Tag Archives: nasdaq

Blackbaud, Inc. (BLKB) Ex-Dividend Date Scheduled for February 24, 2016

Blackbaud, Inc. ( BLKB ) will begin trading ex dividend on February 24, 2016. A cash dividend payment of $0.12 per share is scheduled to be paid on March 15, 2016. Shareholders who purchased BLKB prior to the ex

The Best And Worst Of January: Multialternative Funds

Multialternative mutual funds and ETFs averaged losses of 1.60% in January, bringing their average one-year returns through the end of the month to -4.23%. Over the longer three- and five-year periods, multialternative funds have generated positive annualized returns, but at just +0.87% (three-year) and +1.66% (five-year), those returns have delivered negative alpha of 0.81 and 0.99, respectively, relative to Morningstar’s long-only Moderate Target Risk Index. As a whole, the category is host to 163 funds with combined assets of $62.5 billion. At $8.9 billion, the John Hancock Global Absolute Return Strategies Fund (MUTF: JHAIX ) is the largest fund in the category with a 14.2% market share, while the top 10 funds hold a total of $31.7 billion in assets – just over 50% of the category’s total assets. Top Performers in January January’s top-performing multialternative fund was able to generate big gains of 7%, while the second- and third best funds added between 2-3%. The three best-performing multialternative funds in January were: CMG Global Macro Strategy Fund (MUTF: PEGAX ) Absolute Strategies Fund (MUTF: ASFIX ) Vanguard Alternative Strategies Fund (MUTF: VASFX ) PEGAX, the top-performing fund of January, only launched in December 2015. In its first full calendar month, PEGAX returned an impressive +7.00%. According to Morningstar, $10,000 invested in the fund at its inception would have grown by $120 as of February 17 – not bad for just over two months. ASFIX (one of the oldest funds in the category) and VASFX produced gains of 2.87% and 2.83%, respectively, in what was a volatile January for the markets. Of the two funds, only ASFIX has been trading at least a year, and it returned +0.31% for the 12 months ending January 31. The fund’s one-year alpha and beta numbers were -2.25% and -0.65 (relative to the Morningstar Moderate Target Risk Index), through that date, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.07 and volatility of 5.49%. These numbers compare somewhat favorably to the category averages of -2.29%, 0.49, -0.82, and 5.76%. Worst Performers in January While the bottom three funds struggled as equity markets sold off in January, there is a silver lining – the month’s worst-performing fund was solidly in the black for the year ending January 31. The three worst-performing multialternative funds in January were: Catalyst Macro Strategy Fund (MUTF: MCXAX ) Quantified STF Fund (MUTF: QSTAX ) Tocqueville Alternative Strategies Fund (MUTF: TALSX ) Although MCXAX was January’s worst-performing fund by a long shot at -10.24%, the fund was actually the category’s top performer for the year ending January 31, with gains of 32.05%! With a beta of 2.71 to the Morningstar Moderate Target Risk Index, these one-year gains produced an alpha of 42.08% and a Sharpe ratio of 1.19. However, volatility came in at a whopping 26.03% – numbers that are somewhat reminiscent of Barry Bonds’ late-career stats. QSTAX saw its shares fall by 8.05% in January. The fund, which only launched in November 2015, doesn’t have a long enough track record for further analysis. Finally, TALSX was the third-worst performing multialternative fund in January, with one-month losses of 6.53%. For the year ending January 31, TALSX lost 9.45%, thanks to an alpha of -5.30%. Its beta over the time period was 1.05, while its one-year Sharpe ratio stood at -1.00, and its annual volatility was 9.53%. Past performance does not necessarily predict future results. Jason Seagraves contributed to this article.

Investing Begins At The World Economic Forum

Going back to my very first article in Seeking Alpha, I have said that alpha-level results may stem from, “big, developing, scientific, socio-economic, and political patterns and trends that have yet to be reflected in the price of related equities.” I call this approach, “strategic investing”. Such ideas can arise anytime, anywhere. However, if an investor had only one place to look for them, they could do no better than the World Economic Forum. The World Economic Forum was established in 1971 by German engineer, economist and visionary Klaus Schwab . It is a non-partisan, public-private, non-profit foundation, “committed to improving the state of the world”. The Forum serves its mission by bringing together top leaders – policy-makers, corporate executives, entrepreneurs, academics and others – to influence positive change globally, regionally, and across industry. The Forum’s board, executive committee, membership and partners are truly the international Who’s Who. Periodically, the World Economic Forum publishes “Insight Reports” including their “Global Risks 2015” report. By way of background, the Forum defines a global risk as, “an uncertain event or condition that, if it occurs, can cause significant negative impact for several countries or industries within the next 10 years.” The data for the report come from a survey of World Economic Forum members. In other words, the published findings rely on a Delphi method drawing on diverse opinions of the best and brightest in the world. In the very first graphic of their report, the Forum plots the global risks according to two dimensions, impact versus likelihood. As you can see, the risks that rate the highest across both vectors are: a) Water Crises, b) Interstate [geopolitical] Conflicts, c) Failure of Climate / Change Adaptation, d) Unemployment / Underemployment, e) Fiscal Crises, f) Cyber Attacks, g) Asset Bubbles, h) Terrorist Attacks, i) Profound Social Instability, and j) Food Crises. Click to enlarge This straightforward analysis can begin to inform your decisions about where to invest. Reflecting my belief that challenges represent opportunities more than they do threats, I used the “Global Risks 2015” report to confirm decisions I had made earlier relying on other sources of information. Specifically: In response to developing water crises, I am invested in the two largest and most established water management companies in the world, Suez Environnemental ( OTCPK:SZEVY ) and Veolia Environnemental ( OTCPK:VEOEY ). In addition to being able to muster resources to help increase the supply of fresh water, I believe that third-party companies like these can help government with tough decisions about allocation of this increasingly scarce resource. With respect to adaptation compelled by climate change, I hold shares in companies investing to fight migrating tropical diseases including with vaccines; GlaxoSmithKline (NYSE: GSK ), Merck (NYSE: MRK ), Novartis (NYSE: NVS ), Pfizer (NYSE: PFE ), and Sanofi (NYSE: SNY ). Very recently, I also established a position in a company involved with genetically-modified mosquitoes, Intrexon (NYSE: XON ). Just last week, the BBC reported that the World Health Organization / WHO approved trials involving GM mosquitoes. As to terrorist attacks and to some extent interstate conflicts, a year or so ago anticipating the end of sequestration, I allocated resources to the major military contractors including General Dynamics (NYSE: GD ), Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT ), Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC ), and Raytheon (NYSE: RTN ). In the field of cyber-security, there are so many players involved that I’m having trouble keeping track of them all. However, my sense is that Accenture (NYSE: ACN ) and IBM (NYSE: IBM ), because of their strong positions operating and supporting the systems of the largest companies in the world, will be among the major contenders in the space and I am invested in both. Security is also central to the protection of the power grid and so I am invested in it through General Electric (NYSE: GE ). Lest I forget, military defense contractors also have a major commercial role to play in cyber-security given their institutional know-how of NIST / FIPS testing. Food deserves a place in everyone’s portfolio. However, as opposed to investing in ‘downstream / end-product’ processors, I prefer to focus ‘upstream’ on companies closer to farmers. For this reason, I am invested in Bunge (NYSE: BG ) and Ingredion (NYSE: INGR ). I also hold shares in DuPont (NYSE: DD ) both because of its agricultural chemical business as well as its position in hybrid seeds through Pioneer. Executives often begin their annual planning retreats with a presentation / discussion of major environmental factors that are likely to affect their organization, clients, and competitors. Such external information is often critical to what they do internally. It should be no different for individual investors – an approach that begins with an outward focus makes a lot more sense than picking investments by first studying numbers, ratios and so forth. But, as I have said before, this is not to say that fundamental and technical analysis are not also foundational to successful investing. Disclosure: I am/we are long SZEVY,VEOEY,GSK,MRK,NVS,PFE,SNY,XON,GD,LMT,NOC,RTN,ACN,IBM,GE,BG,INGR, DD. 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. Additional disclosure: As I do, always consult a competent advisor(s) in making your investment decisions. In addition to challenging your assumptions, they can steer you clear of potholes having to do with thinly-trading stocks, foreign tax withholding on dividends, etc. 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.