Tag Archives: management

Investing In A Turbulent Market

Summary In turbulent times, investors need a plan and stick with a few basic rules. Assess macro conditions to guide investment decisions. Recognize the fact that danger and opportunities usually go hand in hand. Actively tweak winning odds to our favor as frequently as we can. It’s been two months since I left my role as a systematic global macro manager to focus on a few equity strategies I have been developing over the past few years. The timing was not great as world equities have been in a tailspin. Many blame China, the US Federal Reserve, and anemic world economic growth as the causes of the selloff. To me, they are just excuses. The real culprit of the market downturn is the investor jitters. Disciplined investors should follow some basic principles for investing in a turbulent environment. Here are some rules I follow: 1. Assess macro conditions to guide investment decisions 2. Recognize the fact that danger and opportunities usually go hand in hand 3. Actively tweak winning odds to our favor as frequently as we can. Assessing Macro Conditions to Guide Investment Decisions An old saying “rising tide lifts all boats” has found new meaning in stocks since 2009. Central banks around the world injected trillions of dollars into the world financial system. Ample money supply is undeniably one of the most important reasons for the current equity bull market. An equity investor should have done well if he recognized this simple macro factor. Therefore, accurately assessing the global macro environment is instrumental in performance. Differing opinions of economic conditions are the root cause of investor anxiety. So where are we now? China, as the world economic growth engine for the last decade, is facing some headwinds. It needs to absorb the excess from multi-decade economic expansion, rein in speculation, transition its economy from low-cost manufacturing to service and consumption, and steady investments and long-term growth to a sustainable level. Such a transition is not going to be easy and painless at all times. As someone who grew up in China before the reform began in earnest, I often found investors not giving enough credit to the success of China’s economic policies that has elevated a poor country with food rationing to a world economic powerhouse. Over the past 20 years, there were many calls of hard landing in China by market “gurus,” but none materialized. There is a certain arrogance to those calls. Is China facing hard landing again this time? I doubt that! Just as we like to say in the West “quiet water runs deep,” people in the East like to say, “narrow water runs far.” Publicizing policies has never been a strong suit of running things in China. Nevertheless, I believe China has economic means and a deep bench of highly skilled policy makers to navigate choppy waters. Everyone can make mistakes, but so far, there is no indication that China won’t be successful again in turning the ship around this time. In my view, they are proactively using policy tools to minimize the negative impact in a changing world. Investors are fickle. Before the two-day US Federal Reserve policy meeting last week, futures market implied a 30% chance of an interest rate hike in September. The market was right, the Federal Reserve did not hike interest rates. At the same time, investors reacted poorly to the decision as the US dollar sold off and interest rates dropped immediately after the announcement. Was the decision a surprise or was it expected? Investors cannot make up their mind. In my view, the timing of the Fed rate hike is not that important. There is no urgency to a rate hike in the absence of inflationary pressures. Nevertheless, barring significant economic deterioration, we will get a rate hike in December. Otherwise, Chairman Yellen’s credibility will be at risk as she previously indicated a hike this year. Given that outlook, I suspect both US dollar and interest rates will trade higher in the next two months. Moreover, according to some studies, a 25 basis points hike will only roughly translate into a 0.1% decline in GDP growth. There is simply no reason to be fixated on that. Accurate macro assessments can not only help us achieve long-term profitability, but also guide our short-term trading. A number of recent selloffs in global equity markets were in sympathy to selloffs in the Chinese equity market. Given the Chinese National Day is coming on October 1, an imminent meltdown in China is almost impossible. Therefore, any significant selloff could create short-term buying opportunities. Recognize the Fact that Danger and Opportunities Usually Go Hand in Hand Novice investors tend to chase markets and hang on to losers too long. It is much better to pick up quality names in a down market when everyone else is selling. In addition, losers tend to go down less than quality names precisely because some investors cannot psychologically part with losers, and instead sell stocks with gains to raise funds during a market downturn. Do not be afraid of selling losers! Better yet, pick up some winners in a down drift by selling losers for harvesting capital losses to reduce realized capital gains. Furthermore, global economic conditions are getting better, not worse – Europe is finally getting ahead of its sovereign debt crisis, the US economic growth is intact, China is working out short-term pains for long-term gains, the weak energy price should largely be stimulative to growth, and global monetary policies will remain accommodative for the foreseeable future. Therefore, there are opportunities to be had in the current passing danger. Actively Tweak Winning Odds to Our Favor as Frequently as We Can I consider myself as a long-term investor as I look to profit from fundamental research and typically hold stocks for an extended period of time. Fundamentals never play out overnight. However, I question the effectiveness of the “buy, hold and do nothing” strategy in the current market environment where information is so readily available through the internet, media, and social networks, affecting investor psyche constantly, and generating market volatility. Because of daily marks to market, professional hedge fund managers cannot sit idle and do nothing during market turbulence. I would argue that individual investors who look after their own portfolios should also be actively looking for ways to increase winning odds by using available tools such as listed equity options. Here are a few suggestions: a. If one wants to buy 100 shares of stock XYZ, he can sell one contract of put option at a strike price lower than or close to the current stock price. At maturity, if the stock price is higher than the strike price, one gets to keep the put option premium; otherwise, one acquires the stock at a price lower than the current price. b. When a stock in a portfolio has appreciated significantly, one should consider selling some covered calls to lighten up the load. At maturity, if the stock price is higher than the strike price, one effectively sells the stock at the strike price plus option premium; otherwise, he gets to keep the option premium. c. In fact, instead of following the red-hot “dividend investing” strategy, a) and b) can be viewed as a “create-your-own-dividend” strategy on any stock. With weekly options, one can aim to generate 10% annual yield by selling options. That’s 10% income and/or cushion one doesn’t have if he does nothing. d. During a market downturn, instead of buying quality stocks outright, one can buy calendar spreads, i.e. buying long-term calls against selling short-term calls at appropriate strikes to further reduce risk. e. Shorting high beta, richly valued stocks can be a more effective hedge than shorting index futures in the portfolio. There are many strategies that can be deployed day in and day out to generate consistent returns or opportunistically in turbulence when everything is out of whack. But one should always have a plan to deal with different market conditions and follow a set of rules so that he is not caught off guard. Let me know what you think. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) 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.

XLV: Getting Your Dose Of Pharmaceuticals And Biotechnology In A Single Source

Summary XLV is a Health Care ETF with the heaviest allocations going to Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology. The returns figures look fairly volatile in a regression analysis which makes it substantially more difficult to diversify away the excess risk. The nice thing for shareholders is that they would be holding the very companies that are establishing the prices for the medicine they may consume. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. One of the funds I am assessing is the Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLV ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. Expense Ratio The expense ratio for Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF is .15%, which isn’t too bad at all. I’d love to see the expense ratio go under .10%, but .15% is within reason and not too bad for giving investors exposure to the Health Care sector. Remember that the Biotechnology sector is also within the Health Care sector which makes it more volatile. Largest Holdings (click to enlarge) I don’t see anything to complain about here. The top holdings for the ETF almost perfectly mirror the index so investors should expect the portfolio to have very similar returns. Given the low expense ratio, a fairly passive indexing strategy is usually the result. I’m fine with that. Passive indexing is a solid strategy over the long term. Looking at the individual companies, I like seeing Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ ) at the top of the holdings. This is a strong dividend company that offers investors some stability. Their product lineup is diverse enough that they are largely protecting from minor shifts in the economy and positioned to benefit from an aging population requiring more medicine. Sector The largest weighting by sector is clearly the pharmaceuticals rather than biotechnology stocks. As a result of this sector diversification the fund is dramatically more stable than peers that are heavily invested in biotechnology companies. On the other hand, the returns for it have also been materially weaker. Building the Portfolio The sample portfolio I ran for this assessment is one that came out feeling a bit awkward. I’ve had some requests to include biotechnology ETFs and I decided it would be wise to also include a the related field of health care for a comparison. Since I wanted to create quite a bit of diversification, I put in 9 ETFs plus the S&P 500. The resulting portfolio is one that I think turned out to be too risky for most investors and certainly too risky for older investors. Despite that weakness, I opted to go with highlighting these ETFs in this manner because I think it is useful to show investors what it looks like when the allocations result in a suboptimal allocation. The weightings for each ETF in the portfolio are a simple 10% which results in 20% of the portfolio going to the combined Health Care and Biotechnology sectors. Outside of that we have one spot each for REITs, high yield bonds, TIPS, emerging market consumer staples, domestic consumer staples, foreign large capitalization firms, and long term bonds. The first thing I want to point out about these allocations are that for any older investor, running only 30% in bonds with 10% of that being high yield bonds is putting yourself in a fairly dangerous position. I will be highlighting the individual ETFs, but I would not endorse this portfolio as a whole. The portfolio assumes frequent rebalancing which would be a problem for short term trading outside of tax advantaged accounts unless the investor was going to rebalance by adding to their positions on a regular basis and allocating the majority of the capital towards whichever portions of the portfolio had been underperforming recently. Because a substantial portion of the yield from this portfolio comes from REITs and interest, I would favor this portfolio as a tax exempt strategy even if the investor was frequently rebalancing by adding new capital. The portfolio allocations can be seen below along with the dividend yields from each investment. Name Ticker Portfolio Weight Yield SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY 10.00% 2.11% Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF XLV 10.00% 1.40% SPDR Biotech ETF XBI 10.00% 1.54% iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF IYR 10.00% 3.83% PowerShares Fundamental High Yield Corporate Bond Portfolio ETF PHB 10.00% 4.51% FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index ETF TDTT 10.00% 0.16% EGShares Emerging Markets Consumer ETF ECON 10.00% 1.34% Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF FSTA 10.00% 2.99% iShares MSCI EAFE ETF EFA 10.00% 2.89% Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF BLV 10.00% 4.02%   Portfolio 100.00% 2.48% The next chart shows the annualized volatility and beta of the portfolio since October of 2013. (click to enlarge) Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. You can see immediately since this is a simple “equal weight” portfolio that XBI is by far the most risky ETF from the perspective of what it does to the portfolio’s volatility. You can also see that BLV has a negative total risk impact on the portfolio. When you see negative risk contributions in this kind of assessment it generally means that there will be significantly negative correlations with other asset classes in the portfolio. The position in TDTT is also unique for having a risk contribution of almost nothing. Unfortunately, it also provides a weak yield and weak return with little opportunity for that to change unless yields on TIPS improve substantially. If that happened, it would create a significant loss before the position would start generating meaningful levels of income. A quick rundown of the portfolio I put together the following chart that really simplifies the role of each investment: Name Ticker Role in Portfolio SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY Core of Portfolio Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF XLV Hedge Risk of Higher Costs SPDR Biotech ETF XBI Increase Expected Return iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF IYR Diversify Domestic Risk PowerShares Fundamental High Yield Corporate Bond Portfolio ETF PHB Strong Yields on Bond Investments FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index ETF TDTT Very Low Volatility EGShares Emerging Markets Consumer ETF ECON Enhance Foreign Exposure Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF FSTA Reduce Portfolio Risk iShares MSCI EAFE ETF EFA Enhance Foreign Exposure Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF BLV Negative Correlation, Strong Yield Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio. Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. (click to enlarge) Conclusion XLV is substantially less risky than the XBI. Since XBI is almost exclusively biotechnology companies, I’m not surprised that XLV is so much safer. Of course, it is still a fairly risky investment in its own right. The ETF has a beta higher than 1.00 so it will naturally be increasing the risk level on most traditional portfolios. The correlation with the S&P 500 stands at .88 which is high enough that it may be a concern. The bigger issue, in my opinion, is that XLV has a weaker negative correlation with the kind of long term bond holdings that investors would use to reduce portfolio volatility. In this case, that is demonstrated by having a negative correlation with BLV of only -.23 compared to -.29 for the S&P 500. I would treat XLV as a fairly aggressive allocation. If investors intend to bring their portfolio volatility significantly below the S&P 500, it will be more difficult if the allocations to XLV are significant. Despite the volatility, I do like the exposure within the portfolio. A heavy exposure to the pharmaceutical companies makes sense when an investor expects to be practically forced to buy their products in the future. While the portfolio has more volatility under modern portfolio theory, it does allow investors to benefit as shareholders if prices (and profits) from the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sector increase. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.

Leveraged Cybersecurity ETFs Are Debuting At A Dangerous Time

Summary Direxion launched two leveraged cybersecurity ETFs this past week. These ETFs may be debuting at a time when the popularity of cybsecurity stocks has already cooled and valuations are still very high. History has taught us the dangers of investors choosing to chase past performance or chasing “hot” stocks. It was probably just a matter of time before Direxion – one of the primary issuer of leveraged and inverse ETFs – jumped on the popularity of cybersecurity stocks. This past week, Direxion launched the Direxion Daily Cyber Security Bull 2X Shares ETF (NYSEARCA: HAKK ) and the Direxion Daily Cyber Security Bear 2x Shares ETF (NYSEARCA: HAKD ) options on the cybersecurity sector. But like many products that get launched after the initial popularity soars, the timing often proves to be a dangerous investor trap. The first ETF to jump on the trend – the PureFunds ISE Cybersecurity ETF (NYSEARCA: HACK ) – has quickly racked up well over $1B in assets and was up over 30% within 8 months of its debut. Cybersecurity stocks have cooled off though thanks to the global economic environment and now the fund is up just marginally since it opened. HACK data by YCharts Followers of behavioral finance will tell you all about investors’ tendency to chase past returns and how it often results in buying high and selling low. You probably won’t be surprised to learn that AUM began ramping up at their fastest pace as cybersecurity stocks were peaking earlier this summer. Just in time for these investors to experience the subsequent pullback. Which is why launching a leveraged cybersecurity ETF right now is dangerous. Investors are still being told in the mainstream media that cybersecurity companies are “hot” and money is still pouring into these products. Even after the recent pullback, many of these cybersecurity companies are trading at very rich multiples. Many of these companies still have yet to turn a profit so measuring them by P/E would be unfair. Instead, let’s use the P/S ratio to try to gauge valuation levels. The S&P 500 as a whole currently trades at a P/S multiple of 1.63. Popular stocks in the sector include Palo Alto Networks (NYSE: PANW ) at 16.98, FireEye (NASDAQ: FEYE ) at 11.13, Fortinet (NASDAQ: FTNT ) at 8.97 and Checkpoint (NASDAQ: CHKP ) at 9.33. While the P/S ratio isn’t necessarily an all-in-one measure, it does go to say that even after the recent pullback cybersecurity companies are still very expensive and could indeed fall much further. Looking back at the Nasdaq bubble in 2000 gives us many examples of investments launched at the wrong time. Take the Jacob Internet Fund (MUTF: JAMFX ). This fund was one of the first mutual funds targeting primarily internet stocks at the time. In the six month period from roughly October 1999 through March 2000, the Nasdaq Composite rose over 175%. The Jacob Internet Fund debuted in December 1999 right as tech stocks were about to hit their peak. What happened next is still a good lesson in the dangers of chasing performance or “hot” stocks. The Jacob Internet rose around 20% in the few months after its debut but by the second half of 2001 the fund had lost around 95% of its 2000 peak value. JAMFX data by YCharts That’s not to suggest that a crash like that is imminent in cybersecurity companies but it does make very clear that jumping into a cybersecurity ETF – especially a leveraged cybersecurity ETF like the two launched last week that are designed to magnify the returns of the sector – could be especially dangerous. Conclusion Direxion is well within their boundaries launching these two ETFs right now but it might not be doing the average investor any favors. These ETFs have a triple whammy of risks – investing in risky cybersecurity stocks, investing in leveraged securities and investing when much of the frothy returns may have already been had. These ETFs are very much a case of “buyer beware” for investors. Disclosure: I am/we are long FEYE. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.