Tag Archives: china

Q4 Outlook For Oil And Gas ETFs

Crude Oil The free fall in oil prices have made energy the most talked-about sector of the entire market in 2015, apart from the fact that its performance has been the worst. Year-to-date, The Energy Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLE ) has posted a loss of 20%. On the other hand, the broad-based Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 index shed just 8% and 5%, respectively, over the same period. As of now, crude prices are trading just above the key psychological level of $40-a-barrel after hitting a new 6-1/2 year low of $37.75 recently. This, despite a short spike that saw the commodity scale a year-high of $61.43 per barrel in June. (Read: 4 Ways to Short the Energy Sector with ETFs ) Oil is facing the heat on several fronts. Perhaps, the most important of them pertains to the mounting worries about China’s crude demand. In particular, the Asian giant’s currency devaluation has stoked speculation about soft economic growth in the world’s No. 2 energy consumer. What’s more, in the absence of production cuts from OPEC, the effects of booming shale supplies in North America and a stagnant European economy, not much upside is expected in oil prices in the near term. Moreover, a stronger dollar has made the greenback-priced crude more expensive for investors holding foreign currency. The Iranian nuclear framework agreement, which has the potential to release more of the commodity in the already oversupplied market, has put the final nail in the coffin. As it is, with inventories near the highest level during this time of the year in 80 years at least, crude is very well stocked. On top of that, OPEC members (like Saudi Arabia) have made it clear time and again that they are more intent on preserving market share rather than attempting to arrest the price decline through production cuts. Therefore, the commodity is likely to maintain its low trajectory throughout 2015. (Read: Still Believe in Goldman’s $20 Oil, Go Short with These ETFs ) This has forced the oil companies and associated service providers to make deep cost cuts by reducing their workforce. Oilfield services behemoths like Halliburton Co. (NYSE: HAL ), Schlumberger Ltd. (NYSE: SLB ) and Weatherford International plc (NYSE: WFT ) were the first to respond to the worsening situation, announcing substantial redundancies earlier in the year. Of late, they have been joined by integrated majors including Royal Dutch Shell plc (NYSE: RDS.A ) and Chevron Corp. (NYSE: CVX ). In the medium-to-long term, while global oil demand will be driven by China – which continues to be the main catalyst to liquids consumption growth despite the current slowdown – this will be more than offset by sluggish growth prospects exhibited by Asian and the European economies. In our view, crude prices in the next few months are likely to exhibit a sideways-to-bearish trend, mostly trading in the $40-$50 per barrel range. As North American supply remains strong and demand looks underwhelming, we are likely to experience a pressure in the price of a barrel of oil. Natural Gas Over the last few years, a quiet revolution has been reshaping the energy business in the U.S. The success of ‘shale gas’ – natural gas trapped within dense sedimentary rock formations or shale formations – has transformed domestic energy supply, with a potentially inexpensive and abundant new source of fuel for the world’s largest energy consumer. With the advent of hydraulic fracturing (or “fracking”) – a method used to extract natural gas by blasting underground rock formations with a mixture of water, sand and chemicals – shale gas production is now booming in the U.S. Coupled with sophisticated horizontal drilling equipment that can drill and extract gas from shale formations, the new technology is being hailed as a breakthrough in U.S. energy supplies, playing a key role in boosting domestic natural gas reserves. As a result, once faced with a looming deficit, natural gas is now available in abundance. Statistically speaking, the current storage level – at 3.261 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) – is up 473 Bcf (17%) from last year and is 127 Bcf (4%) above the five-year average. Expectedly, this has taken a toll on prices. Natural gas peaked at about $13.50 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) in 2008 but fell to sub-$2 level in 2012 – the lowest in a decade. Though it has recovered somewhat, at around $2.70 now, the commodity is still way off the heights reached seven years back. In fact, natural gas been trading range bound over the last couple of quarters with investors looking for direction. It has been stuck between $2.50 and $3 per MMBtu over the past 5 months. In response to continued weak natural gas prices, major U.S. producers like Chesapeake Energy Corp. (NYSE: CHK ), Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. (NYSE: COG ) and Range Resources Corp. (NYSE: RRC ) have all taken significant cost-cutting measures, including a reduction in their capital expenditure budgets for the year. With production from the major shale plays remaining strong and the commodity’s demand failing to keep pace with this supply surge, natural gas prices have been held back. Even the summer cooling demand has been of little help. What’s more, with improved drilling productivity offsetting the historic decline in rig count, and expectations of tepid heating demand with the imminent arrival of soft late-summer temperature, we do not expect gas prices to rally anytime soon. Playing the Sector Through ETFs Considering the turbulent market dynamics of the energy industry, the safer way to play the volatile yet rewarding sector is through ETFs. In particular, we would advocate tapping the energy scene by targeting the exploration and production (E&P) group. This sub-sector serves as a pretty good proxy for oil/gas price fluctuations and can act as an excellent investment medium for those who wish to take a long-term exposure within the energy sector. While all oil/gas-related stocks stand to move with fluctuating commodity prices, companies in the E&P sector tend to be the most important, as their product’s values are directly dependent on oil/gas prices. (See all Energy ETFs here ) SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production ETF (NYSEARCA: XOP ) Launched in June 19, 2006, XOP is an ETF that seeks investment results corresponding to the S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Select Industry Index. This is an equal-weighted fund consisting of 73 stocks of companies that finds and produces oil and gas, with the top holdings being HollyFrontier Corp. (NYSE: HFC ), Tesoro Corp. (NYSE: TSO ) and PBF Energy Inc. (NYSE: PBF ). The fund’s expense ratio is 0.35% and pays out a dividend yield of 1.98%. XOP has about $1,472.9 million in assets under management as of Sep 10, 2015. iShares Dow Jones US Oil & Gas Exploration & Production ETF (NYSEARCA: IEO ) This fund began in May 1, 2006 and is based on a free-float adjusted market capitalization-weighted index of 74 stocks focused on exploration and production. The top three holdings are ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP ), Phillips 66 (NYSE: PSX ) and EOG Resources Inc. (NYSE: EOG ). It charges 0.45% in expense ratio, while the yield is 1.77% as of now. IEO has managed to attract $403.5 million in assets under management till Sep 10, 2015. PowerShares Dynamic Energy Exploration and Production (NYSEARCA: PXE ) PXE, launched in Oct. 26, 2005, follows the Energy Exploration & Production Intellidex Index. Comprising of stocks of energy exploration and production companies, PXE is made up of 30 securities. Top holdings include Phillips 66, Valero Energy Corp. (NYSE: VLO ) and Marathon Petroleum Corp. (NYSE: MPC ). The fund’s expense ratio is 0.64% and the dividend yield is 2.20%, while it has got $92.9 million in assets under management as of Sep 10, 2015. Original Post

Investing In A Turbulent Market

Summary In turbulent times, investors need a plan and stick with a few basic rules. Assess macro conditions to guide investment decisions. Recognize the fact that danger and opportunities usually go hand in hand. Actively tweak winning odds to our favor as frequently as we can. It’s been two months since I left my role as a systematic global macro manager to focus on a few equity strategies I have been developing over the past few years. The timing was not great as world equities have been in a tailspin. Many blame China, the US Federal Reserve, and anemic world economic growth as the causes of the selloff. To me, they are just excuses. The real culprit of the market downturn is the investor jitters. Disciplined investors should follow some basic principles for investing in a turbulent environment. Here are some rules I follow: 1. Assess macro conditions to guide investment decisions 2. Recognize the fact that danger and opportunities usually go hand in hand 3. Actively tweak winning odds to our favor as frequently as we can. Assessing Macro Conditions to Guide Investment Decisions An old saying “rising tide lifts all boats” has found new meaning in stocks since 2009. Central banks around the world injected trillions of dollars into the world financial system. Ample money supply is undeniably one of the most important reasons for the current equity bull market. An equity investor should have done well if he recognized this simple macro factor. Therefore, accurately assessing the global macro environment is instrumental in performance. Differing opinions of economic conditions are the root cause of investor anxiety. So where are we now? China, as the world economic growth engine for the last decade, is facing some headwinds. It needs to absorb the excess from multi-decade economic expansion, rein in speculation, transition its economy from low-cost manufacturing to service and consumption, and steady investments and long-term growth to a sustainable level. Such a transition is not going to be easy and painless at all times. As someone who grew up in China before the reform began in earnest, I often found investors not giving enough credit to the success of China’s economic policies that has elevated a poor country with food rationing to a world economic powerhouse. Over the past 20 years, there were many calls of hard landing in China by market “gurus,” but none materialized. There is a certain arrogance to those calls. Is China facing hard landing again this time? I doubt that! Just as we like to say in the West “quiet water runs deep,” people in the East like to say, “narrow water runs far.” Publicizing policies has never been a strong suit of running things in China. Nevertheless, I believe China has economic means and a deep bench of highly skilled policy makers to navigate choppy waters. Everyone can make mistakes, but so far, there is no indication that China won’t be successful again in turning the ship around this time. In my view, they are proactively using policy tools to minimize the negative impact in a changing world. Investors are fickle. Before the two-day US Federal Reserve policy meeting last week, futures market implied a 30% chance of an interest rate hike in September. The market was right, the Federal Reserve did not hike interest rates. At the same time, investors reacted poorly to the decision as the US dollar sold off and interest rates dropped immediately after the announcement. Was the decision a surprise or was it expected? Investors cannot make up their mind. In my view, the timing of the Fed rate hike is not that important. There is no urgency to a rate hike in the absence of inflationary pressures. Nevertheless, barring significant economic deterioration, we will get a rate hike in December. Otherwise, Chairman Yellen’s credibility will be at risk as she previously indicated a hike this year. Given that outlook, I suspect both US dollar and interest rates will trade higher in the next two months. Moreover, according to some studies, a 25 basis points hike will only roughly translate into a 0.1% decline in GDP growth. There is simply no reason to be fixated on that. Accurate macro assessments can not only help us achieve long-term profitability, but also guide our short-term trading. A number of recent selloffs in global equity markets were in sympathy to selloffs in the Chinese equity market. Given the Chinese National Day is coming on October 1, an imminent meltdown in China is almost impossible. Therefore, any significant selloff could create short-term buying opportunities. Recognize the Fact that Danger and Opportunities Usually Go Hand in Hand Novice investors tend to chase markets and hang on to losers too long. It is much better to pick up quality names in a down market when everyone else is selling. In addition, losers tend to go down less than quality names precisely because some investors cannot psychologically part with losers, and instead sell stocks with gains to raise funds during a market downturn. Do not be afraid of selling losers! Better yet, pick up some winners in a down drift by selling losers for harvesting capital losses to reduce realized capital gains. Furthermore, global economic conditions are getting better, not worse – Europe is finally getting ahead of its sovereign debt crisis, the US economic growth is intact, China is working out short-term pains for long-term gains, the weak energy price should largely be stimulative to growth, and global monetary policies will remain accommodative for the foreseeable future. Therefore, there are opportunities to be had in the current passing danger. Actively Tweak Winning Odds to Our Favor as Frequently as We Can I consider myself as a long-term investor as I look to profit from fundamental research and typically hold stocks for an extended period of time. Fundamentals never play out overnight. However, I question the effectiveness of the “buy, hold and do nothing” strategy in the current market environment where information is so readily available through the internet, media, and social networks, affecting investor psyche constantly, and generating market volatility. Because of daily marks to market, professional hedge fund managers cannot sit idle and do nothing during market turbulence. I would argue that individual investors who look after their own portfolios should also be actively looking for ways to increase winning odds by using available tools such as listed equity options. Here are a few suggestions: a. If one wants to buy 100 shares of stock XYZ, he can sell one contract of put option at a strike price lower than or close to the current stock price. At maturity, if the stock price is higher than the strike price, one gets to keep the put option premium; otherwise, one acquires the stock at a price lower than the current price. b. When a stock in a portfolio has appreciated significantly, one should consider selling some covered calls to lighten up the load. At maturity, if the stock price is higher than the strike price, one effectively sells the stock at the strike price plus option premium; otherwise, he gets to keep the option premium. c. In fact, instead of following the red-hot “dividend investing” strategy, a) and b) can be viewed as a “create-your-own-dividend” strategy on any stock. With weekly options, one can aim to generate 10% annual yield by selling options. That’s 10% income and/or cushion one doesn’t have if he does nothing. d. During a market downturn, instead of buying quality stocks outright, one can buy calendar spreads, i.e. buying long-term calls against selling short-term calls at appropriate strikes to further reduce risk. e. Shorting high beta, richly valued stocks can be a more effective hedge than shorting index futures in the portfolio. There are many strategies that can be deployed day in and day out to generate consistent returns or opportunistically in turbulence when everything is out of whack. But one should always have a plan to deal with different market conditions and follow a set of rules so that he is not caught off guard. Let me know what you think. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) 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.

VWO: A Very Solid Emerging Market ETF, If You Don’t Mind China

Summary VWO offers some solid diversification among the companies and a low expense ratio. When investors look at diversification based on geography, the diversification is not as favorable. I’d like to see a lower allocation to China and stronger allocations to smaller emerging markets. When investors look at the correlation between VWO and major domestic indexes on a daily basis, the correlation looks very high. Over the long term, the high correlation breaks and there is a dramatic difference in returns even over periods of a few years. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. One of the funds that I’m considering is the Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: VWO ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. Expense Ratio The expense ratio on VWO is only .15%. Nice work Vanguard, this is another low cost index fund for effective diversification. Largest Holdings (click to enlarge) The holdings for VWO are fairly diversified with only 2 companies receiving an allocation higher than 2.1%. The one concern I have is that it seems like “China” keeps coming up in the top holdings. I checked the allocation by country to determine how large that exposure would be. Allocation by Country The allocation to China was 27.1% of the market. Since I’ve been a bear on China, I’m not really big on this allocation. I wasn’t bearish on China until their domestic equity market doubled. While the government in China is working hard to protect their equity valuations, I’d rather see the economy growing rapidly from people working and building both infrastructure and exports. I would prefer an emerging market portfolio with an international diversification that was closer to equal weights. It wouldn’t need to actually be equal weight, but less skewed than the current portfolio. Building the Portfolio This hypothetical portfolio has a moderately aggressive allocation for the middle aged investor. Only 25% of the total portfolio value is placed in bonds and a fifth of that bond allocation is given to high yield bonds. If the investor wants to treat an investment in an mREIT index as an investment in the underlying bonds that the individual mREITs hold, then the total bond allocation would be 35%. Given how substantially mREITs can deviate from book value, I’d rather consider the allocation as an equity position designed to create a very high yield. This portfolio is probably taking on more risk than would be appropriate for many retiring investors since a major recession could still hit this pretty hard. If the investor wanted to modify the portfolio to be more appropriate for retirement, the first place to start would be increasing the bond exposure at the cost of equity. However, the diversification within the portfolio is fairly solid. Long term treasuries work nicely with major market indexes and I’ve designed this hypothetical portfolio without putting in the allocation I normally would for equity REITs. An allocation is created for the mortgage REITs, which can offer some fairly nice diversification relative to the rest of the portfolio and they are a major source of yield in this hypothetical portfolio. The portfolio assumes frequent rebalancing which would be a problem for short term trading outside of tax advantaged accounts unless the investor was going to rebalance by adding to their positions on a regular basis and allocating the majority of the capital towards whichever portions of the portfolio had been underperforming recently. Because a substantial portion of the yield from this portfolio comes from REITs and interest, I would favor this portfolio as a tax exempt strategy even if the investor was frequently rebalancing by adding new capital. The portfolio allocations can be seen below along with the dividend yields from each investment. Name Ticker Portfolio Weight Yield SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY 35.00% 2.06% Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF XLY 10.00% 1.36% First Trust Consumer Staples AlphaDEX ETF FXG 10.00% 1.60% Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF VWO 5.00% 3.17% First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX ETF FXU 5.00% 3.77% SPDR Barclays Capital Short Term High Yield Bond ETF SJNK 5.00% 5.45% PowerShares 1-30 Laddered Treasury Portfolio ETF PLW 20.00% 2.22% iShares Mortgage Real Estate Capped ETF REM 10.00% 14.45%   Portfolio 100.00% 3.53% The next chart shows the annualized volatility and beta of the portfolio since April of 2012. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio Using SJNK offers investors better yields from using short term exposure to credit sensitive debt. The yield on this is fairly nice and due to the short duration of the securities the volatility isn’t too bad. PLW on the other hand does have some material volatility, but a negative correlation to other investments allows it to reduce the total risk of the portfolio. FXG is used to make the portfolio overweight on consumer staples with a goal of providing more stability to the equity portion of the portfolio. FXU is used to create a small utility allocation for the portfolio to give it a higher dividend yield and help it produce more income. I find the utility sector often has some desirable risk characteristics that make it worth at least considering for an overweight representation in a portfolio. VWO is simply there to provide more diversification from being an international equity portfolio. While giving investors exposure to emerging markets, it is also offering a very solid dividend yield that enhances the overall income level from the portfolio. XLY offers investors higher expected returns in a solid economy at the cost of higher risk. Using it as more than a small weighting would result in too much risk for the portfolio, but as a small weighting the diversification it offers relative to the core holding of SPY is eliminating most of the additional risk. REM is primarily there to offer a substantial increase in the dividend yield which is otherwise not very strong. The mREIT sector can be subject to some pretty harsh movements and dividends from mREITs should not be the core source of income for an investor. However, they can be used to enhance the level of dividend income while investors wait for their other equity investments to increase dividends over the coming decades. If you want a really quick version to refer back to, I put together the following chart that really simplifies the role of each investment: Name Ticker Role in Portfolio SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY Core of Portfolio Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF XLY Enhance Expected Returned First Trust Consumer Staples AlphaDEX ETF FXG Reduce Beta of Portfolio Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF VWO Exposure to Foreign Markets First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX ETF FXU Enhance Dividends, Lower Portfolio Risk SPDR Barclays Capital Short Term High Yield Bond ETF SJNK Low Volatility with over 5% Yield PowerShares 1-30 Laddered Treasury Portfolio ETF PLW Negative Beta Reduces Portfolio Risk iShares Mortgage Real Estate Capped ETF REM Enhance Current Income Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. Despite TLT being fairly volatile and tying SPY for the second highest volatility in the portfolio, it actually produces a negative risk contribution because it has a negative correlation with most of the portfolio. It is important to recognize that the “risk” on an investment needs to be considered in the context of the entire portfolio. To make it easier to analyze how risky each holding would be in the context of the portfolio, I have most of these holdings weighted at a simple 10%. Because of TLT’s heavy negative correlation, it receives a weighting of 20% and as the core of the portfolio SPY was weighted as 50%. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio. Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. (click to enlarge) Conclusion VWO is benefiting a great deal from having a fairly low correlation with several of the other assets in the portfolio. The highest correlation is with the S&P 500, but even the high level of correlation established here is a function of the very short term measurements being used to measure the correlation. When returns are measured over a longer time period the correlation decreases significantly. Over the sample period the S&P 500 is up by 52% and VWO is down by 12%. Simply put, short term correlations are resulting in significantly overstated correlations for VWO. In the same manner, I think the benefits of diversifying VWO with a long term treasury ETF are understated. When investors are in a period of panic, emerging markets will tend to go down while the risk free securities will be bid higher. If investors want to use a fund like VWO to grab some international diversification (with some heavy exposure to China), I would really for treasuries to be over-weight in the portfolio. The difficulty here is that long term rates are already fairly low so the maximum level of gains on a treasury allocation is limited. All around this is a good ETF, but I would prefer international options with less exposure to China. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.