Tag Archives: etfs

High Yield Bond And Healthcare: 2 ETFs To Watch On Outsized Volume

In the last trading session, the U.S. stocks rose on better-than-expected results in the financial sector and the fading prospect of interest rates hike. Among the top ETFs, investors saw the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) gain 1.5% while the SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF (NYSEARCA: DIA ) rise 1.3% and the PowerShares QQQ Trust ETF (NASDAQ: QQQ ) move higher by 1.6% on the day. Two more specialized ETFs are worth noting as both saw trading volume that was far outside of normal. In fact, both these funds experienced volume levels that were more than double their average for the most recent trading session. This could make these ETFs ones to watch out for in the days ahead to see if this trend of extra-interest continues: Market Vectors International High Yield Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: IHY ) : Volume 5.73 times average This international high yield bond ETF was in focus yesterday as around 248,000 shares moved hands compared with an average of roughly 47,000 shares a day. We also saw some price movement as IHY lost 0.6% in the last session. The big move was largely the result of investors’ drive for higher yield amid ultra-low interest rates and delayed rate hike speculation. In the past one-month period, IHY was up 0.2%. This healthcare ETF was under the microscope yesterday as more than 542,000 shares moved hands. This compares with an average trading day of around 157,000 shares and came as IHF gained 0.5% in the session. The movement can largely be blamed on the earnings release of UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH ) that can have a big impact on the healthcare stocks like what we find in this ETF portfolio. IHF was down 6.1% in the past one month and currently has a Zacks ETF Rank of 1 or ‘Strong Buy’ rating with a Medium risk outlook. Link to the original post on Zacks.com Share this article with a colleague

Index ETF Investors Are Vulnerable To A Return To Rational Pricing

Recent financial research suggests that inclusion of a corporate share in an index ETF adds to its market value. As index ETF investor participation grows, overpricing apparently becomes more pronounced. As ETF participation has become a greater share of the investment universe, these effects have apparently become more important. As a result index ETFs may now be both less diversified and overvalued. A return of shares included by ETFs to their fundamental, rationally determined, values would adversely impact an index ETF investment. The effect of the new valuations on index ETF decision-making would be perverse, leading to further investor losses. According to much recent financial research, the market’s focus on index ETFs [such as the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ), the iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: IVV ) and the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (NYSEARCA: VTI )] has led to overpricing of many of the common shares included in the important indexes, accompanied by underpricing of companies excluded by the indexes, among other pricing anomalies. This mispricing presents a hazard to investors. The only existing investor defense against a return of these overpriced stocks to their rational value is to buy underpriced stocks outside the index ETF with properties similar to the overpriced stocks inside the ETF. How can the simple publication of an index number intended to represent the value of the stock market as a whole change the value of common stocks? The indexes that are the subject of this article are the source of the dominant common stock investment strategy of the moment, the index ETF. For example the Standard and Poors 500 Stock Index (S&P, a value-weighted average of the 500 largest common shares listed on the NYSE or NASDAQ) is the oldest and still the most important example of a traded numerical characterization of the value of the equity market as a whole. Index exchange traded funds (ETFs) are exchange-listed instruments that replicate broad market measures such as the S&P. Index ETFs are big – about 30% of the volume of all investment funds under management. But there may be strange effects of the existence of index ETFs on the prices of stocks that are part of an index. Those effects, or at least the current scholarly take on them, is chronicled in an interesting October 10th article in the New York Times . The Times article points to substantial evidence produced by market researchers that common stocks included in the popular listed indexes are often, by all the usual measures, overvalued relative to similar stocks outside the indexes. In the current financial academic literature, this is a prominent example of market irrationality. It is not rational, the argument goes, for the simple inclusion of a stock in an index portfolio to change investor behavior and thus affect market prices of securities so profoundly. But the evidence points to several effects. It has been clear, almost since the S&P 500 index began to be published, that being newly included in an important index increases a stock’s market value; while a fall into exclusion leads to a decline in market value. But there is evidence of other more profound effects as well. It appears that as a greater share of the market is included in index portfolios, the effects of index inclusion on stock prices have become more pronounced. And the effects may not simply be higher prices of stocks within the indexes, but higher correlations among the prices of stocks within the indexes as well. This higher correlation is particularly interesting, since it has investor risk management implications. If higher past correlation continues, the major indexes no longer perform their function in portfolio theory – risk reduction through diversification. Why? If correlation between investments inside the indexes rises, correlation among instruments outside the indexes rises, and correlation between index-included and index-excluded investments falls, a diversified portfolio must include stocks outside the index. In other words, the behavior of stocks in index ETFs creates a paradox. The effect of index ETF growth is that the index no longer represents a diversified portfolio. Index ETFs are, in this sense, self-defeating. To form a truly diversified portfolio, investors must now add other stocks outside the ETF. The index ETFs are vulnerable to any trading strategy that exploits this mispricing. One trading strategy that a hedge fund might apply to restore rational pricing to the stock market has characteristics that can be found in my SA Instablog: ” A Trading Strategy Based on Index ETF Overpricing. An ETF Defense. ” Investors can protect themselves (imperfectly) now from a return to rational pricing of the shares included by the index ETFs, and simultaneously achieve the portfolio diversification index ETFs once provided, by buying diversified shares outside the ETFs.

Investing For Impact: A Brief Guide For The Perplexed

By Travis Allen and Anne Bucciarelli (click to enlarge) Discussions about investment strategies that take values or ethical principles into account can be confusing. Several different terms are used, often interchangeably; in fact, they may be converging. The most common terms we hear are socially responsible investing (SRI); environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles; and impact investing. SRI strategies usually employ screens to identify companies to include or exclude, based on the manager’s or the investor’s ideas about their social impacts. ESG strategies are similar but tend to focus on certain areas of concern: Environmental factors, including climate change, hazardous-waste disposal, nuclear energy, and natural-resource depletion; Social factors, including human and labor rights, consumer protection, and diversity; and Corporate-governance factors, including management structure, executive compensation, and shareholder rights. Some, but not all, ESG-oriented institutional investors are signatories to the United Nations-supported Principles for Responsible investment (PRI). Impact investing goes further: It seeks to invest (usually privately) in organizations having a positive impact in a particular area, perhaps to revive a blighted neighborhood. Investors often feel empowered by impact investing, but they should recognize the risks. These investments can be as risky as venture capital. Such investments may be best made with capital that exceeds your target financial capital (the amount of money you need to fund you long-term spending). Impact on Portfolios There are many ways to address SRI or ESG concerns. Some investment managers buy or create ESG screening tools to help them avoid investing in companies with undesirable practices or products. We think such tools may be useful but are rarely enough. AB integrates research into potential ESG issues for a company into all parts of our research process, from meetings with company managements, suppliers, and industry experts, to monitoring news reports, as the display shows: But assessing ESG issues can raise as many questions as it answers. For example, if you try to avoid investing in companies with high cardon dioxide emissions or abusive labor practices, do you have to check all the vendors of each company you consider? Many technology and clothing companies are now under attack for the actions of their suppliers, or of their suppliers’ suppliers. Investors should also recognize that both positive and negative screens limit portfolio managers’ flexibility and may affect portfolio returns. Investors with otherwise identical portfolios are likely to have different results, if one of them imposes restrictions on companies in certain industries. Some ESG advocates argue that companies with an ESG focus can outperform the broad market over time. Other people argue that narrowing the universe of potential investments is likely to detract from long-term returns relative to more diversified standard benchmarks. Perhaps the arguments of the ESG advocates are true, but it’s too soon to tell. While the number of managers that invest with a social lens is growing, few ESG managers have a statistically meaningful track record. Therefore, we think it is still too early to assess the relative performance of the ESG segment. Investors whose priority is a portfolio that reflects their personal values now have a range of choices to meet their social as well as financial goals. The goal for such investors should be to work with managers who share their philosophy about social issues, as well as risk and return. Disclaimer: The views expressed herein do not constitute research, investment advice or trade recommendations and do not necessarily represent the views of all AB portfolio-management teams.