Tag Archives: author

Differentiating Between Emerging Markets For Better Returns

Summary Emerging markets are often grouped together, but it’s better not to. Changes in monetary policies may be upon us and some countries should do better than others. Countries with sizable deficits are more likely to experience problems and should be avoided. The year 2015 has been a forgettable one so far for many emerging markets. For instance, the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ET F (NYSEARCA: EEM ), which is the leading ETF for emerging markets is down by 11 percent this year when it comes to liquidity. By comparison, stock markets in countries such as the U.S. and Japan are at record levels. Some people may therefore feel that emerging markets are more of a bargain and have more upside still left in them. A long position in emerging markets is an option worth exploring from this standpoint. On the other hand, some may argue that the worst is not over for emerging markets and there is still some downside left. Avoiding long positions or even initiating short positions in emerging markets is the way to go if one agrees with this viewpoint. A third option is to break down emerging markets into smaller groups and pick the one that is most likely to do well in the future. The group that is most likely to underperform is to be avoided or even shorted as an alternative or as an addition to long positions in emerging markets. How to differentiate between emerging markets While they may be grouped together under a single name, the fact remains that emerging markets are more often than not very different from one another. Some countries have little if anything in common with other emerging markets despite all of them being referred to as emerging markets. It may therefore be a good idea to think of emerging markets not as a single group, but rather as several distinct groups. There are many ways one could divide emerging markets into separate groups. For instance, some may be democratic countries, while others are more autocratic. Some rely heavily on the export of raw commodities, while others depend on the export of manufactured goods. There are lots of options if one wants to break down emerging markets into smaller groups. However, one way that should be given extra consideration is to divide countries based on whether they run a surplus or a deficit. More specifically, does a country run a current account surplus or a current account deficit and why should it matter? Why it matters whether countries have a current account surplus or deficit Countries with significant current account deficits tend to borrow heavily relative to the size of their economy, usually from foreign sources of capital. For many years, this wasn’t such a big issue due to the prevalence of very low interest rates in the U.S. This forced many to look at alternative places with higher yields. Many emerging markets offered such a destination. However, the Federal Reserve is widely expected to begin raising interest rates, which will make it more expensive to borrow. Monetary conditions have actually already tightened even though the policy of zero interest rates is technically not yet over. Capital outflows have picked up in a number of emerging markets as foreign capital is anticipating the next move by the Fed. In this environment where borrowing is increasingly problematic, countries with a current account surplus should be more resilient to higher interest rates than those with chronic deficits. The latter will have to make more adjustments to the existing structure of their economy than the former and this may cause a divergence in how countries perform going forward. Deficit countries do have a number of options when it comes to dealing with higher interest rates. For instance, they could try to reduce their imports and the need for hard currency to pay for these imports. Large reserves can also provide relief. Even so, surplus countries should have a much easier time as their transition period should be shorter and less complicated than those that have to fix or at least try to reduce their deficits. A major advantage for the former in comparison to the latter. Emerging markets ranked by surplus or deficit The table below lists 15 of the most prominent emerging markets, starting from those with the largest current account surplus to those with the biggest deficit. These countries combined make up 96.33 percent of EEM. Based on these numbers, Taiwan should have the least amount of trouble dealing with the Fed raising interest rates. South Africa is the one that looks the most vulnerable as of right now. Mexico may have a bigger deficit, but it’s also a bigger economy. Country GDP Current account surplus/deficit (USD) Taiwan 489B 19.67B South Korea 1410B 10.61B Russia 1861B 5.4B Thailand 374B 1.56B Malaysia 327B 1.21B Philippines 285B 0.95B China 10360B 0.63B Turkey 800B 0.09B Poland 548B -0.96B Chile 258B -2.59B Indonesia 889B -4.01B Brazil 2346B -4.17B India 2067B -6.2B South Africa 350B -8.68B Mexico 1283B -8.86B How to position yourself with regard to emerging markets One drawback of an ETF such as EEM is that it can get dragged down by a few bad apples. Some countries may do very well within the basket, but their performance can get negated by other countries that are doing poorly. A possible solution to this issue would be to take out the bad apples and leave only the good ones. If someone agrees with the thesis that emerging markets with big deficits will have a harder time with higher interest rates, then it’s best to avoid these countries and stick with the ones that run sizable surpluses. The latter are much less likely to experience any setbacks resulting from changes in global monetary policies. As such, they’re more likely to outperform resulting in better returns.

Why I Sold Pimco High Income Fund

Summary PHK has managed to attract a premium near its historical average before its dividend cut. Although another cut is unlikely in the near term, the current premium is overly generous. Historical price trends have created clear buy and sell signals which indicate PHK is too pricey at its current premium. However, if PHK can continue its recent and opaque increase to NAV, a new higher price target may be in order. Pimco High Income Fund (NYSE: PHK ) consistently paid out the same dividend for over a decade, until a 15% cut that management insisted was reflective of the secular stagnation argument for lower global growth that has come to quietly dominate many economists’ thinking. In management’s words: “Generally, the changes in distributions for PHK, PCI and PDI take into account many factors, including but not limited to, each such Fund’s current and expected earnings, the overall market environment and Pimco’s current economic and market outlook.” The market’s response was unsurprising – the fund reached a 52-week low of 6.87 and saw its premium to NAV – once the highest in the CEF universe – fall to zero. This was a tremendous buying opportunity and I heavily added to my position before encouraging investors to not worry about a dividend cut anytime soon . A dividend cut remains unlikely. Since October, the new payout has remained steady. In November, NII covered distributions by 92%, and NII has remained just a hair under 10 cents since April, when NII fell precipitously to about 7.2 cents per share, as it also was in March and January. 92% is still not full coverage, leaving some investors concerned about PHK’s future payouts. However, PHK is preparing for an interest rate hike and the ability to buy new issues at new, higher rates. Prepping for the Rate Hike The duration of PHK’s holdings has fallen to 4.7 years as of the end of September, down from over five years earlier in 2015. The fund has been cutting the duration of its holdings for a long time in anticipation of raising rates, which actually hurt performance in 2014, as management acknowledged in its semi-annual report from September 2014 – and which management attempted to rectify by buying swaps: “Despite the Fund’s short exposure to the long end part of the curve, which has hurt the performance, overall increased duration exposure with interest rate swaps contributed positively to performance as Treasury rates declined.” Now the fund seems to be doubling down on its expectation of an interest rate hike. If Yellen does raise rates in December or early 2016 and high yield issues offer higher yields as a result, PHK will be able to churn into higher yielding debts and fully cover dividends more easily. (For more on how higher rates can be good for PHK, please see my two earlier pieces on the subject: Part 1 and Part 2 ). A Safe Payout – So Why Sell? The market seems to have accepted that PHK’s new distribution is about as safe as the old one, and may last just as long before being cut again. Yet I sold the fund because the market has overpriced the value of PHK’s new payout. As of November 25th, the fund’s premium over NAV was 24.65%, almost at the average premium the fund enjoyed over its lifetime before the dividend cut: In other words, the market is roughly pricing the fund’s ability to fund future payouts at the same premium as it has priced that fund’s future payouts before the dividend cut. At best, the market is punishing PHK with a premium that is 5% below its historical average. Is that sufficient for a 15% dividend cut? The Technical Concern There also is a technical argument to be made against buying PHK now – but keeping it on a watch list in the future. Since 2010, when the fund’s premium to NAV remained sustainably high, PHK has followed a steady pattern of slow appreciation to a peak, followed by a decline, and then a steady appreciation again: (click to enlarge) This pattern held for most of 2014 until the high yield market began to see serious risk aversion and a tightening of credit spreads at the end of the year, partly due to the strong dollar, partly due to rising oil prices, partly due to fears of collapsing liquidity, and partly due to fears of higher defaults resulting in an increase in interest rates: (click to enlarge) While I believe short-term speculation on asset prices is almost always a losing game, in the case of PHK the return to form seems to be congealing, and since the dividend cut the slow appreciation followed by a steep drop-off seems to be coming back to the name: (click to enlarge) However, we are currently not seeing a steep sell off as we did in the middle of September and earlier in November. This trendline, its historical performance, and its new payouts have all given me clear price targets to buy, sell and hold this stock which are currently telling me to wait until returning to the name. A Silver Lining? There is hope for PHK, however, which may help it close the gap on its current premium. In the last few days the fund’s NAV has shot up to its highest point since its dividend cut and the first sign of an increase in NAV since the beginning of 2015: (click to enlarge) It’s unclear how the NAV for PHK shot up so quickly in such a short period of time. Because bonds, especially high-yield bonds, are particularly illiquid, this could be the result of a new mark-to-market for a holding that was temporarily mis-priced due to thin trading. Alternatively, it could be a result of a cumulative appreciation of the high yield market as the fears of earlier in the year briefly fade. A third option is that the fund made a new purchase that was particularly undervalued by the market. In any case, the fund’s NAV shot up after the spread between high yield and U.S. Treasuries widened, giving more opportunities for fund managers to find high-yielding assets to fund distributions: (click to enlarge) This could mean PHK will find more ways to increase its NAV and close that gap between its current premium and the premium that it deserves after a dividend cut. I will continue to watch PHK closely to see if its ability to increase NAV is sustainable, or if the market decides to under-price the fund again. Until then, I’m waiting on the sidelines.

SPHB: Is This The Right Time To Go Risk On?

Summary One highly contrarian trade right now is to go high beta. Beta, or β, displays the level of volatility in the price of an asset compared to a certain benchmark. There are several of these ETFs with the PowerShares S&P 500 High Beta Portfolio being the sole high beta ETF that is focused on U.S. stocks. The PowerShares S&P 500 High Beta Portfolio appears quite attractively valued compared to the Russel Mid Cap Index. One highly contrarian trade right now is to go high beta. This theme appears to be unmarketable with ETFs built around it having little to no assets under management. The reverse theme: low volatility or low beta is extremely popular. This tells me it’s probably a good place to look for value and there is no easier way than just buy exposure through an ETF. There are several of these ETFs wit h the PowerShares S&P 500 High Beta Portfolio (NYSEARCA: SPHB ) being the sole high beta ETF that is focused on U.S. stocks. SPHB data by YCharts What is high beta? Beta, or β, displays the level of volatility in the price of an asset as compared to a certain benchmark. The volatility of the benchmark is equal to 1. A more volatile asset has a beta above 1 and a less volatile asset has a price below 1. Whether the price moved up or down doesn’t matter much, it’s movement in either direction that is measured. Bet’s are based on past price data so by definition it’s a form of investing while looking in the rear view mirror as Buffett likes to call it. Portfolio High beta stocks are the race cars of the indexes. These issues can really move and while they will leave your more pedestrian holdings far behind them when going on a run they also are the ones that can crash and burn at every turn. Just take a look at the hair-raising top 10 holdings of this ETF: Freeport-McMoran (NYSE: FCX ) Cameron International Corp (NYSE: CAM ) Marathon Oil Corp (NYSE: MRO ) Newfield Exploration Corp (NYSE: NFX ) Avago Technologies (NASDAQ: AVGO ) First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR ) Qorvo (NASDAQ: QRVO ) Mallinckrodt (NYSE: MNK ) Harman International Industries (NYSE: HAR ) Vertex Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: VRTX ) Price moves lower tend to happen fast and I suspect that is why there are lots of beaten down stocks in this ETF. The energy sector that’s getting crushed in the multi-year bear market is heavily represented taking up 20% of the ETF’s allocation. A stock’s weighting is based on its beta so higher beta stocks are weighted more heavily. The ETF is rebalanced on the third Friday of February, May, August and November. There also is a minimum required volume which excludes really thinly traded issues. Valuation From a valuation perspective it’s quite an attractive basket of stocks, scoring well on a forward earnings basis, price/book ratio, price/sales ratio and especially on a price/cash flow basis. Even on yield it beats the Russel Midcap which is somewhat surprising. PowerShares S&P 500 High Beta Portfolio Russell Midcap Price/Forward Earnings 16.47 18.22 Price/Book 1.37 2.09 Price/Sales 1.2 1.34 Price/Cash Flow 5.14 9.09 Dividend Yield % 2.78 2.05 Data: Morningstar Expenses The ETF’s expense ratio is about 0.25%. Not particularly high and it compares favorably with many mutual funds and thematic ETFs bu t if you are planning to hold on for decades it will not be negligible. Why is this interesting? I started looking at this ETF myself because Murray Stahl’s recent market commentary , which dealt with high beta ETFs made a lot of sense to me. His thesis basically being market flow toward low volatility strategies help to further stabilize their prices and so a virtuous cycle has been born. With high-volatility stocks, the exact opposite virtuous cycle leads to their undervaluation. As a bottom-up stock picker I noticed many of the companies I analyze lately have a lot of debt or have some kind of volatile earnings profile due to cyclicality or something else. I had no idea why, but the explanation of volatility is out of favor makes sense to me. This means two things: 1) High-volatility stocks are fertile ground to search for undervalued securities and 2) it may be possible to benefit from this observation simply by buying an ETF that is relatively attractively valued. If you compare the PowerShares S&P 500 High Beta Portfolio to the Russell Midcap it is clear you are buying a lot more cash flow for your dollar. The downside obviously being that you will need an iron stomach to sit out the ride.