Tag Archives: author

Bill Ackman Is Nothing More Than A Big Bet Gambler

Taking concentrated fundamental bets is no different than playing craps in Vegas. By now, you’ve heard about Bill Ackman and his white whale, Valeant Pharmaceuticals (NYSE: VRX ). In 2015, Valeant plummeted and Ackman’s fund was down 20.5%. His misfortune continued into 2016, with his fund losing another 26% year to date after Valeant’s latest drop. Valeant’s share price was cut in half that day, and the troubled manager lost a cool billion on his position. Talk about a bad day at the office… A billionaire like Ackman could really use a lesson in risk control from a market technician. His hubris and ego has literally cost him billions. He’s failed to execute the most important rule for successful investing and trading – cutting losses. You would think he learned something from his first rodeo when he went “all-in” on a failing company. Ackman’s first hedge fund, Gotham Partners, doubled down on a bad bet and blew up as well. But remarkably, he was able to convince more people to come ride the pain train again in his new fund, Pershing Square. The importance of risk management and trade management in the market cannot be overstated. That’s why at Macro Ops , we use both fundamentals and technicals in our process. Stock picking and conviction is not enough to succeed in this game. In pure fundamental investing, it’s believed that the lower the price (all else equal), the more attractive the trade. This is because price is further away from the investor’s best guess (and yes, it’s nothing more than a guess) of “fair value”. This is not the case in technical investing. Technicians approach the market in the opposite fashion. They would tell you that price below your cost is a signal to exit. You’re wrong, and receiving negative feedback from the market. The attractiveness of the trade decreases as the price moves against you. We side with the technicians on this one. Arrogant fundamentalists like Ackman never admit defeat and never cut losses. Instead, they buy more because they believe they’re buying at a “better” price. At the beginning of 2016, Ackman doubled down and bought more Valeant shares despite piss poor performance in 2015. That’s called doubling down on stupid… The stock just continued to fall lower after his purchase. As you can see below, from its high, Valeant has lost over 87% of its value. Click to enlarge This approach of averaging down and holding onto losing bets is nothing more than gambling. Investing icons such as Ackman like to make big calls. If they’re right, assets under management swell. If they’re wrong, the fund blows out. Which is exactly what happened with Ackman’s first fund, Gotham Partners. This approach to markets has zero risk control. It’s the “pennies in front of a steamroller” trade in different form. No one can continuously outsmart the market, even with a Harvard MBA. If you don’t cut your losses, the market will do it for you with a margin call. And to make matters worse, your precious investors will redeem their assets once they see a big loss on their statements. This may come as a shocker, but the most important thing in trading has little to do with whether you find an undervalued stock that rises in price. Don’t take this the wrong way, trade selection has value, but it’s vastly subordinate to the path the underlying investment takes after you enter it, including how you manage that path. In other words, trade and risk management are a priority over everything else. A lot of people get confused when we talk about the “path of the underlying”, but the concept is simple. Take a look at the chart below: Click to enlarge The three lines represent three different “paths” that could play out after you buy a stock. The blue line trends straight to the target with little drawdown. The yellow line gives you a lot of heat, but eventually comes back and hits your target. And the purple line rewards you right off the bat, but then takes a turn for the worse. The purple line is Ackman’s Valeant. It’s impossible to predict this path with any amount of accuracy. You can try, but attempting to do so is akin to guessing what next Saturday’s Powerball numbers will be. You have zero control over whether people will buy your stock after you. You have zero control over what management will do in a company you don’t even operate. You have zero control over what the stock price does at all. But you DO have control over when you decide to hop on or off the path. At the end of the day, what shows up on your account statements are your entries and exits. Not your 80-page thesis that you touted to your Ivy League colleagues. The cold, hard profits and losses created by your buying and selling are the only thing that matter. Take any of your favorite performance metrics: Sharpe ratio, gain-to-pain ratio, Sortino ratio, and Calmar ratio. They all look at your equity curve, not your research. Your equity curve is what graphs your trading account’s performance. So ultimately, how you manage risk is what moves these numbers up or down. Your returns over your drawdowns is what matters the most, not whether you ended up being right on a thesis. This is why trade and risk management are far more important than investment selection for longevity and performance in the markets. To better explain this concept, let’s go back to the path diagram: Click to enlarge Pictured are three different scenarios, all of which you were “right” about at some point during the trade. Scenario one is the blue line. The blue line is the easiest path to stomach. It has little drawdown and slowly trends upward towards your valuation target. In raging bull markets, like we had since 2009, a lot of hotshot investors saw their picks trade in this fashion. They touted their “genius” and “insight”, which the investing public bought into, causing those managers’ AUM to soar. Scenario two is the yellow line. This is where things become tougher. Yes, your target was eventually hit, but look at the drawdown you had to suffer through to get there. Could you realistically stomach paper losses for the first year or so you were in the trade? How much doubt would you have? Also, holding this will put a dent in your performance metrics. Holding onto any type of drawdown will. Guys like Ackman will typically hold the yellow line, or even double down on the yellow line. This may work great for a while, until a purple line pops into your life… which can happen even if you’re a seasoned billionaire. Scenario three is the purple line – the most painful of them all. You bought the stock and were immediately rewarded. But it didn’t quite hit your valuation target. You were hoping for more from your little darling. Then, unforeseen information comes out and the stock starts to take a turn for the worse. But the initial run-up made you confident that the stock is a good company and that it’ll “come back.” Yet, as time passes, the stock drops, and you become more and more wrong. The anxiety and pain is now at level 11 out of 10. You aren’t sleeping at night. You’re pulling your hair out and questioning whether you had any investing skill in the first place. The problem is you never exit and control risk, because you believe in your own story over the market. The purple path is what finally blows out the arrogant who refuse to respect price. Holding onto a purple path is a career ender. It involves PERMANENT capital loss. And permanent loss in equities happens a lot more than you would think. You just never hear about the losers. Technicians wouldn’t stay on the purple path. They would react to the adverse price action and protect their profits. Or at least, exit that trade for a small loss. If stocks were illiquid like private investments, you would be stuck on the “path” and all the anxiety and negative emotions that come with it. But lucky for us, they aren’t! You don’t need to suffer through a purple path if you have appropriate trade and risk management. Fundamentalists can take a page from the technician’s handbook and have their entry and exit rules determined before they enter a trade. With rules in place, you can recover when you’re wrong and limit your account drawdowns to something that’s not career-ending. If you don’t control the path, the path will control you. 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.

BlackRock Seeks To Ride The Gold ETF Rally

Sluggish growth in China since the beginning of the year, the oil market turbulence and concerns over global growth slowdown have lifted the demand for safe-haven assets like gold. The weakness in the global financial markets has helped the precious metal to recover its sheen in 2016. Gold has gained more than 16% year to date. The jump in gold prices was also supported by plunging interest rates on a global scale. With the Fed not expected to raise interest rates in the near term, the rally is expected to continue. Given the tailwinds, it’s not surprising that BlackRock (NYSE: BLK ) has chosen to increase its stake in gold. But what’s surprising is that to do so, it has opted for a competitor’s ETF, the SPDR Gold Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: GLD ), instead of its own product, the iShares Gold Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: IAU ). As per the SEC filing , BlackRock has increased its holding in GLD to 13%, worth almost $4 billion. This is a massive increase from a 5% stake disclosed in a regulatory filing last month. GLD is the largest and most popular ETF in the gold space, with AUM of $31.3 billion and average daily volume of about 8.1 million shares. The fund reflects the performance of the price of gold bullion. Its expense ratio comes in at 0.40%. The fund currently has a Zacks ETF Rank #3 (Hold) with a Medium risk outlook. In comparison, IAU has AUM of $7.7 billion and trades in solid volume of more than 7.5 million shares a day, on average. The ETF charges 25 bps in annual fees. Like GLD, this ETF offers exposure to the day-to-day movement of the price of gold bullion and carries a Zacks ETF Rank #3 (Hold) with a Medium risk outlook. BlackRock’s gold ETF made headlines earlier this month when it had to temporarily suspend creations. As per a Reuters report, it sold $296 million in shares of the exchange-traded fund without properly registering them with the SEC. After recognizing the slip, BlackRock stopped selling new shares of the fund. Though this is not the first time an asset manager has invested in a competitor’s product and included it in the portfolio, BlackRock’s choice of increasing its holding in GLD emphasizes the craze for gold in the market. While IAU has a lower expense ratio as compared to GLD, GLD trades in much higher volumes, keeping the bid/ask spread low, and has a much larger asset base. Original Post

Your Strategy Will Sometimes Lag, And That’s OK

By Roger Nusbaum, AdvisorShares ETF Strategist Barron’s featured an ETF Roundtable that focused on smart beta funds . The actual discussion wasn’t all that interesting, but there was an important general point made about investment strategies. Gray: Value investing is driven in part by behavioral biases-otherwise, why wouldn’t everyone just be Warren Buffett and buy cheap stocks and hold them? They don’t because if you hold concentrated, cheap-stock portfolios, there will be multiple years when you’ll get your face ripped off. You need clients that understand how true active strategies work over the long term. Indeed, the cheapest U.S. stocks have trailed more expensive growth stocks for nine years now. Whistler: The challenge with strategic beta, or any factor-based investment, is that they can underperform a traditional cap-weighted index for quite a long period-two, three, even five years. For purposes of this blog post, value investing is merely an example. There are plenty of valid strategies that could replace value in the excerpt. The passage is important, because it accepts as an inevitability that any given strategy will have periods where it lags. Value has lagged for the entire bull market until this year, according to another Barron’s article from this weekend, but there is no sentiment that somehow value is not a valid investment strategy. Value or growth, buy and hold no matter what, indexing or passive and so on and on are all capable of getting the job done. Underperformance for a couple of years, although completely normal, potentially breeds impatience, which can lead to chasing the performance of what just did well in the expectation that it will continue to do well. In simplistic terms, something that just outperformed last year has a good chance of underperforming this year. The person who perpetually chases last year’s winner has a high likelihood of always lagging, which does not have to be ruinous, but does make things harder over the long term in terms of keeping pace with the projection of “the number.” My preference is to maintain exposure to various market segments: small cap/large cap, growth/value, foreign/domestic, high dividend/no or low dividend and so on. And like any approach out there, there are times where my preference outperforms and times where it lags. More important than returns are savings rates and the avoidance of self-destructive investment behaviors. At a high level, everyone knows they need to save money, but doing it is the hard part. People who save 10%, 15% or more are making things easier for their future selves and are acting on the thing they have far more control over – saving money, versus the whims of the capital markets. Chasing previous top performers is just one of countless behavioral things that people do to themselves. My hope in revisiting these building blocks, especially when others in the field say essentially the same thing, is that hopefully, more market participants will come to realize that how they are doing in 2016 simply won’t matter in the long run. As I often mention in this context, “Without looking, how’d you do in the first quarter of 2012?” The only way someone is likely to know is if something catastrophic happened to their portfolio. 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. Additional disclosure: To the extent that this content includes references to securities, those references do not constitute an offer or solicitation to buy, sell or hold such securities. AdvisorShares is a sponsor of actively managed exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and holds positions in all of its ETFs. This document should not be considered investment advice, and the information contain within should not be relied upon in assessing whether or not to invest in any products mentioned. Investment in securities carries a high degree of risk, which may result in investors losing all of their invested capital. Please keep in mind that a company’s past financial performance, including the performance of its share price, does not guarantee future results. To learn more about the risks with actively managed ETFs, visit our website AdvisorShares.com .