Tag Archives: georgia

UnitedHealth Solid Q1 Earnings Put These ETFs In Focus

The largest U.S. health insurer, UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH ), reported solid first-quarter 2016 results. The company continued its long streak of earnings beats. Earnings per share came in at $1.81, surpassing the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 9 cents and the year-ago earnings by 17%. Revenues rose 25% year over year to $44.5 billion, broadly in line with the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $44.7 billion. The company reported medical care ratio of 81.7%, up 30 basis points year over year, thanks to the extra calendar day of service in the quarter. Growth was broad based, with a 54% increase in revenues for Optum, the health services business (see all the Healthcare ETFs here ). Based on solid first-quarter results and business trends, UnitedHealth raised its earnings guidance to $7.75-7.90 per share for 2016 from $7.60-7.80 per share projected earlier. The Zacks Consensus Estimate of $7.85 per share is within the guided range. The company expects revenues to be approximately $182 billion in 2016, which is in line with the current Zacks Consensus Estimate. As a result, the stock jumped 4.8% in the last two trading days (as of April 20, 2016), following the earnings announcement. The stock currently has a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) with a Value Style Score of “A”. This underscores its potential to outperform in the weeks ahead. In its conference call, UnitedHealth stated that it would pull out of the majority of public exchanges owing to smaller overall market size and a higher risk profile within this market segment. Next year, the company plans to remain in only a few of the states and will not carry any financial exposure from the exchanges into 2017. ETFs in Focus Investors may want to take a closer look at the ETFs having the largest allocation to this health insurance giant, as UNH has shown encouraging trading following its earnings. For those, the iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (NYSEARCA: IHF ) could especially be on their radar, as UNH takes the top spot in the fund’s portfolio at 12.9% share. IHF This ETF provides exposure to 49 companies offering health insurance, diagnostics and specialized treatment by tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Healthcare Providers Index. About 45% of the portfolio is dominated by managed care firms, while healthcare services (26.5%) and healthcare facilities (23.3%) round off the top three. The fund has amassed $709.6 million in its asset base, while volume is good at about 112,000 shares per day, on average. It charges 44 bps in annual fees and expenses, and added 1.9% in the last two trading days following the UNH earnings release (as of April 20, 2016). The product has a Zacks ETF Rank of 1 or “Strong Buy” rating with a Medium risk outlook. Other ETFs Other healthcare ETFs, like the Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLV ) – 4.6%, the iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF (NYSEARCA: IYH ) – 4.3%, the PowerShares DWA Healthcare Momentum Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: PTH ) – 3.8%, the Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (NYSEARCA: FHLC ) – 3.9% and the Vanguard Health Care ETF (NYSEARCA: VHT ) – 4.1%, also have a decent exposure to UnitedHealth. Apart from the healthcare space, UNH is among the top 10 holdings in some large cap ETFs, such as the SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF (NYSEARCA: DIA ) and the PowerShares Dynamic Large Cap Growth Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: PWB ), with exposure of 4.9% and 3.4%, respectively. However, these products will be less impacted by the movement of UNH share price. Original Post

Tactical Models Under Pressure As U.S. Stocks Rebound

The US stock market may be on the verge of decisively throwing off its bear-market shackles and making fools of analysts (including yours truly) who’ve been issuing cautious commentary in recent months. It’s also been clear for more than a month that a previously issued markets-based warning on US business-cycle risk has been wrong, at least so far. As yesterday’s broad-minded review of economic indicators relates, the US economy wasn’t in recession in March, based on data published to date. In the wake of the equity market’s rally in recent weeks, the call that stocks were at risk of a bear market may be about to fade too. So it goes in the dark art/science of trying to outwit Mr. Market and look for signals in the noise. The risk of being wrong is an occupational hazard for anyone who practices investing with something other than a buy-and-hold strategy. To be fair, every model that attempts to engineer higher returns, lower risk, or some combination is subject to failure at times. It’s the nature of the beast – no one can outfox the crowd all of the time. Even if you’re right 70% of the time, being wrong in real time outweighs previous successes on an emotional level. The question now is whether we’re on the cusp of one of those times when model failure is about to spill out across the market landscape from a broad US equity perspective? The S&P 500 ticked higher again yesterday, posting another new year-to-date peak. Measured from the previous trough in early February, the index has climbed roughly 15%. In just over a month’s time, the mood has shifted from deep pessimism to exuberance. In the days ahead, analysts and investors will be under pressure to decide if the current exuberance is irrational or warranted. Click to enlarge For some perspective on where we’ve been, recall that the current phase of volatility began last August, when China unveiled a surprise currency devaluation and global markets swooned in response. Bear-market signals from various models followed, including a popular tactical model that seeks to filter out noise by focusing on monthly data-current month-end price relative to a 10-month moving average-for monitoring market trends ( “A Quantitative Approach to Tactical Asset Allocation” ). But this model, like so many others, has been whipsawed in recent months via the monthly readings for the S&P. In the current climate, the bear-market signals have recently given way to bull readings… again. (For charts tracking various ETFs in context with this model’s signals, see Meb Faber’s updates here. ) The Capital Spectator is fair game for criticism as well in the wake of recent market volatility. For instance, an econometric application based on a Hidden Markov model that’s been discussed on these pages continues to signal that the US stock market remains in a bear market. This model has been consistently profiling a negative regime for equities since last fall, but that won’t mean much if it turns out to be wrong. For investors who favor a buy-and-hold strategy, a hefty dose of vindication may be near. If you want to know why most efforts to generate superior risk-adjusted returns through time via various flavors of tactical asset allocation usually come to naught, recent action in the US equity market offers a real-time education. But let’s not put a fork in the tactical models just yet. Even if the past six months have been an extended head fake for bearish signals, there’s still prudent reasons for embracing some degree of tactical models. Expecting superior results at all times, alas, is expecting too much. But that’s a subject for another day. Meantime, back on the front lines of market action, the S&P has retraced all its losses-twice-since last August’s slide. In addition, the case for seeing an imminent recession for the US is still MIA, based on numbers in hand. But there have been worrisome signs of macro weakness in some corners of the economy-last week’s March numbers for industrial production and retail sales are the latest examples. Meantime, next week’s first-quarter GDP report is expected to deliver a tepid 0.3% rise, based on the Atlanta Fed’s Apr. 19 nowcast. Are these reports the raw material for a resumption of the bull market that was rudely interrupted last August? We’ll have the answer shortly, perhaps within a few weeks. If the US stock market runs decisively higher from current levels, the sound you hear of crashing will be disgruntled tactical asset allocators throwing their models out the window. But that’s not yet fate. There’s a severe round of comeuppance lurking around the next bend. The only mystery is where the axe will fall. Some of us think we already know the answer, but perhaps it’s time to roll out Robert Goldman’s famous phrase: “Nobody knows anything.” Actually, let’s rephrase that for use with market analytics: Nobody knows anything… in real time.

No-Load Funds Excel In Q1: 5 Top Performers

After a dream run last year, no-load mutual funds continued to offer healthy returns in the first quarter of 2016. While U.S.-based mutual funds registered significant outflows for most of the quarter primarily led by a massive slump in the major benchmarks, healthy returns indicate that no-load mutual funds attracted enough investor attention. Despite the early slump, the markets made a remarkable rebound during the latter half of the first quarter, which helped no-load mutual funds to eventually come up with solid returns. The lower expense advantage of no-load funds over load funds played an important role in boosting their demand. It will be interesting to find out the top performers from this category during the first quarter. But before that, let’s take a look at the performance of the no-load fund category during the period. Q1 Performance The top 100 funds out of the 10,714 no-load funds we studied, registered an average return of 25.9% last quarter compared to the top 100 load funds’ average return of 16.2%. Meanwhile, top no-load fund ProFunds Precious Metals UltraSector Investor’s (MUTF: PMPIX ) gains of 82.1% also came significantly higher than the return of 49.9% from Rydex Precious Metals A’s (MUTF: RYMNX ), which was the top performing mutual fund among those that carry sales load. The top performing no-load fund list for the first quarter is dominated by precious metal and utility funds. A massive crash witnessed earlier this year following weak global growth and a plunge in oil prices, boosted demand for securities related to the safe-haven sectors like gold and utilities. Separately, the strong average return of the top 100 no-load funds came in higher than most of the top performing mutual fund categories in the first quarter. Apart from the equity precious metals category, which gained 40.7% in the quarter, strong returns of the top 100 no-load funds easily beat all the broader mutual fund categories. The second-best utility category of the quarter gained 11.4%. While no-load mutual funds succeeded in providing healthy returns during the first quarter, the category also outperformed its load counterparts last year. The top performing 100 no-load mutual funds posted an average return of 16.74% in 2015 compared with the top 100 load funds’ average return of 11.05%. Also, the category managed to finish in the positive territory in the third quarter of 2015, which was the worst quarter in four years. Top Performing No-Load Mutual Funds In this segment, we have highlighted five top performing no-load mutual funds of the first quarter that carry either a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 (Strong Buy) or #2 (Buy). These funds also have minimum initial investment within $5000, expense ratios below 1% and net assets over $50 million. Banking on these fundamentals, we expect these funds to outperform their peers in the future. Remember, the goal of the Zacks Mutual Fund Rank is to guide investors to identify potential winners and losers. Unlike most of the fund-rating systems, the Zacks Mutual Fund Rank is not just focused on past performance, but also on the likely future success of the fund. Franklin Gold and Precious Metals Advisor (MUTF: FGADX ) invests the lion’s share of its assets in securities of companies involved in operations related to gold and precious metals. The fund carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2 and returned 45.5% during the first quarter. Annual expense ratio of 0.84% is lower than the category average of 1.44%. American Century Global Gold Investor (MUTF: BGEIX ) invests in securities of global companies whose operations are related to gold or other precious metals. The product carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2 and returned 43.5% during the first quarter. Annual expense ratio of 0.67% is lower than the category average of 1.44%. Fidelity Select Gold (MUTF: FSAGX ) invests heavily in companies whose principal operations are related to gold as well as in bullion or coins. The fund carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 and returned 41% during the first quarter. Annual expense ratio of 0.90% is lower than the category average of 1.44%. Oppenheimer Gold & Special Minerals Y (MUTF: OGMYX ) invests mainly in common stocks of companies that are involved in mining, processing or dealing with gold. The product carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2 and returned 36% during the first quarter. Annual expense ratio of 0.92% is lower than the category average of 1.44%. American Century Utilities Investor (MUTF: BULIX ) uses qualitative and quantitative management techniques to invest a major portion of its assets in equities related to the utility industry. The fund carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 and returned 16.7% during the first quarter. Annual expense ratio of 0.67% is lower than the category average of 1.25%. Original Post