Tag Archives: author

5 Investing Lessons I Learned In 2015

Summary Every year I like to do a recap of the lessons I learned over the preceding 12 months. A 50/50 diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds is likely sitting near the zero line in 2015. At some point we are going to see a turn in this commodity downtrend that leads to a new bull market cycle. In my opinion, a counter-intuitive mindset is still one of your greatest allies when navigating these markets. Every year I like to do a recap of the lessons I learned over the preceding twelve months. I find this exercise to be cathartic in examining past mistakes as well as reminding myself of successful portfolio management guidelines that will serve us well in the future. Many of these lessons also apply to other areas of my life outside of the financial markets as well. Part of this practice also involves reviewing my prior years’ lessons in order to stay mindful of the journey that has brought us to this point. So let’s dive in to the high-level topics that drove the markets and our portfolios this year … Trendless markets require endless patience. Looked at a chart of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) lately? It’s gone virtually nowhere over the last 12 months. However, that doesn’t mean it has been completely asleep. There have been gut-wrenching drops and face ripping rallies that virtually no one could have foreseen ahead of time. To add to this sense of frustration is the fact that returns in bonds and cash are virtually flat as well. A 50/50 diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds is likely sitting near the zero line in 2015. It’s years like this that truly test your patience with sticking to your plan versus trying to go find a better system or advisor that rose to the top. Of course, you have to ask yourself whether any supposed alpha this year was driven by a time-tested process or the result of simply stumbling into the right place at the right time. Be mindful of taking on too much risk by chasing performance in areas of the market that appear stretched or are outside your comfort zone. Just because an investment seems cheap, doesn’t mean it can’t get cheaper. Anyone who has been trying to find a bottom in commodities or energy stocks this year certainly can relate to this axiom. There have been plenty of pundits, pivots, and pirates in this group that have been unable to successfully navigate the deflation trade. At some point, we are going to see a turn in this commodity downtrend that leads to a new bull market cycle. This will likely fuel demand for beaten down areas of the market like junk bonds, MLPs, oil and gas stocks, or the futures contracts themselves. The bottom line: We aren’t there yet. Trying to pick a perfect bottom in this market is more than likely going to cause undue stress rather than simply waiting for a more discernible pattern to develop. My grandfather used to say that a little bit of lost opportunity is better than a lot of lost money. That certainly applies in this instance. A counter-intuitive mindset is still your best ally. Remember that crazy summer correction in the market? The one that caused a panic on Wall Street, a lockup in ETF liquidity, and decrees that the apocalypse has arrived? Yeah it turned out we overcame that pretty fast. It was scary for sure, but taking a measured approach to any portfolio changes versus full-blown panic was the better move. In my opinion, a counter-intuitive mindset is still one of your greatest allies when navigating these markets. There is a great deal of pessimism and fear out there. More tactical investors can capitalize on that by reducing a portion of your exposure as prices rise and adding to new opportunities on dips. Long-term investors should be looking to put new money to work on any pullbacks to maximize their average cost basis. Starting something new can be rejuvenating. We all get stuck in the grind of our daily life. Our normal routines can get boring, dull, and allow complacency to set in. One of the ways we combated that mindset this year is by introducing a new premium newsletter service to our blog. We call this the Flexible Growth and Income Report , which is designed for serious investors with intermediate to long-term time frames. Our primary investment vehicles are diversified, transparent, and liquid exchange-traded funds. It’s also one of the few services that implements closed-end funds to enhance yield or seek greater returns. The introduction of this new service allowed us the opportunity to evaluate new themes, interact with new clientele, and challenge our existing market thesis. All of this may seem like additional work at first, but it can be truly rejuvenating in the sense that we are creating dynamic content that is rabidly consumed and used as actionable material. It’s a humbling and inspirational process that we enjoy producing every week. Shoulda, coulda, woulda are a drain on emotional capital. Ever feel like there was that one trade you almost took and then decided it wasn’t right for you? Then it goes on to be a very profitable investment and you can’t seem to get that “I should have bought XX” feeling out of your mind. It’s even worse if there was a trade that you forced, only to find out that it was a big loser in time or money. This seems to be a reoccurring theme when I talk to individual investors about their portfolios. Even very successful investors are haunted by missed opportunities or trades they wish they could have back. There is nothing wrong with a short period of self-reflection if you feel you made a mistake with your portfolio. Nevertheless, spending too much time worrying about something that has already passed you by is a drain on emotional capital. It also keeps you preoccupied from being in the present and the future opportunities that will be afforded to you. It’s not always easy to live in the here and now when we are constantly bombarded with historical results in this business. Yet, filtering out the noise and letting go of nominal miscues will be a significant game changer in your long-term success. The Bottom Line 2015 was a difficult year in many respects. However, it afforded the chance to learn and grow as well. Make sure you take the time prior to 2016 to set goals for your personal, professional, and investment endeavors. This will enable you to benchmark your performance to ensure you are on the right track to meet your ultimate objectives.

The York Water Company: 200 Years Of Dividends, But Shares Are Expensive

York continues to be an excellent dividend payer with a great history. It recently raised its dividend by 4%. The shares look fairly expensive at these levels. In January of 2015, I originally wrote about The York Water Company (NASDAQ: YORW ). In that article, I highlighted its record setting dividend paying history as well as its more recent dividend growth history. While the company continues to be an extremely strong and reliable dividend payer, its shares are looking pricey right now. Before getting to the shares, let’s take a look at the dividend again. With its most recent raise of 4% in November, the dividend now stands at $0.622 annually. This makes the forward yield about 2.37%. This is extremely low for a utility in the first place. However, let’s give some credit where credit is due. This declaration was York’s 580th consecutive dividend declaration. Their consecutive streak of paying dividends has now hit 200 years. In the press release , the company also claims that this is believed to be the longest record of consecutive dividends in America. The streak is just downright impressive. On the other hand, “consecutive years” is a lot different than “consecutive years of growth.” But… the company has one of these streaks as well. This most recent increase bumps its current dividend growth streak to 19 years. YORW Dividend data by YCharts While the dividend growth rate has not been necessarily stellar over the past few years, it has been a lot better than nothing. The 5-year DGR is roughly 3.6%. While it has maintained this growth, it is also keeping a relatively safe payout ratio. With trailing earnings of 98 cents, the current payout ratio is about 63%. I believe considering the majority of its business is regulated and extremely defensive in nature that this is a prudent payout. While the dividend is looking solid as ever, the shares are not. Shares are up almost 35% from 52-week lows. This run up has obviously pushed the yield to a very low level historically. Its 5-year average yield is 2.84%. The point here is that while the dividend is attractive there is not a particular reason for the yield to be so low. YORW PS Ratio (TTM) data by YCharts Fundamentally, shares haven’t seen these high levels since 2006-2007. And as I said, there just doesn’t seem to be a good reason for it. Sales for 2015 are supposed to finish up 2.8% higher than last year. Next year’s sales are expected to be 3.5% higher. Earnings are expected to be up 6.4%. These aren’t bad numbers. They just aren’t all that great and certainly don’t justify such high fundamentals. Trading at roughly a little more than 26 times both trailing earnings as well as forward earnings things don’t look any better when we look at the shares from an earnings basis. This P/E is actually higher than comparable peers such as Middlesex (NASDAQ: MSEX ) and Aqua America (NYSE: WTR ) as well. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that these water utilities should trade with a nice premium. The name of the game here is consistency. These businesses don’t falter much, even in bad times, and there are massive barriers to entry. However, I strongly believe the market has priced in too much of a premium currently and pushed these shares into overvalued territory. YORW data by YCharts In conclusion, York has been a solid dividend payer for 200 years now. It is immensely impressive that not only has the company never broken that streak but also tagged along a dividend growth streak of 19 years. With the most recent raise, the dividend is looking very good, but the shares are not. These levels are fundamentally way too high and have no real forward catalysts to justify it. The shares are far too expensive to be a buyer at these levels in my opinion.

The ETF Monkey 2016 Model Portfolio: Charles Schwab Implementation

Summary In a previous article, I introduced The ETF Monkey 2016 Model Portfolio. This portfolio offers my suggested model for 2016 based on careful review of the 2016 outlook from multiple high-quality research firms and/or investment providers. In that article, I also promised to build and then track practical implementations of the portfolio using ETFs from three different providers. This is the Charles Schwab implementation. This article is designed to be read in conjunction with the article in which I introduced The ETF Monkey 2016 Model Portfolio . In that article, I offered what I believe to be a model portfolio for 2016, based on my reading and analysis of materials related to the 2016 outlook from several top-quality sources. I further explained that I would both build and track actual implementations of this portfolio using ETFs from three major providers; Vanguard, Fidelity (featuring iShares funds) and Charles Schwab. This article features the Charles Schwab implementation. Overview I will start with a couple of tables. The first will briefly recap the asset classes and weightings that I identified in The ETF Monkey 2016 Model Portfolio, followed by the name and symbol of the Charles Schwab ETF I selected to represent that portion of the portfolio. The second will present a summary of key data for each ETF, including data points such as the expense ratio and average spread, the current dividend yield, and the size and daily volume of the fund. Combined, these will give you, in one glance, a big picture overview of the expenses and returns, as well as some idea of the fund’s tradeability. In this fashion, when I have completed my articles for all three selected providers, you will be able to do some side-by-side comparisons if you wish. Finally, one by one, I will offer other comments and data for each ETF. So let’s get started. Here is the first table, presenting my ETF selections. Asset Class Weighting ETF Name Symbol Domestic Stocks (General) 30.00% Schwab U.S. Broad Market SCHB Domestic Stocks (High Dividend) 5.00% Schwab US Dividend Equity SCHD Foreign Stocks – Developed 20.00% Schwab International Equity SCHF Foreign Stocks – Emerging Markets 7.50% Schwab Emerging Markets Equity SCHE Foreign Stocks – Europe 5.00% SPDR STOXX Europe 50 FEU TIPS 15.00% Schwab U.S. TIPS SCHP Bonds 10.00% Schwab U.S. Aggregate Bond SCHZ REITS 7.50% Schwab U. S. REIT SCHH Here is the second table, presenting key data points. (click to enlarge) When comparing the ETF selections across all 3 providers that I am featuring in this series of articles, likely something that will immediately jump out at you is that Charles Schwab is extremely serious about its expense ratios. It beats Vanguard, long known themselves for rock-bottom expense ratios, on 7 of the 8 ETFs I have selected to fill out the portfolio. In my Fidelity article , I noted that BlackRock (NYSE: BLK ) temporarily held the title of “world’s cheapest ETF” when they lowered the expense ratio of ITOT to .03%. However, this did not last long as Charles Schwab responded almost immediately by cutting the expense ratio on SCHB to match. It is worth noting, however, that Vanguard is still the overall winner when it comes to size and tradeability. I look forward to seeing how the results play out as I track all 3 portfolios moving forward. Note: In view of Vanguard’s standing in the ETF field, I decided to use the Vanguard implementation as the lead, or reference, article for the three implementations. I will in some cases refer back to, and compare, the related Vanguard ETF when discussing the selections I make for the Fidelity and Charles Schwab implementations of the portfolio. With that overview in mind, let’s now take a look at each of the ETFs. Schwab U.S. Broad Market As noted, Charles Schwab recently dropped the expense ratio on this fund to .03%. At the same time, it is not quite as broad or deep as either the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (NYSEARCA: VTI ) or the iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (NYSEARCA: ITOT ), in terms of complete market coverage. SCHB tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Broad Stock Market Index . Basically, this index includes the largest 2,500 stocks in the U.S. market, therefore excluding micro-caps and some small-caps. SCHB itself contains 2,070 holdings, a little more than half of VTI and ITOT. SCHB’s Top-10 holdings represent 14.4% of the total. At 1.93%, its distribution yield is right in line with VTI and just a little higher than ITOT. Viewed from a critical standpoint, then, this ETF could be considered slightly less of a genuinely “total market” fund than either of its competitors in my analysis. At the same time, its rock-bottom expense ratio combined with its substantial size and great tradeability make it a solid choice, particularly for the Schwab investor who can trade it commission-free. Schwab US Dividend Equity This ETF seeks to track the investment results of the Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index composed of relatively high dividend paying U.S. equities. As a result of using this index, it takes a little different approach than the Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (NYSEARCA: VYM ). Whereas VYM contains 435 stocks, SCHD only contains 101. At the same time, I like how they are selected. The index screens both for a 10-year history of paying dividends as well as strong financial ratios. While this stringent process eliminates certain high-payers, and therefore drops the distribution yield a little bit, it leaves this ETF as a wonderful choice for conservative investors. Similar to VYM, REITs are excluded. However, sector allocations are somewhat different. For example, utilities comprise 7.6% of VYM, but only a scant 0.7% of SCHD. In contrast, industrials and information technology are more heavily weighted in SCHD. This holding is designed to help increase the level of income generated by the portfolio. Its 2.97% yield will act as a nice supplement to the 1.93% yield offered by SCHB, while SCHB should offer more opportunities for growth . My last note for this section is that you may have noticed that both SCHB and SCHD are tilted more toward large-caps, and a little more conservatively, that their competitors from both Vanguard and Fidelity. It will be interesting to watch their comparative returns in 2016. Schwab International Equity SCHF tracks the FTSE Developed ex U.S. Index . This index focuses on international large and mid-cap companies. As a result, it is not as broad an index as the one used by Vanguard for the Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: VEA ). This can be seen in the fact that this fund contains 1,217 holdings, as opposed to 1,866 for VEA. Interestingly, though, its Top-10 comprises 11.8% of its assets, only slightly higher than VEA’s 11.3%. Another little wrinkle is that its index includes both Canada as well as South Korea. Other providers tend to include South Korea under the “emerging market” umbrella. The combination of SCHF’s super-low .08% expense ratio, healthy asset base and great tradeability make it a rock-solid core for the international portion of any investor’s portfolio. Really, the only weakness that I can identify, when compared to its competitors in my analysis, is that it is a little light on exposure to smaller stocks. Schwab Emerging Markets Equity This is the counterpart to SCHF. This ETF invests in stocks of companies located in emerging markets around the world, such as China, India, Taiwan, and South Africa. Its goal is to closely track the return of the FTSE Emerging Index, very similar to the index tracked by the Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: VWO ). As noted above, however, South Korea is included in SCHF, and is not included here. At the end of the day, for purposes of The ETF Monkey 2016 Model Portfolio, it will all work out the same, as South Korea is included one way or the other. Additionally, I could not find any evidence either in Schwab’s online materials or the prospectus for SCHE to the effect that China A-shares are included at the present time. This ETF currently contains 759 holdings, with the Top-10 comprising 21.10% of its assets. Similar to its counterpart SCHF, it focuses on large and mid-cap companies, not as much in smaller companies. It carries an expense ratio of .14%, the lowest of the 3 competitors. SPDR STOXX Europe 50 FEU was a bit of a tough choice. I was unable to find much from Schwab in terms of ETFs targeted specifically at Europe. Of the possibilities I evaluated, this was my favorite. FEU seeks to provide investment results that, before fees and expenses, correspond generally to the total return performance of the STOXX Europe 50 Index . As that implies, it is not anywhere near as comprehensive as the competing offerings from Vanguard and Fidelity featured in my analysis. On the other hand, not only does it provide coverage of some of the largest and best companies in Europe, it crosses sectors well. Allow me to explain. The index does not simply look for the 50 largest companies in Europe. Here is how the prospectus explains it: The Index is designed to represent the performance of some of the largest companies across components of the 19 EURO STOXX Supersector Indexes. . . . The 50 companies in the Index are selected by first identifying the companies that equal approximately 60% of the free-float market capitalization of each [sector] . . . From that list, the 40 largest stocks are selected to be components of the Index. In addition, any stocks that are current components of the Index (and ranked 41-60 on the list) are included as components. In other words, the index ensures that all 19 sectors are represented, by the largest companies in each sector. Interestingly, the composition of the Top-10 ends up being quite similar to both the Vanguard FTSE Europe ETF (NYSEARCA: VGK ) and the iShares Core MSCI Europe ETF (NYSEARCA: IEUR ). It comes as no surprise, however, that they constitute a much larger percentage of the total; 37.19% for FEU vs. IEUR’s 15.83% and VGK’s 16.0%. With an expense ratio of .29%, it is also the priciest of the three competitors. However, the benefits of commission-free trading should offset that for Schwab investors. Schwab U.S. TIPS This ETF seeks to track an index that measures the performance of inflation-protected public obligations of the U.S. Treasury. Instead of comparing SCHP to Vanguard’s offering, as I have generally been doing in this series of articles, I am going to instead use the iShares TIPS Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: TIP ) as my reference point. In my opinion, to do any less would be to show disrespect to SCHP. Simply put, SCHP is a worthy competitor to TIP. Yes, it was launched in 2010, 7 years after TIP. Yes, it “only” has $813 million in AUM against TIP’s roughly $2 billion. But its rock-bottom .07% expense ratio, compared to .20% for TIP, has made it very popular with investors, leading to great acceptance and trading volume. In terms of the contents of the fund, they are almost identical to TIP. It contains 37 holdings, comparable to TIP’s 39, and comes in with an effective duration of 7.68 years, as opposed to 8.44 for TIP. Not surprisingly, SCHP’s dividend distribution of 1.93% is also very similar to TIP’s 1.98%. Long story short, this is a wonderful vehicle for any investor interested in the TIPS sector, and especially great for the Schwab investor who can trade commission-free. Schwab U.S. Aggregate Bond SCHZ tracks the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index . With an inception date of 7/14/2011, SCHZ is both newer, and far smaller, than its two competitors in my 3 tracked portfolios. Its AUM of $2.05 billion compares against the Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF’s (NYSEARCA: BND ) $27.12 billion and the iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF’s (NYSEARCA: AGG ) $30.38 billion. It also contains a smaller number of holdings; 2,612 as compared to 4,984 for AGG and 7,746 for BND. In terms of portfolio construction, SCHZ runs a little closer to AGG, having an effective duration of 5.26 years as compared to 5.36 years for AGG and 5.8 years for BND. Still, it offers broad market coverage and is a solid choice for buy-and-hold investors. Finally, at a puny .05%, it has the lowest expense ratio of the three. Schwab U.S. REIT SCHH tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Select REIT Index . SCHH has established itself as a formidable player in the REIT space. It does not contain as many holdings as either of its competitors in my analysis, with 100 holdings as opposed to the Vanguard REIT ETF’s (NYSEARCA: VNQ ) 154 holdings and the Fidelity MSCI Real Estate ETF’s (NYSEARCA: FREL ) 201 holdings. However, it still does a nice job of covering many different sectors; including Retail, Residential, Health Care, and Office REITS. With fewer holdings, it comes as no surprise that its largest holding, as well as its Top-10 holdings, are more heavily weighted than its competitors in my analysis. Simon Property Group (NYSE: SPG ), its single largest holding, carries a 9.9% weighting as opposed to 7.9% in VNQ and 6.39% in FREL, and its Top-10 holdings comprise a full 44.8 of its total as opposed to 35.9% in VNQ and 32.42% in FREL. At the same time, its expense ratio of .07% is by far the lowest of our 3 competitors, making it a solid holding for investors interested in holding a position in REITS. Summary and Conclusion So there you have them. The 8 ETFS that make up the Charles Schwab implementation of my portfolio. I have also written similar articles for both Vanguard and Fidelity, and will follow all 3 with an article that will begin the process of actually building and tracking the portfolios as of the closing price of all the components on December 31, 2015. Until then, I wish you . . . Happy investing!