Tag Archives: feeds

The Fundamental Difference: Through A Lens Of Net Buybacks

By Jeremy Schwartz At WisdomTree, we believe that screening and weighting equity markets based on fundamentals such as dividends or earnings can potentially help produce higher total and risk-adjusted returns over a complete market cycle. One of the most important elements of a fundamental index is the annual rebalance process, where the index screens the eligible universe and then weights those securities based on their fundamentals. In essence, the process takes a detailed look at the relationship between the underlying fundamentals and price performance and tilts weight to lower-priced segments of the market. One way to illustrate the benefits of this approach for our earnings-weighted family is to compare the net buyback yield of the WisdomTree Earnings Index to a market cap-weighted peer universe. Below we look at how the net buyback yield changes when you screen and weight U.S. equity markets by firms’ profitability instead of market cap. Earnings Weighting vs. Market Cap Weighting Click to enlarge The WisdomTree Earnings Index consistently had a higher net buyback ratio than did a market cap-weighted universe consisting of the 3,000 largest securities by market cap. The WisdomTree Earnings Index averaged a net buyback yield of 2.2% over the period, compared to just 1.1% for the market cap peer universe. We believe that having an annual profitability screen for inclusion in the WisdomTree Earnings Index helps avoid speculative and unprofitable smaller-capitalization firms that have a tendency to raise capital by periodically issuing new shares. The earnings-weighted approach that tilts weight to more profitable firms can also be a reason the weighted average net buyback yield is higher. The chart below looks at the net buyback yield on a universe of the lowest price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio stocks within the 3,000 largest stocks by market cap and contrasts that with the net buyback yield on the highest P/E ratio stocks. Net Buyback Yield by P/E Ratio Click to enlarge If corporate America responds well to incentives, the higher-priced basket would issue more shares (given that their stocks are high priced and issuing more of them would be an effective way to raise growth capital) and the lower-priced basket would issue fewer shares or actually buy back shares to reduce their shares outstanding and thus power their earnings-per-share growth. What we see in the data is the higher-priced universe buys back fewer share, and instead issues more shares (having more companies with negative net buyback yields). Why Earnings Weight Going back to the WisdomTree Earnings Index in the first chart-weighting by Earnings Stream is essentially tilting weight from a market cap-weighted scheme to over-weight those companies with below average P/E ratios and to under-weight those companies with high P/E ratios. The Earnings Stream can be defined as earnings per share times shares outstanding or market cap x earnings yield (which is equivalent to 1/PE ratio). Tilting weight to the higher-earnings-yield stocks by earnings weighting thus is one effective way to tilt the net buyback yield balance in one’s favor. Companies reducing shares outstanding are essentially locking in earnings-per-share growth by reducing their share count, while companies that are issuing more shares are creating a higher hurdle to overcome to achieve earnings-per-share growth. There is a philosophical debate about the motivations for all the buybacks we are seeing today as well as fears that companies are failing to reinvest for future growth (or that they just see no growth opportunities, hence all the dividends and buybacks). One thing is clear to us from the data: the lower-priced stocks issue fewer shares, and the more expensive stocks issue more shares (and have lower net buyback yields). This can be especially true in the small-cap space, as we will discuss in a future blog post. The consistently greater-than 2% net buyback yields seen on the WisdomTree Earnings Index over the last five years, combined with 2% dividend yields on this basket today, provides critical valuation support and also helps explain why we think the earnings-weighted approach can add value over time. Jeremy Schwartz, Director of Research As WisdomTree’s Director of Research, Jeremy Schwartz offers timely ideas and timeless wisdom on a bi-monthly basis. Prior to joining WisdomTree, Jeremy was Professor Jeremy Siegel’s head research assistant and helped with the research and writing of Stocks for the Long Run and The Future for Investors. He is also the co-author of the Financial Analysts Journal paper “What Happened to the Original Stocks in the S&P 500?” and the Wall Street Journal article “The Great American Bond Bubble.”

The Great Temptation, Greatest Danger

“If we survive danger it steels our courage more than anything else.” – Reinhold Niebuhr I am often bewildered that what passes for analysis is really a focus on recent performance, rather than process. Yet, so little attention is given to the investor return/behavior gap, a well-documented phenomenon that proves that “on, average, investors sacrifice a substantial portion of their returns by incorrectly timing when to enter or exit investments”. In correct timing tends to come from chasing performance, getting in after a major up move has already taken place, and then, of course, exiting when the drawdown is likely near its end. The below chart sums up some of the research on this which, in my opinion, is a “must know” when considering where to put money to work. Click to enlarge The best returns in the future come from those parts of the marketplace that have not done well in the past. Yet despite the overwhelming evidence which supports this, strong recent performance is often the core catalyst to make an investment. In reality, it should be the exact opposite. High past performance and continuous visibility of that performance is a temptation too strong for many to ignore, and that temptation unequivocally results in sub-optimal returns going forward on average. Take that truism on mutual funds, and magnify it by a billion when it comes to Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs). Yes folks – I would argue to you that ETFs are the greatest danger to investors. Why? Because ETFs provide an even greater temptation to chase recent performance, day by day, hour by hour, and minute by minute. Overtrading is the ultimate source of the investor return gap, and the temptation to get “in and out” of the market has never been higher thanks to these investment vehicles. Now, don’t get me wrong here. We ourselves use ETFs to execute across our quantitative strategies in mutual funds and sub-advised separate account strategies we run. However, following a systematic, backtested, and quantitative approach using ETFs as the vehicle of choice for execution is NOT what the vast majority of ETFs “investors” do. The pattern of behavior remains the same. Assets for ETFs grow when the ETF has strong recent performance, and collapse after, with a lag, when losses have already occurred. In our case, we rotate based on leading indicators of volatility (click here to learn more). The majority rotate based on old leaders that have had continuously low volatility. The greatest danger is in using past strong performance to make an investment decision. ETFs like the S&P 500 SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) may be the greatest temptation of all that results in exactly that. *Join us this week for our live webcast on the 2016 Dow Award paper, hosted by the Market Technicians Association. Registration available by clicking here . This writing is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell, a solicitation to buy, or a recommendation regarding any securities transaction, or as an offer to provide advisory or other services by Pension Partners, LLC in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation, purchase or sale would be unlawful under the securities laws of such jurisdiction. The information contained in this writing should not be construed as financial or investment advice on any subject matter. Pension Partners, LLC expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken based on any or all of the information on this writing. 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.

The V20 Portfolio: Week 33

The V20 portfolio is an actively managed portfolio that seeks to achieve an annualized return of 20% over the long term. If you are a long-term investor, then this portfolio may be for you. You can read more about how the portfolio works and the associated risks here . Always do your own research before making an investment. Read the last update here . Note: Current allocation and planned transactions are only available to premium subscribers . Over the past week, the V20 Portfolio rose by 3.8% while the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) increased by 0.4%. Portfolio Update Conn’s (NASDAQ: CONN ) was responsible for most of the gains this week, rising 15.8% from $10 to $11.58. There were no major events other than a credit facility amendment on Friday, so much of this rally can be attributed to shifting sentiment in the market. Some of the amendments relaxed covenants while others were more restrictive. Let’s go over the restricting amendments first. Distributing restricted payments (e.g. dividends, buybacks) will now require a 2.5x interest coverage ratio for two quarters. Borrowing base was reduced by $15 million, which will be waived if interest coverage ratio exceeds 2x for two quarters. Finally, margin on the loan was increased by 25 bps (i.e. making the revolver a bit more expensive). While none of the amendments were crippling, the amendment concerning restricted payments will prevent Conn’s from making any share repurchases in the coming months, as the interest coverage ratio was less than 2.5x for Q4. The positive amendments included eliminating the minimum interest coverage ratio covenant for Q1 and lowering the total coverage ratio to 1x from 2x. Overall, this was a slight setback as buybacks will not be a possibility in the near future. Last week we discussed how Intelsat (NYSE: I ) was buying back bonds at a discount. For whatever reason (possibly the increased likely hood of a rate hike), the bonds in question declined in value from $70s to high $60s. As such, Intelsat lowered its consideration accordingly, lowering the offer by around 500 bps. Our helicopter company was the portfolio’s major laggard. There was no major development. As discussed in last week’s update, the oil and gas division will continue to battle industry wide headwinds, though the recent bounce in commodities may cushion the fall. However, it is unlikely that revenue will suddenly recover to its previous level as the oil and gas industry overall is still at a cost cutting stage. The medical segment should continue to generate profits, as it will not be affected by the commodity downturn. Risk Management Due to additional capital being allocated to Conn’s and its subsequent rally, the position now accounts for more than 10% of the entire portfolio. For a position to account for such a significant portion, it must fulfill two criteria: high expected rate of return and low probability of permanent capital loss. As we’ve seen with Dex Media, even though the shares were undervalued, 100% of the investment will likely be written off. But by allocating a small amount of capital to this speculative position, it only had a tiny impact on the overall portfolio. Conn’s on the other hand fulfills both criteria. It is not under any significant financial distress and is still growing its business. While short-term results have dampened its profitability, its long-term outlook remains bright. Performance Since Inception Click to enlarge Disclosure: I am/we are long CONN, I. 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.