Tag Archives: author

Market Neutral Funds: Best And Worst Of November

By DailyAlts Staff (click to enlarge) Market-neutral funds balance long and short holdings, generally in pursuit of something close to a 0% net-long exposure. This allows investment managers to neutralize beta and focus on generating alpha – or at least, that’s the idea. In November, the top three market-neutral mutual funds generated returns ranging from +0.94% to +3.52%, while the category’s three laggards returned between -2.53% and -3.19%. In this month’s review, we look beyond November’s performance and also consider the composition of each of the featured funds’ three-year standard deviation and Sharpe ratio. (click to enlarge) November’s Top Performers The top performing market-neutral mutual funds in November were: (click to enlarge) The QuantShares US Market Neutral Momentum ETF fund led the pack last month with its decidedly strong returns of +3.52%. Year to date through November 30, the fund had spectacular gains of 20.43%, but its annualized three-year return through that date stood at a lower +3.80%! Overall, the QuantShares US Market Neutral Momentum Fund’s three-year Sharpe ratio stood at 0.31. The Hussman Strategic International Fund’s +1.37% returns in November weren’t quite as impressive, but were still strongly positive for the month. However, the fund’s three-year return of -1.91% through November 30 is less impressive. On a risk-adjusted basis, the Hussman fund’s three-year Sharpe ratio stood at a dismal -0.28, as of November 30. Perhaps the best looking of the three funds was November’s third-best performer, the Turner Titan II Fund, which posted a 0.94% gain for the month. Its three-year annualized return of 4.69% is much stronger than its peers’, and the three-year Sharpe ratio of 0.82 is by far the best of any market-neutral fund reviewed this month. November’s Worst Performers The worst performing market-neutral mutual funds in November included: (click to enlarge) The Whitebox fund was the month’s worst, at -3.19%. For the first eleven months of 2015, the fund lost 6.56%, but its three-year annualized returns were in the black at +1.44%. What’s more, the fund’s Sharpe ratio of 0.27 was not only better than either of November’s other worst performing market-neutral funds, but among the top three of the six funds covered this month. The QuantShares US Market Neutral Value Fund lost 2.98% in November, bringing its year-to-date losses to 10.03% as of November 30. The fact that QuantShares has found itself on both the Best and the Worst lists for the month is a clear indication that momentum exposure worked in November (and the year), and value did not. On a three-year basis, the fund was in the black, with annualized returns of +0.30%. Finally, the Hussman Strategic Growth Fund was November’s third-worst performer, also earning Hussman the distinction of being in both the penthouse and the doghouse for the month. Of the three biggest losers from last month, the Hussman fund has the worst looking long-term results: a three-year annualized return of -8.88%. Its three-year Sharpe ratio of -1.38 was also easily the worst of the bunch. Past Performance does not necessarily predict future results. Meili Zeng and Jason Seagraves contributed to this article.

No High-Yield Relief For MLP ETFs Post Fed

The Fed went ahead and hiked the short-term interest rates after almost a decade and investors are probably looking for high-yield but stable investing tools to weather the prospective bounce in the U.S. Treasury yields, but this search will not be easy now. Investors need to be very careful while picking high-yields securities in the present market condition. This is because of the fact that the Fed hike is not the only threat to the market, a below-$40 oil price seems to be the main culprit now. As a result, conventionally high-yield securities MLPs, which are normally stable in nature too, are now having a bloodbath. MLPs are involved in the business of transportation and storage of oil and gas, and they are suffering even more than the oil producers from the downturn in the market. MLPs primarily benefit from an uptick in oil production. Oil Price Slump Hurts Now oil prices are in a freefall and hovering around a seven-year low following the prospect of more production from OPEC nations amid supply glut and falling demand. So energy MLPs are being crushed. Now, Russia’s deputy finance minister expects oil price to range between $40 and $60 per barrel in the next seven years. So one can easily expect how prolonged the pain could be for the MLPs. As you may know, MLPs often operate pipelines or similar energy infrastructures that make it an interest-rate sensitive sector. This group catches investor eye as the players in it do not pay taxes at the entity level and hence must pay out most of their income (more than 90%) in the form of dividends. Investors looking for higher income levels outside the traditional bond sources generally bet on these products. Rising Rate Scenario: A Pain A rising interest rate environment would also adversely impact the performance of MLPs for a number of reasons. First, higher interest rates lower the appeal of high-yielding stocks such as MLPs, which have historically offered around 5% in yields and hence have attracted investors’ attention due to ultra-low interest rates. Secondly, MLPs heavily depend on external financing to run their operations as they distribute most of their income as dividends. As a result, a rise in interest rates would increase their financing costs, which in turn would diminish their ability to keep distribution payments at the existing level. Dividend Cuts Also, thanks to the oil rout, the cash position of MLPs is weakening. Upstream exploration MLP companies earn from every barrel of oil and are being thrashed by the endless weakness in oil prices. U.S. oil producers are resorting to a cutback in oil production in response to falling prices. Since pipeline operators are heavily dependent on them, a blow to the MLP balance sheet is inevitable. The situation is so acute that Street.com indicated a few MLPs which may cut dividend – the sole lure of the MLP investing – in the near term. Already the largest energy infrastructure company in North America – Kinder Morgan, Inc. (NYSE: KMI ) – cut its dividend by 75% on December 8. The author in the Street.com believes that Targa Resources Partners (NYSE: NGLS ) and Vanguard Natural Resources (NASDAQ: VNR ), which yield about 20% and as high as 55%, respectively, may resort to a cutback in the coming days. Crestwood Equity Partners (NYSE: CEQP ) is yet another mid-stream MLP which yields about 38.52% annually in dividend, but is in the danger list. Others are NGL Energy Partners (NYSE: NGL ) presently yielding 26.42% and NuStar Energy (NYSE: NS ) with a dividend yield of 13.05% at present that may not be able to sustain the same payout in the coming months due to financing issues. ETF Impact All these have kept the MLP ETFs space depressed, each losing in the range 15% to 30% in the last one-month frame (as of December 14, 2015). Year to date, these products have lost in the range of 22% to 55%. InfraCap MLP ETF (NYSEARCA: AMZA ), Yorkville High Income MLP ETF (NYSEARCA: YMLP ) and Cushing MLP High Income Index ETN (NYSEARCA: MLPY ) were the worst hit during the last one-month frame. Original Post

4 Simple Actions To Consider After Fed Liftoff

We finally have liftoff. This week, after months of anticipation, the Federal Reserve (Fed) initiated its first rate hike in nearly a decade , raising the Fed Funds Rate by 25 basis points (bps). Why not a bigger blast off? The Fed has made it clear that rate “normalization” will happen gradually, meaning rates will likely remain below historical averages for the foreseeable future. But while it may take years to get back to a 4 to 5 percent Fed Funds rate, higher rates are on their way. The good news for investors is that just a few simple actions can help you prepare your bond and equity portfolios for this new rising rate environment . In the wake of the Fed’s decision, here are four such moves you may want to consider. 1. Consider Your Duration While longer-duration bonds can provide portfolio diversification benefits, shortening the duration of your bond portfolio can potentially help manage losses due to rising interest rates. Remember, duration is a measure of a bond’s sensitivity to interest rate changes. The longer the duration, the more a bond’s price is impacted. When interest rates change, a bond’s price will change in the opposite direction by a corresponding amount. For example, if a bond’s duration is 5 years and interest rates rise 1 percent, you can expect the bond’s price to fall by approximately 5 percent. Therefore, bonds with higher duration generally have greater price volatility and the potential for losses when rates rise . 2. Focus on Credit Instead of owning only Treasuries, you may want to focus on adding credit exposure. Credit exposure adds credit risk (the risk that the issuer won’t pay you back) to a portfolio, but it mitigates some interest rate risk. In addition, investors are compensated for taking more credit risk with higher yields, so increasing exposure to higher quality credit risk may enhance income and offset potential price declines due to rising rates. 3. Shift to Cyclical Sectors It’s important to remember that when rates rise, it’s not just bonds that are affected. Equities are affected too. Higher rates mean that borrowing money becomes more expensive, so it’s harder for businesses and consumers to finance everyday needs. As such, traditionally defensive sectors, like utilities and telecommunications, typically become increasingly vulnerable in a rising rate environment due to their existing large debt positions. At the same time, higher rates generally are a sign of an improving economy, boosting the case for adding exposure to cyclical sectors, which have tended to outperform when the economy is strong. I prefer to get cyclical exposure through two sectors: U.S. technology and U.S. financials (excluding rate-sensitive REITs). With their large cash reserves, U.S. mature tech companies are much less vulnerable to rising rates than companies in more debt-laden sectors mentioned above. In addition, tech sector revenues may increase if economic growth continues to expand and consumers and businesses spend more. Meanwhile, for some financial institutions, like banks, rising rates could mean higher profits, as net interest margins may increase. 4. Seek New Sources of Income You may also want to take a look at your dividend strategies when interest rates rise. Although traditional high dividend payers (think the utilities and telecom sectors) have performed strongly in recent years, they’ve become quite expensive by most valuation metrics. And the previously low interest rate environment paved the way for many of these defensive businesses to load up on debt to expand their operations, while continuing to pay high dividends to investors. As such, many of these companies will likely come under pressure when rates rise. In contrast, dividend growth stocks have historically demonstrated less interest rate sensitivity and may be an attractive way to maintain yield in a rising rate environment. In contrast to high dividend payers, they tend to be more reasonably valued and have more potential to sustainably grow dividends over time. So, although rates are expected to moderately increase, you can prepare your portfolio now for a rising rate environment by considering simple actions such as these. These simple steps may help to insulate your investments while also capturing new opportunities. Funds, such as the iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: FLOT ), the iShares Short Maturity Bond ETF (BATS: NEAR ) and the iShares 1-3 Year Credit Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: CSJ ), can provide credit exposure with short duration. Meanwhile, the iShares U.S. Technology ETF (NYSEARCA: IYW ), the iShares U.S. Financial Services ETF (NYSEARCA: IYG ) and the iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (NYSEARCA: DGRO ), can provide exposure to the U.S. technology sector, the U.S. financials ex-REITs sector and dividend growers, respectively. This post originally appeared on the BlackRock Blog.