Tag Archives: management

Building A Bulletproof Portfolio Of A+ Growth Stocks

Summary An investor can “bullet-proof” his portfolio while maximizing his expected return using the hedged portfolio method. When creating a hedged portfolio, you can start from scratch or start with a list of stock picks. We explore the second method here. The stock picks we start with are ones rated “A+” by S&P Capital IQ for growth and stability of earnings and dividends. We provide a sample hedged portfolio of “A+” stocks designed for an investor unwilling to risk a drawdown of more than 14%. Growth Investing versus Value Investing The idea of buying a stock for less than its ” intrinsic value ” has an innate appeal to value investors, but, as leading buy-and-hold investing blogger Eddy Efenbein suggested in a recent quip, not everyone is cut out for it: Give a man a value stock and he’s invested for a day, but teach a man value investing and he’ll be in anxiety-ridden mess for life. – Eddy Elfenbein (@EddyElfenbein) September 24, 2015 Unlike bargain-shopping value investors, growth investors are willing to pay more for a stock, in return for the prospect of higher future earnings growth. But that doesn’t necessarily eliminate anxiety. As with any style of stock investing, with growth investing, you face two kinds of risks: idiosyncratic risk , the risk of something bad happening to one of the companies you own, and market risk , the risk of your investments suffering due to a decline of the market as a whole. Two Ways of Limiting Stock-Specific Risk One way to limit stock-specific risk is via hedging; another way is via diversification. In a previous article (“How to Limit Your Market Risk”), we discussed ways to limit market risk for a diversified portfolio. In this post, we’ll look at how to “bulletproof” a concentrated portfolio of growth stocks using the hedged portfolio method . In that method, you limit both stock-specific and market risk via hedging. First, we’ll need a list of growth stocks to start with. For that, we’ll use a screen devised by the research firm S&P Capital IQ . A+ Stocks with High Projected Growth The goal of this screen is to find stocks likely to extend their superior historical earnings and dividend growth records. It uses two criteria: Forward annual earnings growth estimates of 12% or better over the next 3-5 years. An S&P Capital IQ Earnings and Dividend Rank of A+, which means a 10-year history of high growth and stability of earnings and dividends. On Wednesday, Fidelity’s screener identified seven stocks meeting those S&P Capital IQ criteria: Advance Auto Parts (NYSE: AAP ) CVS Health (NYSE: CVS ) Echolab (NYSE: ECL ) Ross Stores (NASDAQ: ROST ) Tupperware Brands (NYSE: TUP ) UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH ) Walt Disney Co. (NYSE: DIS ) We’ll use those stocks as a starting point to construct a “bulletproof”, or hedged portfolio for an investor who is unwilling to risk a drawdown of more than 14%, and has $500,000 that he wants to invest. First, though, let’s address the issue of risk tolerance, and how it affects potential return. Risk Tolerance and Potential Return All else equal, with a hedged portfolio, the greater an investor’s risk tolerance — the greater the maximum drawdown he is willing to risk (his “threshold”, in our terminology) – the higher his potential return will be. So, we should expect that an investor who is willing to risk a 24% decline will have a chance at higher potential returns than one who is only willing to risk a 14% drawdown. Constructing A Hedged Portfolio We’ll outline the process here briefly, and then explain how you can implement it yourself. Finally, we’ll present an example of a hedged portfolio that was constructed this way with an automated tool. The process, in broad strokes, is this: Find securities with high potential returns (we define potential return as a high-end, bullish estimate of how the security will perform). Find securities that are relatively inexpensive to hedge. Buy a handful of securities that score well on the first two criteria; in other words, buy a handful of securities with high potential returns net of their hedging costs (or, ones with high net potential returns). Hedge them. The potential benefits of this approach are twofold: If you are successful at the first step (finding securities with high potential returns), and you hold a concentrated portfolio of them, your portfolios should generate decent returns over time. If you are hedged, and your return estimates are completely wrong, on occasion — or the market moves against you — your downside will be strictly limited. How to Implement This Approach Finding promising stocks In this case, we’re going to start with the stocks generated by the A+ high growth screen. To quantify potential returns for these stocks, you can, for example, use analysts’ price targets for them and then convert these to percentage returns from current prices. In general, though, you’ll need to use the same time frame for each of your potential return calculations to facilitate comparisons of potential returns, hedging costs, and net potential returns. Our method starts with calculations of six-month potential returns. Finding inexpensive ways to hedge these securities Whatever hedging method you use, for this example, you’d want to make sure that each security is hedged against a greater-than-14% decline over the time frame covered by your potential return calculations (our method attempts to find optimal static hedges using collars as well as protective puts going out approximately six months). And you’ll need to calculate your cost of hedging as a percentage of position value. Selecting the securities with highest net potential returns In order to determine which securities these are, out of the list above, you may need to first adjust your potential return calculations by the time frame of your hedges. For example, although our method initially calculates six-month potential returns and aims to find hedges with six months to expiration, in some cases the closest hedge expiration may be five months out. In those cases, we will adjust our potential return calculation down accordingly, because we expect an investor will exit the position shortly before the hedge expires (in general, our method and calculations are based on the assumption that an investor will hold his shares for six months, until shortly before their hedges expire or until they are called away, whichever comes first). Next, you’ll need to subtract the hedging costs you calculated in the previous step from the potential returns you calculated for each position, and exclude any security that has a negative potential return net of hedging costs. Fine-tuning portfolio construction You’ll want to stick with round lots (numbers of shares divisible by 100) to minimize hedging costs, so if you’re going to include a handful of securities from the sort in the previous step and you have a relatively small portfolio, you’ll need to take into account the share prices of the securities. Another fine-tuning step is to minimize cash that’s left over after you make your initial allocation to round lots of securities and their respective hedges. Because each security is hedged, you won’t need a large cash position to reduce risk. And since returns on cash are so low now, by minimizing cash you can potentially boost returns. In this step, our method searches for what we call a “cash substitute”: that’s a security collared with a tight cap (1% or the current yield on a leading money market fund, whichever is higher) in an attempt to capture a better-than-cash return while keeping the investor’s downside limited according to his specifications. You could use a similar approach, or you could simply allocate left over cash to one of the securities you selected in the previous step. Calculating Expected Returns While net potential returns are bullish estimates of how well securities will perform, net of their hedging costs, expected returns, in our terminology, are the more likely returns net of hedging costs. In a series of 25,412 backtests over an 11-year time period, we determined two things about our method of calculating potential returns: it generates alpha, and it overstates actual returns. The average actual return over the next six months in those 25,412 tests was 0.3x the average potential return calculated ahead of time. So, we use that empirically derived relationship to calculate our expected returns. An Automated Approach Here we’ll show an example of creating a hedged portfolio starting with S&P Capital IQ’s A+ growth stocks using the general process described above, facilitated by the automated hedged portfolio construction tool at Portfolio Armor . In the first step, we enter the ticker symbols in the “Tickers” field, the dollar amount of our investor’s portfolio (500000), and in the third field, the maximum decline he’s willing to risk in percentage terms (14). In the second step, we are given the option of entering our own return estimates for each of these securities. Instead, in this case, we’ll let the site supply its own potential returns. A couple minutes after clicking the “Create” button, we were presented with the hedged portfolio below. The data here is as of Wednesday’s close. Why These Particular Securities? The site included all of the entered securities for which it calculated a positive potential return, net of hedging costs. In this case, that turned out to be all of them except TUP. In its fine-tuning step, Portfolio Armor added Facebook (NASDAQ: FB ) as a cash substitute. Let’s turn our attention now to the portfolio level summary. Worst-Case Scenario The “Max Drawdown” column in the portfolio level summary shows the worst-case scenario for this hedged portfolio. If every underlying security in it went to zero before their hedges expired, the portfolio would decline 13.8%. Negative Hedging Cost Note that, in this case, the total hedging cost for the portfolio was negative, -1.98%, meaning the investor would receive more income in total from selling the call legs of the collars on his positions than he spent buying the puts. Best-Case Scenario At the portfolio level, the net potential return is 5.76% over the next six months. This represents the best-case scenario, if each underlying security in the portfolio meets or exceeds its potential return. A More Likely Scenario The portfolio level expected return of 2.02% represents a conservative estimate, based on the historical relationship between our calculated potential returns and backtested actual returns. How to Get a Higher Expected Return The site calculates potential returns using an analysis of price history and options sentiment, and, according to those metrics, didn’t consider the stocks we entered “A+”. If you disagree with the site’s potential returns for these stocks, you can enter your own estimates for them. Alternatively, you could decide not to enter any ticker symbols, and let the site pick its own securities. If you had done that on Wednesday using the same dollar amount ($500,000) and decline threshold (14%), the hedged portfolio generated would have had a net potential return (best case scenario) of 16%, and an expected return (more likely scenario) of 4.8%. Each Security Is Hedged Note that each of the above securities is hedged. Facebook, the cash substitute, is hedged with an optimal collar with its cap set at 1%, and the remaining securities are hedged with optimal collars with their caps set at each underlying security’s potential return. Here is a closer look at the hedge for UnitedHealth: UnitedHealth is capped here at 4.62%, because that’s the potential return Portfolio Armor calculated for it over the next several months. As you can at the bottom of the image above, the cost of the put protection in this collar is $1,600, or 2.6% of position value. But if you look at the image below, you’ll see the income generated from selling the calls is $2,700, or 4.38% of position value. So, the net cost of this optimal collar is negative.[i] Possibly More Protection Than Promised In some cases, hedges such as the ones in the portfolio above can provide more protection than promised. For an example of that, see this instablog post on hedging the iPath S&P 500 VIX ST Futures ETN (NYSEARCA: VXX ). [i]To be conservative, this optimal collar shows the puts being purchased at their ask price, and the calls being sold at their bid price. In practice, an investor can often buy the puts for less (i.e., at some point between the bid and ask prices) and sell the calls for more (again, at some point between the bid and ask). So the actual cost of opening this collar would have likely been less (i.e., an investor would have likely collected more than $1,100 when opening this hedge).

New Hope Looks Good, But Is Free Cash Flow Negative

Summary New Hope is one of Australia’s companies focused on coal. It says it wants to acquire new projects with its A$1B working capital position, but it’s spending cash like there’s no tomorrow. The dividend is 7 times higher than the free cash flow is. If New Hope is serious about its expansion plans, it should reduce its dividend payments right now. Introduction After identifying Whitehaven Coal ( OTCPK:WHITF ) as a great coal company, I continued to look for other companies and was waiting for New Hope’s ( OTCPK:NHPEF ) financial results to see whether or not this is another coal company I should add to my list. Source: company presentation New Hope has a more liquid listing at the Australian Stock Exchange where it’s listed with NHC as its ticker symbol. The current market capitalization is approximately US$1.05B, so this isn’t your average micro-cap company. The company is still flowing cash Everybody knows the entire coal sector is suffering due to low prices, but fortunately the Australian producers have one advantage; the extremely weak Australian Dollar. As the Australian currency has lost in excess of 30% of its value in just one year time, the Australian companies are doing much better than their competition as even though they are still selling the coal in USD, the local expenses are a few dozen percents cheaper than one year ago, protecting the margins. (click to enlarge) Source: financial statements And yes, this seems to be proven in the company’s financial statements as even though the revenue decreased by 11%, the cost of sales fell by 17% and this would have resulted in a pre-tax profit of A$73M ($52M), if New Hope would have been able to avoid an A$97M impairment charge. This pushed the pre-tax profit in the red and even after a small tax benefit the bottom line was still showing a net loss of almost A$22M ($16M). Fortunately an impairment charge never has any influence on a company’s ability to generate cash flows, so I would think the cash flows of New Hope would remain pretty decent but the only way to find out is by checking the cash flow statements. That’s why I waited for New Hope to publish its annual report, as (unlike the quarterly reports), the company has to provide a cash flow overview as well. (click to enlarge) Source: financial statements The operating cash flow was A$88.5M ($63M) (after taxes), and whilst that’s still pretty good, considering the worsening circumstances on the coal market, you shouldn’t forget the total capital expenditures were A$115M ($82M), so New Hope was free cash flow negative. Again, that’s nothing to worry about because a) the negative cash flow is still limited and b) New Hope has a substantial amount of cash on its balance sheet. The negative free cash flow was A$26.5M ($18M), but in the next part of this article I’ll explain why I’m not really worried about this cash shortfall. But is spending more than it receives, and I don’t like that Indeed, that’s New Hope’s strength. It has a working capital position of in excess of A$1B ($700M) and a current ratio of in excess of 11 and that’s extremely high. This strong working capital position will also allow New Hope to indeed pursue the acquisitions it has been eying as this must be the only coal company in the world with such a financial flexibility. (click to enlarge) Source: financial statements The majority of its cash is being held in term deposits, and this resulted in a total interest income of A$38M in FY 2015. This was sufficient to cover the shortfall of the operating cash flow to fund the capital expenditures, but despite the free cash flow increasing to A$11.5M, it’s quite annoying to see the company has spent A$79M on paying dividends. And it won’t stop there. Together with the presentation with the company has announced a final dividend of A$0.025 and a special dividend of A$0.035 to bring the total dividend for the financial year at A$0.10 ($0.07). Using the current amount of 831M outstanding shares, this means New Hope will be paying A$83M in dividends based on its FY 2015 results. And that’s a pity. The adjusted free cash flow was a positive A$11.5M, but paying A$83M in dividends is definitely weakening the company’s financial situation. Of course, it still has in excess of one billion of Australian Dollars in working capital, but I have a firm opinion the company should NOT pay out more cash than it’s taking in from its operations. Investment thesis The shareholders will be happy with a 6% dividend yield, but I believe not a single company should pay out more cash than it’s generating. New Hope has publicly declared it wants to acquire more projects, to paying out almost A$100M ($71M) in dividends probably is one of the most stupid things the company could do. I like coal, and I like New Hope’s strong and solid financial status, but it’s not helping the company at all to spend cash on dividends instead of keeping the cash in its treasury. The working capital decreased from almost A$1.2B to A$1.1B in the past year, and that seems to be a bit contradictory to the company’s public claims it’s looking for acquisition targets. If New Hope is really serious about becoming a major player in the coal space, it should cut the dividend and cash up. Now. Editor’s Note: This article discusses one or more securities that do not trade on a major U.S. exchange. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.

Shooting Hoops With Peter Lynch And The Gurus

Many funds focus exclusively on one particular type of stock, such as large-cap value picks. But different types of stocks come in and out of favor in the market over time. Allowing your portfolio free range to go wherever the best values are at a particular time can enhance your long-term returns. The 2015-16 NBA season is fast approaching, and many teams are getting ready to show off the off-season changes they made in hopes of shoring up their weaknesses and improving their squads. Take the Toronto Raptors. Last year, the Raptors scored the fourth most points in the NBA, but gave up the 18th most points. Advanced metrics showed an even wider gap, indicating that Toronto had the third most efficient offense in the league, but the eighth least efficient defense, according to ESPN. Not surprisingly, the Raptors have made several moves in the off-season to try to bolster their defense. The name of the game, of course, is balance. In basketball, just as in any other sport, you are not going to get too far if your team has several weaknesses that counterbalance its strengths. So you of course want a mix of players whose skills complement each other. Building a team of only big, strong centers or only small, lightning-quick point guards would give you certain strengths in certain situations, yes. But it would also both limit the pool of talent from which you could choose, and leave you with some major weak spots in certain aspects of the game. Unfortunately, when it comes to picking stocks, that’s just what a lot of fund managers – and the investors who buy their funds – do. Many funds will focus only on a specific “style-box” category – large-cap value stocks, for example – filling the fund primarily or entirely with just that type of stock. To be sure, style boxes serve a purpose, particularly for institutional investors, who often are required to put a certain portion of their portfolios into certain categories of stocks. But for individual investors, I think style-box investing significantly eats away at returns. Why? Because, much as with basketball players, good stocks come in all different styles and sizes; focusing on one style and size simply limits your opportunities to find winners. Sometimes, for example, the small-cap growth area of the market may be offering the most attractive values; other times, mid-cap value plays may feature the best opportunities. Why not allow yourself to go where the best opportunities are, regardless of size and growth/value distinctions? In addition, much like basketball players, the size and style of a stock often means that it will perform better in certain situations than others. Sometimes, for example, large-cap value stocks will go out of favor, and a portfolio that is focused only on them will get hit hard. A portfolio that includes stocks of various sizes and styles, however, has some natural hedges built in that should smooth out returns – making it more likely you’ll stick with it over the long haul. This “free-range” approach is what I do with my Validea Hot List portfolio, which looks for consensus from all of my Guru Strategies (each of which is based on the approach of a different investing great) when choosing stocks. At any given time, the portfolio could be tilted towards smaller stocks or larger stocks, growth-oriented picks or value plays. The strategy has paid off, with a 10-stock version of the Hot List more than doubling the S&P 500 since its July 15, 2003 inception, and a 20-stock version nearly doubling the index. What sort of stocks is this approach on right now? Here’s a look at a handful of picks that are in my 10- and/or 20-stock portfolios. The Travelers Companies, Inc. (NYSE: TRV ) : Minnesota-based Travelers ($31 billion market cap) provides property casualty insurance for auto, home, and business. The 162-year-old company does business in the US, Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Brazil. Travelers’ mix of solid growth and reasonable value helps it earn strong interest from my Peter Lynch-based strategy. Its 17% long-term earnings per share growth rate (I use an average of the three-, four-, and five-year EPS figures) and high sales ($27 billion over the past year) make it a “stalwart” according to the Lynch approach – the kind of large, steady firm that Lynch found offered protection during downturns or recessions. To find growth stocks selling on the cheap, Lynch famously used the P/E-to-Growth ratio, adjusting the “growth” portion of the equation to include dividend yield for stalwarts, since they often pay solid dividends; yield-adjusted P/E/Gs below 1.0 are acceptable to my Lynch-based model, with those below 0.5 the best case. When we divide Travelers’ 9.2 P/E by the sum of its growth rate and dividend yield (2.4%), we get a yield-adjusted P/E/G of 0.43 – a sign that it’s a bargain. South State Corporation (NASDAQ: SSB ) : South State provides retail and commercial banking services, mortgage lending services, trust and investment services, and consumer finance loans. It serves customers and conducts its business from about 130 financial centers in South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia. South State ($2 billion market cap) is a smallish mid-cap growth stock that gets strong interest from my Martin Zweig-based model. It likes the firm’s long-term EPS growth (17%) and long-term sales growth (22%). It also likes that recent EPS growth has been even better, coming in at 38% in the most recent quarter (vs. the year-ago quarter). Alaska Air Group, Inc. (NYSE: ALK ) : Actually based in Washington state, Alaska Air is the parent of Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air Industries, which with partner regional airlines serve 90 locations in the US, Canada, and Mexico. The smallish large-cap or big mid-cap, depending on how you look at it ($10 billion market cap) is a favorite of my Lynch model, in part because of its stellar 40% long-term EPS growth rate. Shares trade for 14.4 times earnings, making for a strong 0.41 PEG ratio. Alaska Air also has a very reasonable 34% debt/equity ratio. MYR Group (NASDAQ: MYRG ) : This small-cap specialty contractor ($571 million market cap) serves the electrical infrastructure market throughout the US and Canada. The Zweig strategy likes that it has grown earnings per share at a 27% pace and sales at a 24% pace over the long term, and that both EPS and sales growth accelerated last quarter. It also likes MYR’s 0% debt/equity ratio. Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. (NYSE: CBI ) : Based in The Netherlands, CBI is involved in engineering, procurement and construction services for customers in the energy and natural resource industries. The $4.7 billion market cap mid-cap was founded more than a century ago in Chicago as a bridge designer and builder. The model I base on the writings of hedge fund guru Joel Greenblatt is particularly high on CBI as a value play. Greenblatt’s approach is a remarkably simple one that looks at just two variables: earnings yield and return on capital. My Greenblatt-inspired model likes CBI’s 16.7% earnings yield (Greenblatt uses earnings before interest and taxes divided by enterprise value for that) and 177% ROC (EBIT/tangible capital employed), which combine to make the stock the most attractive in the entire U.S. market right now, according to this approach. CBI’s 24% long-term EPS growth rate and bargain priced 0.32 PEG ratio also help it earn strong interest from my Lynch-based model.