Tag Archives: nreum

Avoiding The Pitfalls Of Factor-Based Investing

By DailyAlts Staff The proliferation of smart beta ETFs may be a relatively recent phenomenon, but the risk factors used to construct smart-beta indexes – most notably value, momentum, low beta, quality, illiquidity, and size – have been a popular topic for financial researchers for nearly three decades. Building off the early handful of factors, factor-based investing has since been expanded to as many as 250 distinct factors that have allegedly generated historical outperformance, but Research Affiliates’ Jason Hsu, Vitali Kalesnik, and Vivek Viswanathan argue that the supposed outperformance of most (if not all) of these new factors is illusory, based on cherry-picking by researchers and “artifacts” of the data. In fact, Mr. Hsu and his colleagues believe at least one of the traditional factors may be unlikely to generate superior risk-adjusted returns going forward. The researchers make their case in the Summer 2015 edition of The Journal of Index Investing , in an article titled “A Framework for Assessing Factors and Implementing Smart Beta Strategies.” Factor Robustness Hsu, et al. allege that economists, financial researchers, and other quantitative analysts are constantly trying to determine new factors, and that only their positive results are likely to get published. New research undermining an existing and semi-popular factor is unlikely to make it to the stage of peer review, according to Research Affiliates. This means that investors, advisors, and other decision-makers must test would-be factors for robustness themselves. Behind the quantitative data, Hsu, et al. insist that factors must be based on economic intuition and make sense within a theoretical framework – otherwise, they’re likely to be statistical noise. Factor premiums can be based on risk or behavioral issues, but in either case, they should span across geographic markets. If back-testing reveals a factor premium for U.S. stocks, that same premium should be evident in Japan and elsewhere. But when analyzed across geographic regions, only the value and low-beta factors consistently hold up; while momentum, quality, and illiquidity are mixed; and size shows no consistency whatsoever. (click to enlarge) Factor Perturbations Since legitimate factors must make intuitive sense, it stands to reason that they should hold up under “perturbations” of their definitions. For example, the value factor is typically defined with book-to-price ratio, but dividend yield and earnings yield (earnings-to-price) also make sense. Therefore, if the value premium were only evident when measured according to book-to-price, the theoretical framework would crumble. Fortunately for value investors, Research Affiliates’ research indicates that value holds up well under a variety of definitions – as do the momentum, low-beta, and illiquidity factors – but quality and size do not. (click to enlarge) Size Doesn’t Matter? According to Hsu, et al., the small-size factor premium is based on back-testing that includes several months of major small-cap outperformance back in the 1930s, and the factor has not generated alpha since its discovery in the early 1980s. Of course, the 1930s were a time of deflation (strengthening dollar) and the 1980s kicked off a 30-year bull market in bonds (weakening the dollar), which could play a significant role in the data. Today, it is generally assumed that small-cap stocks – with a higher degree of U.S. dollar exposure – benefit from a strong currency. Implementation and Allocation Hsu, et al.’s paper looks into implementation and allocation issues, as well, and notes that transaction costs are rarely taken into account by factor-based investors – and this is a mistake. To maximize risk-adjusted returns, factor-based investors should rotate their portfolios only as often as is necessary to capture the factor premium, and no more. The authors say that factor allocation faces many of the same challenges as asset allocation, and that smart-beta solutions should be customized to meet individual investors’ unique risk tolerances. For more information, visit researchaffiliates.com to download a pdf copy of the paper .

BlackRock Utility And Infrastructure Trust: An Option Player In The ETF Utility Space

I recently looked at UTG and UTF, leading readers to ask about BUI. BUI is BlackRock’s entrant into the infrastructure space. The biggest difference it offers is the use of options. I recently wrote an article reviewing two relatively long-standing infrastructure closed-end funds , or CEFs. My conclusion being that Reaves Utility Income Fund (NYSEMKT: UTG ) and Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Fund (NYSE: UTF ) are both good products, though UTF is trading at a wider discount at the moment. Readers of that article asked my take on BlackRock Utility and Infrastructure Trust (NYSE: BUI ), another option (that’s a pun, actually) in the space. What is BUI? BUI opened its doors in late 2011, meaning that it doesn’t have the longevity of UTG or UTF. In fact, it hasn’t really witnessed a major market correction yet, like the pain we all suffered at the turn of the century and more recently during the 2007 to 2009 recession. This is less of a knock than a piece of information to keep in mind. BUI isn’t doing anything outlandish, so it’s unlikely it would “blow up” in a downturn. Actually, just the opposite is likely to be the case, but that expectation is untested. That said, what does it do? As the name implies, like UTG and UTF, BUI invests in things like electric utilities, water utilities, pipelines, bridges, and other similar hard assets. These are the types of things we take for granted, but without which life simply wouldn’t go on as it had before. On that score, it does, indeed, deserve to be looked at with UTG and UTF. However, there’s a not too subtle difference here. UTG and UTF both make use of leverage. BUI does not. It enhances returns, specifically income, through the use of an option overlay strategy . This means two things: return of capital will always be an issue and the options it writes could provide downside protection in a bear market. One of UTG’s big bragging rights is that it has never used return of capital to support its distributions. They have always come out of income and capital gains. You can argue this doesn’t matter much so long as a fund isn’t using destructive return of capital over extended periods. For example, UTF has used return of capital in the past and in one recent year it was destructive (the net asset value went down at the same time as return of capital was being used to support the dividend). However, that was one year and UTF hasn’t used return of capital recently. But some investors are highly suspicious of return of capital distributions. And BUI has made use of return of capital every single year. Why? Because it writes options. Dividends and interest on debt fall into investment income. Capital gains fall into, well, capital gains. Option income isn’t either of those things and winds up getting shoved into return of capital. It hasn’t proven to be a bad thing at BUI, with the net asset value, or NAV, increasing from $19.10 a share at its initial public offering to $21.50 or so more recently. So, at this point, the issue of return of capital hasn’t been a big one and likely only matters if you have a personal issue with that type of distribution. Looking at options from a different angle, the premiums received can provide return during down markets. This protects an option writing fund’s returns to some extent from the full effects of a market decline. In the case of BUI, however, that’s more of an academic issue because the fund has yet to deal with a truly severe downdraft. So, in theory, BUI should hold up better than UTG or UTF in a downturn. But it’s worth noting that the use of leverage at these two funds is likely to result in notable underperformance during a bear market. Both funds, for example, lost more than 40% of their NAV value in 2008. A fact to keep in mind when you consider that options can also limit BUI’s upside because positions will get called away. So BUI should lag in good markets and shine in bad ones compared to UTG and UTF. How has it done? Looking at performance numbers, BUI has underperformed relative to UTG and UTF on an NAV total return basis over the trailing three-year period through May (BUI’s short history means that’s the furthest back this trio can be compared). Interestingly, however, over the trailing six months period, UTG is down 2.7%, UTF is up a scant 0.4%, and BUI is up roughly 1.8%. Although hardly a bear market, while UTG and UTF have struggled, BUI is beating them. BUI’s standard deviation goes right along with that. UTG and UTF have three year standard deviations, a measure of volatility, of 13.5 and 11.4, respectively. BUI’s standard deviation is a far more subdued 8.5% over that span. Looking at cost, UTG is trading at a small discount to its NAV and roughly in line with its historical price trends. UTF, meanwhile, is trading far more cheaply at an around 14% discount. BUI is trading at a discount of around 12%, nearly three percentage points more than its trailing three-year average discount. Investors looking for bargains should be interested in UTF and BUI. That said, if you are concerned about risk, BUI should have the edge (despite the fact that it hasn’t been stress tested by a deep downturn). Yield wise, BUI’s distribution is around 7.5%. That’s in the same area as UTF, but notably above UTG’s 6.3% yield. That said, it’s worth repeating that UTF and UTG use leverage to enhance yield, hopefully earning more in dividends than they pay in interest. BUI, on the other hand, generates income by selling options on its holdings, which generates return of capital, can limit upside potential, yet also helps to reduce volatility. And options are also cheaper to deal with, which is why BUI’s expense ratio is around 1.1%. Both UTG and UTF have to contend with interest costs, which push their expense ratios up to 1.7% and 2.2%, respectively. Who’s BUI for? Whether or not you want to purchase BUI really boils down to your concern about market volatility. If you think the markets are trading at premium levels and could be due for a correction, theoretically, BUI is probably the best choice out of these three funds. It also has the allure of trading at a noticeable discount, like UTF, if you prefer to buy on the cheap. And it’s the least expensive to own based on fees. All of that said, I still like UTG because of its longevity and the fact that it has never cut its distribution. But for risk-averse investors who don’t have an issue with return of capital, BUI is truly worthy of consideration. Disclosure: The author has no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Retired With Money To Invest? Consider Playing Defense With Utilities

Summary Utility stocks have moved from overvaluation to undervaluation. Utility stocks are attractive for their safety and high current yield. Utility stocks can be used to increase a portfolio’s yield or defensively in lieu of holding cash. To get a free, more detailed perspective on utility stocks, follow this direct link to a video on my site mistervaluation.com and watch and listen to me analyze these companies out loud via the FAST Graphs fundamentals analyzer software tool. Introduction It is no secret that the stock market in the general sense is trading at a higher valuation than normal. On the other hand, I would argue that it’s far from bubble territory. Regardless, I must admit that finding attractive valuations is getting harder with each passing day. This is especially true for the conservative retired investor looking for safe sources of income in order to fund their golden years. But, at the same time, that does not mean that good value or sound investments cannot be found. In the same vein, many, if not most, of the best-of-breed blue-chip dividend growth stocks are also now fully valued. However, it’s important to point out that fully valued does not mean the same thing as dangerously overvalued. Instead, it implies that many of our best dividend growth stocks are not bargains today. For example, quality blue chips like Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG ) or Kimberly-Clark (NYSE: KMB ) offer dividend yields in excess of 3%, which is reasonably attractive given the current low interest rate environment. The fact that both of those names are Dividend Champions and/or Aristocrats suggest that future dividend increases can also be rationally expected. However, since both of these names are trading at above-average premium valuations, it also indicates higher-than-normal risk and perhaps less than historical normal total return opportunities. To illustrate my point, I offer the following earnings and price correlated F.A.S.T. Graphs on Kimberly-Clark since 2003. Utilizing the calculating feature of the research tool, I chose a point (May 28, 2004) where Kimberly-Clark was trading at approximately the same P/E ratio of 19, as it does today. Then, I ran my calculation out to a future point in time when Kimberly-Clark was trading at a fair value P/E ratio of approximately 15 (November 30, 2011) which I contend is inevitable. The total annualized rate of return of 3.96%, although positive, is not necessarily enticing. (click to enlarge) Then, in order to emphasize the value and importance of fair valuation, I conducted a second calculation exercise. Only this time, I waited until a time when Kimberly-Clark’s stock price had, in fact, moved into fair valuation territory (October 31, 2005) and then calculated the return up to the same future point when the company was again at fair valuation (November 30, 2011). The result of investing when fair value was present generated a 7% total annualized return, which is reasonable and acceptable for this high-quality blue-chip. However, there are interesting points to consider and learn from conducting this exercise. Although waiting for fair value to manifest before I invested significantly increased my total annualized return, it simultaneously meant forgoing a couple of dollars per share of dividend income. On the other hand, this exercise illustrated that by being diligent about fair valuation I would have increased my annualized return while simultaneously reducing my risk. The importance of investing only when fair valuation is present should not be disregarded or overlooked. (click to enlarge) Regular readers of my work will attest to the fact that I believe it’s a market of stocks and not a stock market. Therefore, even though I have postulated the notion that the stock market in the general sense, and blue-chip dividend stocks in particular, are currently fully valued to moderately overvalued, that is not to say that all stocks or all sectors are also overvalued. The remainder of this article will offer a look at five high-quality utility stocks that were recently overvalued but have since come into fair valuation territory. Utilities High Yield and Fair Valuation In the introduction I alluded to the fact that I believe common stocks will inevitably move to fair valuation. Modern finance theory would like us to believe that the market is efficient and, therefore, that stocks are always being priced properly. I disagree with that theory, but not totally. Instead of the market always being efficient, I believe that it is always seeking efficiency. In other words, stocks do become improperly priced from time to time, however, they will inevitably move into alignment with fair value in the longer run. This works the same if the market is overvaluing companies as it does if it is undervaluing companies. The utility sector represents a current case in point. From approximately the fall of 2014 through the spring of 2015, utility stocks became moderately overvalued to a similar extent that we currently see with the Kimberly-Clark example above. However, most utility stocks peaked in January, and over the course of the rest of this year, the average utility stock has fallen approximately 15% to 20% off of their highs. Unfortunately, there are many investors that would consider the utility sector’s recent poor performance a negative and look elsewhere. In contrast, I see the utility sector’s recent poor performance as the inevitable process of the market seeking efficiency and see opportunity. Stated more directly, this low-growth but high-yielding sector has gone from being previously unattractive to currently being fairly valued and attractive. Where others see risk, I now see opportunity. Utility Stocks: Sometimes the Best Offense Is a Good Defense There are a couple of facts regarding investing in utility stocks that I would like to simply mention here, and elaborate more on later in the article with specific examples. First and foremost, almost by definition utility stocks tend to have very low historical rates of earnings growth. Therefore, if bought at fair valuation, the capital appreciation component for the long-term buy-and-hold investor will correlate very closely to the company’s rate of change of earnings growth. Consequently, there is not much of a margin for error because even a modest amount of overvaluation can significantly lower or even negate any potential future capital appreciation. Additionally, current yield will be lessened, and risk increased if you overpay for a utility stock even by just a little bit. As previously mentioned, this was the case for utility stocks just a few short months ago, but not anymore. The common view about dividend-paying utility stocks, which I personally share, is that they are high-yielding stable investments with predictable earnings and low volatility. Therefore, utility stocks have long been considered a safe sector. However, it is worth repeating that utility stocks are by their nature not high total return investments. Instead, investors are usually attracted to utility stocks for their above-average current yields, consistent operating results and relative safety. In other words, investors should expect utility stocks to be defensive and stable investments that have consistent earnings growth and offer above-average dividend yield. With attractive value so hard to find today, this makes fairly-valued, high-quality utility stocks worth considering. 5 High Quality, High Yielding, Defensive Utility Stocks for Today’s Uncertain Market When your investing objective is for income, as is the case for many investors in retirement, generating the highest possible total return is not the highest priority. The more prudent focus turns to preserving your capital while generating an attractive level of spendable income. This is a primary reason why investors have traditionally chosen bonds and other fixed income instruments. When interest rates are at more historically normal levels than they currently are, fixed income investments would typically offer a current yield advantage over equities coupled with a higher degree of safety. Unfortunately, that is not the case today. The only way to earn an interest rate that is competitive with the current dividend yield of utility stocks is to either invest in extremely long-term bonds, or invest in lower-quality instruments. That strategy actually negates the traditional benefit the fixed income should offer. In my opinion, in the current low interest rate environment, high-quality utility stocks provide a bridge of sorts. High-quality utility stocks offer more safety than is found with the typical equity, and current yields that are customarily associated with fixed income. Consequently, I believe that carefully selected utility stocks available at sound valuations can provide viable investment options for investors in retirement and in need of income. With this article, I offer five high-quality utility stock candidates that prudent income-seeking investors with fresh capital to invest might consider. My selection process was straightforward. Each candidate had to have a credit rating of BBB+ or higher, a dividend yield in excess of 4%, and a P/E ratio between 14 to 16. Four of these candidates meet those criteria perfectly. However, as I will discuss later, my favorite utility, Wisconsin Electric, is currently at a P/E ratio of approximately 17 and its dividend yield is 3.7%. However, I included it because it has historically been one of the most consistent and fast-growing utilities in the country. To get a free more detailed perspective on utility stocks, follow this direct link to a video on my site mistervaluation.com and watch and listen to me analyze these companies out loud via the FAST Graphs fundamentals analyzer software tool. Consolidated Edison, Inc. (NYSE: ED ) Short business description, courtesy S&P Capital IQ: “Consolidated Edison, Inc., through its subsidiaries, engages in regulated electric, gas, and steam delivery businesses in the United States. It offers electric services to approximately 3.4 million customers in New York City and Westchester County; gas to approximately 1.1 million customers in Manhattan, the Bronx, and parts of Queens and Westchester County; and steam to approximately 1,700 customers in parts of Manhattan. The company owns 62 area distribution substations and various distribution facilities; 39 transmission substations and 62 area stations; electric generation facilities with an aggregate capacity of 705 megawatts that run with gas and fuel oil; 4,330 miles of mains and 369,339 service lines for natural gas distribution; and 1 steam-electric generating station and 5 steam-only generating stations. It also supplies electricity to approximately 0.3 million customers in southeastern New York, and in adjacent areas of northern New Jersey and northeastern Pennsylvania; and gas to approximately 0.1 million customers in southeastern New York and adjacent areas of northeastern Pennsylvania. The company operates 572 circuit miles of transmission lines; 14 transmission substations; 62 distribution substations; 86,379 in-service line transformers; 3,991 pole miles of overhead distribution lines; and 1,869 miles of underground distribution lines, as well as 1,867 miles of mains and 105,077 service lines for natural gas distribution. In addition, it is involved in the sale and related hedging of electricity to retail customers; and provision of energy-related products and services to wholesale and retail customers. Further, the company develops, owns, and operates renewable and energy infrastructure projects, as well as invests in transmission companies. It primarily sells electricity to industrial, commercial, residential, and governmental customers. The company was founded in 1884 and is based in New York, New York.” Consolidated Edison is attractively valued at a blended P/E ratio of 14.8 and offers a dividend yield of 4.5%. Since the beginning of 2015, Consolidated Edison’s stock price has inevitably moved from moderate overvaluation to its current fair valuation level. (click to enlarge) It should be no surprise that when reviewing the performance of Consolidated Edison relative to the S&P 500 that the index outperforms on a total return basis. However, as previously discussed, the attractiveness of utilities comes from their relative safety and superior dividend income-producing ability. Therefore, I direct the reader’s attention to the cumulative total dividend income advantage of Consolidated Edison over the S&P 500. (click to enlarge) Since the primary attraction of investing in utility stocks is for their safety and high dividend income, each candidate’s ability to support their dividend is of paramount importance. The following FUN Graph (fundamental underlying numbers) reflects revenues per share (revps), cash flow per share (cflps) and dividends paid per share (dvpps). Clearly, dividend coverage is supported by revenues and cash flows. (click to enlarge) SCANA Corporation (NYSE: SCG ) Short business description, courtesy S&P Capital IQ: “SCANA Corporation, through its subsidiaries, engages in the generation, transmission, distribution, and sale of electricity to retail and wholesale customers in South Carolina. It owns nuclear, coal, hydro, natural gas and oil, and biomass generating facilities. The company also purchases, sells, and transports natural gas; offers energy-related services; and owns and operates a fiber optic telecommunications network, ethernet network, and data center facilities in South Carolina. In addition, it offers tower site construction, management, and rental services, as well as sells towers in South Carolina, North Carolina, and Tennessee. As of December 31, 2014, the company supplied electricity to approximately 688,000 customers; and provided natural gas to approximately 859,000 residential, commercial, and industrial customers in North Carolina and South Carolina, as well as markets natural gas to approximately 459,000 customers in Georgia. It serves municipalities, electric cooperatives, other investor-owned utilities, registered marketers, and federal and state electric agencies, as well as chemical, educational service, paper product, food product, lumber and wood product, health service, textile manufacturing, rubber and miscellaneous plastic product, and fabricated metal product industries. The company was founded in 1924 and is based in Cayce, South Carolina.” SCANA is attractively valued at a blended P/E ratio of 14 and offers a dividend yield of 4.3%. Since the beginning of 2015, SCANA’s stock price has inevitably moved from moderate overvaluation to its current fair valuation level. (click to enlarge) It should be no surprise that when reviewing the performance of SCANA Corp. relative to the S&P 500 that the index outperforms on a total return basis. However, as previously discussed, the attractiveness of utilities comes from their relative safety and superior dividend income-producing ability. Therefore, I direct the reader’s attention to the cumulative total dividend income advantage of SCANA Corp. over the S&P 500. (click to enlarge) Since the primary attraction of investing in utility stocks is for their safety and high dividend income, each candidate’s ability to support their dividend is of paramount importance. The following FUN Graph (fundamental underlying numbers) reflects revenues per share (revps), cash flow per share (cflps) and dividends paid per share (dvpps). Clearly, dividend coverage is supported by revenues and cash flows. (click to enlarge) The Southern Company (NYSE: SO ) Short business description, courtesy S&P Capital IQ: “The Southern Company, together with its subsidiaries, operates as a public electric utility company. It is involved in the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity through coal, nuclear, oil and gas, and hydro resources in the states of Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and Mississippi. The company also constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets, including renewable energy projects. As of December 31, 2014, it operated 33 hydroelectric generating stations, 33 fossil fuel generating stations, 3 nuclear generating stations, 13 combined cycle/cogeneration stations, 9 solar facilities, 1 biomass facility, and 1 landfill gas facility. The company also provides digital wireless communications services with various communication options, including push to talk, cellular service, text messaging, wireless Internet access, and wireless data; and wholesale fiber optic solutions to telecommunication providers in the Southeast. The Southern Company was founded in 1945 and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia.” Southern Company is attractively valued at a blended P/E ratio of 15.1 and offers a dividend yield of 5.1%. Since the beginning of 2015, Southern Company’s stock price has inevitably moved from moderate overvaluation to its current fair valuation level. (click to enlarge) It should be no surprise that when reviewing the performance of Southern Company relative to the S&P 500 that the index outperforms on a total return basis. However, as previously discussed, the attractiveness of utilities comes from their relative safety and superior dividend income-producing ability. Therefore, I direct the reader’s attention to the cumulative total dividend income advantage of Southern Company over the S&P 500. (click to enlarge) Since the primary attraction of investing in utility stocks is for their safety and high dividend income, each candidate’s ability to support their dividend is of paramount importance. The following FUN Graph (fundamental underlying numbers) reflects revenues per share (revps), cash flow per share (cflps) and dividends paid per share (dvpps). Clearly, dividend coverage is supported by revenues and cash flows. (click to enlarge) Xcel Energy Inc. (NYSE: XEL ) Short business description, courtesy S&P Capital IQ: “Xcel Energy Inc., through its subsidiaries, engages primarily in the generation, purchase, transmission, distribution, and sale of electricity in the United States. It operates through Regulated Electric Utility, Regulated Natural Gas Utility, and All Other segments. The company generates electricity using coal, nuclear, natural gas, hydro, solar, biomass, oil and refuse, and wind energy sources. It is also involved in the purchase, transportation, distribution, and sale of natural gas. In addition, the company engages in developing and leasing natural gas pipelines, and storage and compression facilities; and investing in rental housing projects. It serves residential, commercial, and industrial customers, as well as public authorities in the portions of Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin. Xcel Energy Inc. was founded in 1909 and is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota.” Xcel Energy is attractively valued at a blended P/E ratio of 15.9 and offers a dividend yield of 3.9%. Since the beginning of 2015, Xcel Energy’s stock price has inevitably moved from moderate overvaluation to fair valuation territory. With this particular candidate, I would suggest patiently waiting until the P/E ratio was closer to 15 and the dividend above 4%. (click to enlarge) It should be no surprise that when reviewing the performance of Xcel Energy relative to the S&P 500 that the index outperforms on a total return basis. However, as previously discussed, the attractiveness of utilities comes from their relative safety and superior dividend income-producing ability. Therefore, I direct the reader’s attention to the cumulative total dividend income advantage of Xcel Energy over the S&P 500. (click to enlarge) Since the primary attraction of investing in utility stocks is for their safety and high dividend income, each candidate’s ability to support their dividend is of paramount importance. The following FUN Graph (fundamental underlying numbers) reflects revenues per share (revps), cash flow per share (cflps) and dividends paid per share (dvpps). Clearly, dividend coverage is supported by revenues and cash flows. (click to enlarge) Wisconsin Energy Corporation (NYSE: WEC ) Short business description, courtesy S&P Capital IQ: “Wisconsin Energy Corporation, through its subsidiaries, generates and distributes electric energy. The company operates in two segments, Utility Energy and Non-Utility Energy. It generates electricity from coal, natural gas, oil, hydroelectric, wind, and biomass. The company provides electric utility services to customers in the paper, foundry, food products, and machinery production industries, as well as to the retail chains. It also provides retail gas distribution services in the state of Wisconsin, as well as transports customer-owned gas to paper, food products, and fabricated metal products industries; and generates, distributes, and sells steam. As of December 31, 2014, the company serves approximately 1,133,600 electric customers in Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan; and approximately 1,089,000 gas customers in Wisconsin, as well as 440 steam customers in metropolitan Milwaukee, Wisconsin. In addition, it invests in and develops real estate, including business parks and other commercial real estate projects primarily in southeastern Wisconsin. The company was founded in 1981 and is headquartered in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.” Wisconsin Energy is attractively valued at a blended P/E ratio of 17.1 and offers a dividend yield of 3.7%. Since the beginning of 2015, Wisconsin Energy’s stock price has inevitably moved from moderate overvaluation to its current fair valuation level. With this particular candidate, I consider it attractive even though its P/E ratio is a little high and its dividend yield slightly below 4%. However, relative to most utilities, this company’s superior growth potential compensates by providing the potential for above-average total return. (click to enlarge) It should be no surprise that when reviewing the performance of Wisconsin Energy relative to the S&P 500 that the index outperforms on a total return basis, however, in this case the return differential is narrow. Once again, as previously discussed, the attractiveness of utilities comes from their relative safety and superior dividend income-producing ability. Therefore, I direct the reader’s attention to the cumulative total dividend income advantage of Wisconsin Energy over the S&P 500. (click to enlarge) Since the primary attraction of investing in utility stocks is for their safety and high dividend income, each candidate’s ability to support their dividend is of paramount importance. The following FUN Graph (fundamental underlying numbers) reflects revenues per share (revps), cash flow per share (cflps) and dividend paid per share (dvpps). Clearly, dividend coverage is supported by revenues and cash flows. (click to enlarge) Summary and Conclusions When looking to the utility sector, it is both impractical and unrealistic to expect above-average, long-term total returns. Instead, it is more sensible to consider investing in utilities stocks for the advantages and benefits they can offer and provide. These include high current yield, relative safety and the opportunity for consistent but moderate capital appreciation. Consequently, I contend that utility stocks represent viable investment choices under certain rational needs and objectives. These would include but are not limited to the need for high current income, safety and predictable but moderate, inflation-fighting capital appreciation. However, due to the low growth nature of utility stocks, these attributes are only available when current valuations are attractive, as I believe they currently are for the five candidates presented in this article. I cannot emphasize enough the importance of fair valuation when considering utility stocks. Therefore, I suggest that prudent investors might consider investing in fairly valued utility stocks if they need income and if they are concerned about safety and capital preservation. Utility stocks can also serve as a viable alternative for parking cash. This last point is especially relevant when the valuations of other equity options are extended as they are today. Disclosure: Long KMB,ED,SCG at the time of writing. Disclaimer: The opinions in this document are for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell the stocks mentioned or to solicit transactions or clients. Past performance of the companies discussed may not continue and the companies may not achieve the earnings growth as predicted. The information in this document is believed to be accurate, but under no circumstances should a person act upon the information contained within. We do not recommend that anyone act upon any investment information without first consulting an investment advisor as to the suitability of such investments for his specific situation. Disclosure: The author is long KMB,ED, SCG. (More…) The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it. The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.