Tag Archives: apple

Dynamic Asset Allocation

Identifying the right asset classes and proportions to diversify is difficult for an investor. The scientific methods for diversification, namely Markowitz’s Mean Variance Optimization have not been practically applicable. Investing in all asset classes evenly at all times will reduce risk but lower returns too. A diversification strategy that reduces exposure to asset classes trending down long term has historically outperformed the stock market both in terms of overall return and volatility. Diversification is widely accepted as the most important aspect in building a portfolio. For investors looking to accomplish their long term financial goals, diversification helps reduce risks and volatility as market and economy go through various expansion, contraction cycles. However the specifications on how much to diversify and in what asset classes are often vague and left to the judgment of an individual investor. There aren’t many established or prevalent public tools that would take investor characteristics as an input (for example risk tolerance, time horizon etc.) and output a recommended model portfolio. A recommended portfolio that provides a list of specific asset classes (mutual funds, ETFs or stocks) and propose percentage weights for investor to review and consider as a starting point. Further, the primary goal for diversification is looked at as risk minimization or reduced volatility in your portfolio. That comes at a cost since lower risk leads to lower return. Could diversification lead to lower risk and yet outperform the market in terms of returns? This article proposes a diversification strategy that has historically outperformed the market, with lower drawdowns and can be used by investors to build a long term asset allocation strategy. Background: Let’s start with understanding the history and state of financial theory on diversification. Harry Markowitz’s Mean Variance Optimization (MVO) method developed in 1952 forms the core backbone of financial theory on diversification. The core insight of Markowitz’s work was that by combining assets that are negatively correlated (i.e. they typically move in different directions) one can reduce the overall volatility of a portfolio without impacting the expected return. Markowitz provided a mathematical algorithm that can use this insight to generate the ideal portfolio (named as Markowitz Efficient Portfolio ) with lowest risk/volatility possible. This was a powerful algorithm and Markowitz rightfully won a Nobel Prize in 1990 for it. Unfortunately even though this was a powerful algorithm, it has not turned out to be practically applicable (Reference papers: 1 , 2 , 3 ). It entails complicated mathematics sensitive to minor changes in the input and requires accurate future forecast on potential assets. Historical returns are very poor forecasts. Variations of Markowitz’s algorithm like Black Litterman model have been proposed to overcome these limitations, however even these require sophisticated inputs (like asset market weightings, volatilities and correlations) that may not be easy to provide for by an average investor. Diversification Strategy Options: To build a model that is simple to understand, compute and specific in terms of output recommendations, we start with Markowitz’s key insight: incorporate assets that are negatively correlated in a portfolio. However correlation between two assets can change over time and rather quickly so we don’t want to assume future correlation will be same as past. Instead we incorporate asset classes that have the potential to have negative future correlation. Thus we include assets in the portfolio that are fundamentally or significantly different from each other. To illustrate this with an example, let’s start with Stocks, Gold and Bonds as three available asset classes that are fairly different from each other. Let’s pick a mutual fund or index from each of these to start with diversification in asset class itself and not be exposed to individual stock risk. I picked the Vanguard 500 Index Fund (MUTF: VFINX ), the V anguard Long Term Investment Grade Fund (MUTF: VWESX ) and the Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Fund (MUTF: FKRCX ) to represent stocks, bond and gold in this test portfolio. We could have picked ETFs like the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF ( SPY), the SPDR Gold Trust ETF ( GLD) and the i Shares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF ( TLT) but those have historical data only since 2002. Using VFINX, VWESX and FKRCX as proxies for stock, bond and gold allowed me to back test on historical data going all the way back to 1985 from Yahoo Finance. The simplest diversification without making any future assumptions on expected returns would be to allocate equal one third percentage to each asset class. How would this constant equally diversified portfolio would have worked as compared to staying 100% invested in stocks? Overall, stocks would have generated better returns but they’d have also seen larger volatility as seen in the higher drawdown in table below. The graph below shows how the two portfolios would have grown and the table shows annualized return and drawdown numbers for the duration. (click to enlarge) (click to enlarge) Looking at the above numbers, a simple strategy of equal breakdown across multiple asset classes provided a good start for reasonable growth and yet lower drawdowns. However, could we have generated better returns than being in stocks alone? We can take advantage of being in an asset class rather than an individual stock. Individual stocks can go through wild up and down swings, but asset classes do show longer bull – bear trend. For example, the graph below shows that “Gold – Precious metal equities” have been a 4 year long bear market since 2011. Similarly U.S. stocks went through 2-3 year bear market in 2000 and 2008. (click to enlarge) One improvement that we can make in our diversification strategy is to exclude any asset class that is in its longer term bear market and equally invest in all other asset classes. An asset class can be marked in bear market if its 52 week return is less than -2%. We could use any other indicator too like simple moving average or 52 week minima drop. They will all work. The important thing is to classify it as a bear and exit or reduce your sizing in that asset class. Any heuristic that improves the accuracy of classifying an asset class is in bear market will improve the strategy further. In our proposed dynamic allocation strategy we simply reduce allocation to zero on an asset class which has lost more than 2% over the last one year. All other assets are held in equal proportions to make up 100% of portfolio and balanced weekly. For simplicity we have assumed balancing weekly has zero costs, in reality transaction costs may necessitate balancing over a longer time period like 1 or 3 months. Back testing this strategy on historical data since 1984 returns an annual return of 11.87% with an average drawdown of 3.73%. The worst case drop from a 52 week high was 31.35%. So an outperformance both in terms of returns as well as lower volatility. (click to enlarge) (click to enlarge) Conclusion: Investors who manage their portfolio on their own, can use the learning above to build their own long term portfolio management strategy. They can extend the above proposed strategy to cover a comprehensive set of asset classes to include all major sectors like real estate, commodities etc. as well as international economies. Including more asset classes should help reduce risk but too many asset classes will decrease the overall return. Investors can try a variations where instead of equal allocation across all asset classes, sectors that are booming have higher weighted allocation versus sectors that are underperforming. Catching a long term bull market in an asset class and over indexing on those asset classes is likely to help improve returns. They can adjust the maximum level of weighting in a single asset class based on their risk tolerance to limit over exposure in a single asset class. Investor can thus build their own diversified portfolio, test its historical performance on returns and drawdown and thus be equipped to make smarter investing decisions for the long term. Disclaimer: The author does not have any holdings in the mutual funds (VFINX, VWESX and FKRCX) used to test described diversification strategy. These funds have been used only for illustrative purpose and the author is not making any recommendations to buy them. We use a proprietary asset allocation technique across global stocks, bonds, commodities, commodities stocks, mutual funds, ETFs and other investment options in our portfolio.

Market Lab Report – Premarket Pulse 12/8/15

Major averages fell yesterday on mixed volume. The price of oil continued to plunge, sending stocks lower at home and abroad. The Commodity Research Bureau Index (CRB) is now a hair away from lows not seen since the early 1970s. This confirms the ongoing global economic malais. Airline Jet Blue Airways (JBLU) had a pocket pivot on a base breakout as airlines are perceived to benefit from lower oil prices. Earnings are soaring, group rank 37. The price of oil continues to trend lower which is bullish for the airlines. Heating and A/C service company Select Comfort (FIX) had a pocket pivot. It gapped higher on its prior earnings report, earnings are strongly accelerating, group rank 78. The success of recent pocket pivots and buyable gap-ups has been dicey at best, with most names going nowhere while some have moved slightly higher and others have moved lower. In an environment where making big money is difficult to pull off, investors have to adapt by taking smaller positions and keeping tighter stops. We tend to think that the standard O’Neil dogma of a 7-8% downside stop is too large in this environment. Investors who wait this long to sell stocks are probably down for the year in 2015 as losses can build up rapidly if one is sitting around waiting to get hit 7-8% before dumping a position. Therefore, it is far more prudent to use nearby moving averages, generally the moving average or moving averages from which the pocket pivot originated, as tighter selling guides. Both Apple (AAPL) and Tesla Motors (TSLA) remain short-sale targets, with AAPL showing resistance at the 120 price level while TSLA’s resistance lies at the 200-day moving average, currently at 234.10. Shorting as close to these levels of resistance as possible is optimal, while they also serve as guides for tight upside stops.

Hidden Champions As A Source Of Wide Moat Investment Opportunities

Summary Hidden champions are market leaders in specific niches that are off the radar of most investors. U.S. hidden champions include companies like Columbus McKinnon, the domestic market leader in material handling products; and Gaming Partners International Corporation, the world’s largest seller of casino chips. Asian hidden champions hold even greater promise than their U.S. counterparts, due to their relative obscurity and longer growth runways. Background On Hidden Champions A hidden champion is defined as a market leader either globally or in any specific continent in terms of market share, with sales under $4 billion, and operating out of the public limelight. The term “hidden champions” was first coined by Professor Hermann Simon, chairman of Simon-Kucher & Partners Strategy & Marketing Consultants, in his 1996 international best-seller of the same name. He went to published an updated version of his book in 2009 titled “Hidden Champions of the 21st Century, Success Strategies of Unknown World Market Leaders.” In a 2010-2011 survey done in German-speaking countries, Professor Hermann Simon was voted the most influential management thinker after the late Peter Drucker. Hidden champions are potential sources of wide moat investment ideas, since both high market share and high Return on Invested Capital (NASDAQ: ROIC ) are indicators of sustainable competitive advantages. However, while it is possible to screen for high ROIC stocks, hidden champions boasting high market shares require significant digging by investors on their own. Examples Of Hidden Champions I have written extensively about hidden champions in several Seeking Alpha articles. They include companies such as Columbus McKinnon (NASDAQ: CMCO ), PGT, Inc. (NASDAQ: PGTI ), Gaming Partners International Corporation (NASDAQ: GPIC ), Knowles Corporation (NYSE: KN ), EnerNOC, Inc. (NASDAQ: ENOC ) and Generac Holdings (NYSE: GNRC ) among others. I will elaborate in greater detail about the moats and growth runways of three of these stocks below. Columbus McKinnon holds the largest domestic market share (46%) in material handling products, representing 74% of its fiscal 2014 U.S. sales. Its largest product category comprises hoists, trolleys and components. Columbus McKinnon benefits from high customer switching costs, since its material handling products improve efficiency, enhance productivity and maximize profitability for its client, but yet cost a fraction of their customers’ total product costs (80% of its revenues are generated from products that are sold at under $5,000 per unit). Also, stealing market share from competitors is not Columbus McKinnon’s only growth avenue, since its largest installed base of hoists in North America allows it to cross-sell complementary and new products to its existing customers and benefit from after-market sales for replacement units and components and repair parts. Gaming Partners International Corporation is the global market leader in casino currency and boasts approximately 90% market share of the casino chip, plaque, and jeton sales in Macau. Given that casino operators place a strong emphasis on the quality of casino currency and the need to minimize the threat of counterfeit gaming chips, they are likely to stick with trusted players like Gaming Partners International Corporation. There is a razor-and-blade model at play here, as Gaming Partners International Corporation can cross-sell ancillary products and consumables like playing cards, table layouts, dice, and table accessories as an integrated supplier of casino table gaming equipment. PGT has approximately 70% market share of impact resistant window and door market in Florida. PGT’s moat is derived from the strength of its WinGuard branded products, which are now synonymous with quality, built upon a three-decade long track record of zero reported impact failures. Its growth drivers are the strength of the Florida housing market and the increase in penetration rates of impact resistant window and door market in Florida. Moats Of Hidden Champions While individual hidden champions might have their respective competitive advantages and diverse moats, a recurring theme is what Morningstar terms as the efficient scale moat. Hidden champions typically have significant market share in a niche where the market is sufficiently small, making it uneconomical for new entrants to compete. So what can potentially narrow or even destroy an efficient scale moat for hidden champions? If either the niche market experiences faster growth, or larger ancillary market segments experience slower growth, it might attract new competitors like bees to honey. Customer preferences and switching costs could also change, leading to greater ease of grabbing market share from the incumbent hidden champions. Growth Potential Of Hidden Champions Growth is another interesting topic for hidden champions. Most hidden champions will find it difficult to grow significantly by gaining market share from competitors, since they are usually already the outright market leader. Similarly, the organic growth prospects for the niche market tend to be modest (which deters new entrants). On the other hand, moving to ancillary market segment tends to expose them to competition from larger players and entrenched incumbents in other markets. As a result, hidden champions possessing either pricing power or the ability to cross-sell complementary products under a razor & blade model are favored. Asian Hidden Champions There are no shortcuts to identifying hidden champions. I seek hidden champions by starting with the As in a list of sub-$1 billion market capitalization stocks and paying attention to details on market share and unique niches based on the industries they operate in. My own experience is that Asian-listed hidden champions tend to have a higher probability of remaining off the radar of most investors. Firstly, Asian stocks in general have a lower concentration of stocks enjoying sell-side analyst coverage, due to the relatively lower market capitalizations and liquidity of a wider spectrum of companies listed on Asian stock exchanges. Secondly, since certain Asian companies neither report their financial results in English nor feature themselves in English media, a great proportion of international investors are unable to access these names. On the flip side, it is precisely because Asian hidden champions are relatively more “hidden,” their potential for outsized investment gains will be higher. More importantly, as these Asian companies are smaller, lie at an earlier stage of their corporate lifecycles and are still working hard at penetrating the broader yet fragmented pan-Asian market, their growth runways are also longer. This compares favorably with most other U.S. hidden champions already in the mature stage of their corporate lifecycles with limited growth drivers. As a special bonus for my subscribers, they will get access to the names of five (5) Asian-listed hidden champions in a separate bonus watchlist article. My December 2015 Stock Idea meant exclusively for subscribers also happens to be an Asian hidden champion with leading domestic market shares in certain money handling equipment. Note: Subscribers to my Asia/U.S. Deep-Value Wide-Moat Stocks exclusive research service get full access to the list of wide moat investment candidates and value traps, which include “Magic Formula” stocks, wide moat compounders, hidden champions and high quality businesses, that I have profiled.