Return from Security Selection AlphaBetaWorks’ measure of residual security selection performance is αReturn – performance relative to a factor portfolio that matches the funds’ historical factor exposures. αReturn is the return a fund would have generated if markets had been flat. MTUM has generated approximately 4% cumulative αReturn, primarily in 2013, compared to roughly 1.5% decline for the average U.S. equity ETF: MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Cumulative Active Return from Security Selection Click to enlarge Source: abwinsights.com iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Active Return from Factor Timing AlphaBetaWorks’ measure of factor timing performance is βReturn – performance due to variation in factor exposures. βReturn is the fund’s outperformance relative to a portfolio with the same mean, but constant, factor exposures as the fund. MTUM generates approximately -3% cumulative βReturn, compared to a roughly 1% decline for the average U.S. equity ETF: MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF – MTUM: Cumulative Active Return from Factor Timing Click to enlarge Source: abwinsights.com These low active returns are consistent with our earlier findings that many “smart beta” funds are merely high-beta and offer no value over portfolios of conventional dumb-beta funds. It is thus vital to test any new resident of the Factor Zoo to determine whether they are merely exotic breeds of its more boring residents. Conclusion Theoretical, or academic, momentum portfolios are not directly investable. A popular momentum ETF, MSCI USA Momentum Factor , did not deviate significantly from a passive portfolio of simpler non-momentum factors. Investors may be able to achieve and surpass the performance of the popular momentum ETFs with transparent, passive, and potentially lower-cost portfolios of simpler index funds and ETFs. The information herein is not represented or warranted to be accurate, correct, complete or timely. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Copyright © 2012-2016, ALphaBetaWorks, a division of Alpha Beta Analytics, LLC. All rights reserved. Content may not be republished without express written consent. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Ambarella Cuts GoPro Exposure On Sluggish Sales; Q1 Views ‘Messy’

Sluggish GoPro ( GPRO ) sales will force Ambarella ( AMBA ) to cut its fiscal 2017 guidance from earlier views for 15%-20% growth, a Needham analyst predicted Friday after the chipmaker late Thursday posted mixed Q4 results and disappointing Q1 guidance. Ambarella stock was down 9.5% in afternoon trading on the stock market today , below 42. GoPro stock was down more than 2%. Ambarella makes key chips used in GoPro’s Hero action cameras. Ambarella reported $67.97 million in sales and 64 cents earnings per share ex items, up 5% and down 6% year over year, respectively, for its fiscal Q4 ended Jan. 31. Sales topped the consensus model of 12 analysts polled by Thomson Reuters for $65.8 million and Ambarella’s own guidance for $65 million to $67.5 million, but EPS lagged expectations for 68 cents and declined for the first time in 18 quarters. Ambarella ended the year with $316.4 million in sales and $3.31 EPS ex items, up 45% and 66%, respectively. Both metrics beat the consensus for $313.6 million and $3.05. But Ambarella’s outlook is “messy” at best, Pacific Crest analyst Brad Erickson wrote in a research report. Erickson cut his price target on Ambarella stock to 62 from 72, but he kept his overweight rating. For Q1, Ambarella guided to $55 million to $57 million in sales, down 21% at the midpoint vs. the year-earlier quarter. It would be Ambarella’s first year-over-year decline in 18 quarters. Ambarella cut its GoPro exposure to low single digits until it refreshes its wearable sports camera line, likely in October, Erickson wrote. Overall, wearable cameras should account for a mid-teen-percentage of sales in Q1, Ambarella CFO George Laplante said Thursday on the company’s earnings conference call. The expected GoPro refresh, combined with strong seasonal IP security and drone sales, “should drive a return to year-over-year growth,” Erickson wrote. During Q4, China — which generally contributes heavily to IP security camera sales — was flat sequentially, Needham analyst N. Quinn Bolton wrote in a report. The IP security, drone and automotive segments all posted strong year-over-year growth, Bolton said. “But the consumer portions of these segments declined quarter over quarter,” he wrote. “As expected, wearable sports cameras declined substantially year over year and quarter over quarter.” Ambarella is shifting focus to the consumer and China professional IP security camera markets, where analysts say profit margins tend to be low. Quinn maintained his hold rating on Ambarella stock, noting cloudiness surrounding the China market.

How Much Will Apple Raise Its Quarterly Dividend?

During Apple ‘s ( AAPL ) annual meeting last month, CEO Tim Cook said the company was committed to raising its dividend annually. The question of how much that raise will be won’t be answered until next month when Apple reports its March-quarter financial results. Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster on Thursday predicted that Apple will raise its dividend by 5% to 10%. “We believe that prior changes in capital return policy are good indicators for what to expect this April,” Munster said in a report. In April 2015, Apple raised its dividend by 11% to 52 cents a share. And in April 2014, Apple raised its dividend by 8%. Apple also is likely to hike its stock buyback plan significantly, he said. “We expect Apple to add $30 billion-$50 billion to its share repurchase program, based on the past two years of the share repurchase program,” Munster said. “This would generate an incremental 5% EPS growth, excluding revenue in each of the next two years.” Last April, Apple increased its buyback program by $50 billion to a $140 billion total. In January, Apple had $30 billion left on its current repurchase authorization, Munster said. “Our model reflects a share count reduction of 3% in calendar 2016, compared to an actual reduction of 5% in 2015,” he said. “We believe the updated buyback would suggest our share count reduction expectations are conservative.” It took Apple 3-1/2 years to repurchase $110 billion in stock of the authorized $140 billion program, he said. “Every 1% in share-count reduction adds about 9 cents to annual EPS, or about 1%,” Munster said. “Assuming a $110 average stock price, that 1% share count reduction would cost about $6.1 billion. In other words, if Apple increases the buyback by $40 billion, and has $20 billion-$25 billion left on the existing buyback, this would increase EPS by 10% if they completed the entire buyback in a year, excluding revenue growth. Most likely, the buyback will happen over a two-year period, generating about 5% EPS growth in each of the next two years.”