Tag Archives: function

Telecom ETFs To Watch After Dull Verizon Earnings

Verizon Communications Inc . (NYSE: VZ ), the largest U.S. wireless carrier, has come out with lukewarm earnings for the fourth quarter of 2014. While the company managed to surpass the Zacks Consensus Estimate for revenues, it reported in line earnings results. Verizon Earnings in Details Excluding one-time items (pension and other post-employment benefit liabilities), adjusted earnings per share came in at 71 cents, up 7.6% from adjusted earnings of 66 cents per share in Q4 2013. Adjusted earnings were in line with the Zacks Consensus Estimate. Verizon however posted a net quarterly loss of $2.23 billion or 54 cents per share as against a profit of $1.76 per share in the year-ago-quarter, largely attributable to costs incurred for employee pensions and severance. Quarterly revenues increased 6.8% year over year to $33,192 million, beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 2%. The year-over-year rise was driven by increased demand for Verizon Wireless and its high-speed FiOS Internet services. During the reported quarter, the company added 2 million postpaid customers as compared to 1.5 million subscribers added in the last quarter. However, profit margins at its wireless business contracted to 42% in the fourth quarter from 47% in the year-ago period. Also, the quarterly retail postpaid churn rate, the percentage of subscribers who switched to another wireless provider, increased to 1.14% from 0.96% in the year-ago quarter. On the wireline side, the company added net 116,000 FiOS video subscribers, 145,000 FiOS Internet subscribers and 88,000 FiOS digital video residence connections. ETF Impact Despite reporting in line earnings results, Verizon’s share price closed roughly 1% lower on concerns of lower revenue growth at the wireless segment, higher churn rate, added customer acquisition costs and provision for pension payment. Investors seem to be worried about the ongoing wireless price war, which might affect margins further. Other telecom players like AT&T (NYSE: T ) and Sprint (NYSE: S ) also fell 0.62% and 2.3% respectively, following Verizon’s uninspiring results. However, T-Mobile (NYSE: TMUS ) rose 1.40% in yesterday’s trading session. Given the mixed reaction from the telecom players, Telecom ETFs closed marginally higher on Thursday’s trading session. Below, we have highlighted three telecom ETFs with the largest allocation to Verizon. Investors should keep a close eye on these ETFs as they might face volatile trading in the days ahead, given that AT&T is also set to report results towards the end of the month. ETFs to Watch Vanguard Telecommunication Services ETF (NYSEARCA: VOX ) The most popular telecom ETF – VOX – tracks the MSCI US Investable Market Telecommunication Services 25/50 Index and holds 31 stocks in its basket. Verizon occupies the top position in the basket with 22.2% of assets. Sector-wise, about two-thirds of the portfolio is skewed toward integrated telecom services, followed by alternative carriers and wireless telecommunication services. The product has amassed $841.6 million in its asset base and charges 14 bps in annual fees. VOX gained 0.65% in yesterday’s trading session and is up nearly 2% in the year-to-date time frame and has a Zacks ETF Rank of 3 or ‘Hold’ rating with a ‘Medium’ risk outlook. Fidelity MSCI Telecommunication Services Index ETF (NYSEARCA: FCOM ) This fund follows the MSCI USA IMI Telecommunication Services 25/50 Index, holding 30 stocks in its basket. Verizon takes the second spot at 21.5% and, from a sector look, diversified telecom services makes up for 81% of assets. The ETF manages an asset base of just $86.4 million in AUM while the expense ratio is 0.12%. The fund has gained over 2% year to date and currently has a Zacks ETF Rank of 3. iShares U.S. Telecommunications ETF (NYSEARCA: IYZ ) This is also one of the most popular ETFs in the broad telecom space with an AUM of $570 million. The product provides investors exposure to 26 telecom stocks while charging 45 bps in fees and expenses. Verizon takes the top spot in the basket with a 12.9% share. In terms of sector exposure, diversified telecom services accounts for 70% while wireless telecom services takes the rest. IYZ is up 1.4% so far this year, and has a Zacks ETF Rank of 3 or ‘Hold” rating with a ‘Medium’ risk outlook.

InfraCap MLP ETF: Can An Actively Managed ETF Add Value To The Alerian MLP Index?

Summary The InfraCap MLP ETF is one of the new, actively managed ETFs, bringing return-enhancement strategies to the ETF space. MLP-focused funds face additional tax hurdles not faced by ETFs in other market sectors. The InfraCap fund strategies may help overcome those hurdles. The investment results from the new MLP can be directly compared to the largest MLP ETF, allowing investors to see if the active management strategies work. A new MLP-focused ETF, InfraCap MLP ETF (NYSEARCA: AMZA ) takes an interesting approach to offsetting the rather large hurdles facing an ETF that tracks the widely followed Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index – AMZI . Since AMZA is based on the index tracked by the largest MLP-focused ETF, results from the ETF can be directly compared. Challenges for an MLP ETF Several features of MLPs and the MLP indexes provide distinct challenges for an ETF that wants to mimic the returns of a specific ETF. These challenges result in significant underperformance by the ETF compared to the index or a well-selected basket of individual MLPs. Tax rules concerning investment funds and MLPs provide the biggest drag on returns. A fund that holds more than 25% of its portfolio in MLPs is forced to structure as a corporation and pay corporate income taxes on net income reported by the owned MLP units. A fund organized as a corporation will also adjust its calculated NAV for an accrued, deferred income tax liability. The result is an NAV that lags the index value gains by the 35% top corporate income tax rate. A second challenge for an Alerian index focused ETF is the structure of the AMZI index. The index includes just 25 midstream MLPs, with the five largest partnerships – Enterprise Products Partners, L.P. (NYSE: EPD ) , Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. (NYSE: MMP ) , Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. (NYSE: PAA ) , Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. (NYSE: ETP ) , and MarkWest Energy Partners, L.P. (NYSE: MWE ) – accounting for 41% of the index value. The result is just a few large MLPs – good or bad – have an over-weighted impact on the index results. Benefits of an MLP Focused Fund Before jumping into the discussion about the AMZA ETF, here are a couple of reasons to use an MLP ETF as a way to get exposure to this historically high-yield, high-average total returns sector: A fund turns the MLP K-1 reporting tax hassle into a simple 1099 reporting investment. Typically, MLP fund dividends are a combination of non-taxable return of capital and ordinary income. A fund may be a better way to get MLP exposure inside of a tax-advantaged account such as an IRA. Owning MLP units inside of an IRA can produce additional tax reporting and tax payments out of the tax-deferred account. The corporate income tax accrual has the additional effect of increasing the yield of an ETF compared to the index. While the AMZI currently yields 5.74%, the tracking ETF yields 6.81%, even with 0.85% in expenses. InfraCap MLP ETF Active Management Adjustments to AMZI According to its prospectus , the InfraCap MLP ETF typically owns the same 25 midstream MLPs tracked by the AMZI index. However, the ETF’s active management strategy allows management to use any or all of the following strategies to boost returns or safeguard against declines. Underweight and overweight MLPs compared to the AMZI based on Infrastructure Capital Advisors proprietary model that values MLPs based on commodity prices, cash flow forecasts, and relative valuations. Fund management will sell call options to enhance the yield earned by investors. AMZA can employ up to 33.3% leverage. The use of leverage provides an offset to the corporate income tax bite. Management can reduce leverage or even move into cash if the model determines the MLP sector is overvalued. The bottom line is that with AMZA, investors get a strategically managed MLP ETF with an expense ratio of just 0.95%. This is significantly less than the typical expenses of an MLP-focused closed-end fund (which also incurs the corporate income tax bite) and the 0.85% expenses of the $9 billion in assets ALPS Alerian MLP ETF (NYSEARCA: AMLP ) . AMLP tracks the Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index. Since AMLP tracks the AMZI index and AMZA holds the same components weighted by its model, it will be interesting to see if the active management strategies produce extra return for investors. AMZA was launched in October 2014 and has gathered $7 million in assets. So we have two questions: Will the active management model work? And will investors buy into it?

GAMCO Global Gold, Natural Resources & Income Trust And GAMCO Natural Resources, Gold & Income Trust: Is It Time To Sell?

Summary The discounts at GGN and GNT have booth narrowed since I highlighted them. If you were looking for a quick gain, it might make sense to take or at least look at taking profits. With recent history as a guide, however, there could be a little more narrowing to go. I wrote articles about GAMCO Global Gold, Natural Resources & Income Trust (NYSEMKT: GGN ) and GAMCO Natural Resources, Gold & Income Trust (NYSE: GNT ) earlier this month, highlighting an opportunity to take advantage of discounts that appeared likely to narrow. That’s started to happen. If you were looking for a quick gain, now is the time start thinking about a sale. This pair of closed-end funds, or CEFs, from Gabelli invest in exactly what their names suggest, precious metals and other natural resources. The big difference is that Natural Resources, Gold & Income Trust has a broader mandate, so it includes specialty chemicals, agriculture, and machinery. That makes it a little more diversified, though not by much. In addition, Global Gold, Natural Resources & Income makes use of leverage, something that its sibling does not do. Both CEFs use options to generate income, their main goal. The quickie When I wrote about GGN and GNT on the seventh and eighth of January, respectively, their discounts were roughly 5% and 6%. At the close of trading on the 21st, those discounts had narrowed to around 1% for GGN and 4% for GNT. This is in keeping with recent history. Toward the end of the year, this pairs’ discounts have widened only to narrow as the new year progresses. At this point, the price of GGN has increased around 8% and the price of GNT has advanced about 5.5%. There was also a $0.07 per share dividend that I didn’t included in either return figure. On an absolute basis those aren’t numbers to write home about. However, if the goal was a short term trade, that quick bounce happened in about two weeks. Annualized, that’s a great return. If you were looking to benefit from the discount narrowing, you should be thinking about selling. That said, there could be a little more upside. Based on the price performance of GGN over the last 18 months, it looks like a 3% premium would be a good selling point. Selling GNT when the discount narrows to zero looks about the right point for that CEF. Clearly, I can’t guarantee that either fund will get to those points, but that’s what a rough average of the three narrowest discounts (or widest premiums, as the case may be) over the past year and half suggest as sell targets. That said, if you want the quick gain, you might want to just lock in now. Longer term? There’s another angle here, however, that could merit you sticking around longer. Both GGN and GNT provide exposure to hard assets. This can provide a safe haven during turbulent times. If you think the market is at or nearing a turning point, either of these funds could be a ballast for your portfolio. And if you include distributions into returns (essentially looking at total return), the funds have solid track records. Both have outperformed Vanguard Precious Metals and Mining Fund (MUTF: VGPMX ) over the trailing three year period through year-end 2014, according to Morningstar. And GGN, which has been around longer, also outperformed Vanguard’s offering over the trailing five year period. So, comparatively speaking, they are a decent way to get exposure to this sector. Note that all of the funds lost ground over the trailing three- and five-year periods, so I am discussing relative performance not absolute performance. So, at the end of the day, there’s a reason to sit tight if you bought GGN or GNT for exposure to gold and natural resources. However, if the potential narrowing of the discount was your reason for buying either of these, you could lock in quick gains now. If you are hoping for a little more gain, you should, at the very least, start thinking about when you want to get out. For GGN I think a 3% premium could be a good selling point. For GNT I would be looking to sell when the discount narrows to 0%.