Tag Archives: power

Best And Worst Q3’15: All Cap Blend ETFs, Mutual Funds And Key Holdings

Summary The All Cap Blend style ranks third in Q3’15. Based on an aggregation of ratings of 66 ETFs and 675 mutual funds. DGRW is our top-rated All Cap Blend ETF and MFVZX is our top-rated All Cap Blend mutual fund. The All Cap Blend style ranks third out of the 12 fund styles as detailed in our Q3’15 Style Ratings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. It gets our Neutral rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 66 ETFs and 675 mutual funds in the All Cap Blend style. See a recap of our Q2’15 Style Ratings here. Figure 1 and 2 show the five best and worst-rated ETFs and mutual funds in the style. Not all All Cap Blend style ETFs and mutual funds are created the same. The number of holdings varies widely (from 4 to 3794). This variation creates drastically different investment implications and, therefore, ratings. Investors seeking exposure to the All Cap Blend style should buy one of the Attractive-or-better rated ETFs or mutual funds from Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1: ETFs with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 (click to enlarge) * Best ETFs exclude ETFs with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings The ValueShares U.S. Quantitative Value ETF (BATS: QVAL ) is excluded from Figure 1 because its total net assets are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums Figure 2: Mutual Funds with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 (click to enlarge) * Best mutual funds exclude funds with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings The Walden Asset Management Fund (MUTF: WSBFX ) and the Jensen Quality Value Fund ( JNVIX , JNVSX ) are excluded from Figure 2 because their total net assets are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums. The WisdomTree U.S. Dividend Growth ETF (NASDAQ: DGRW ) is the top-rated All Cap Blend ETF and the MassMutual Select Focused Value Fund (MUTF: MFVZX ) is the top-rated All Cap Blend mutual fund. Both earn a Very Attractive rating. The PowerShares FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid Portfolio ETF (NASDAQ: PRFZ ) is the worst-rated All Cap Blend ETF and the Forward Dynamic Income Fund (MUTF: FDYAX ) is the worst-rated All Cap Blend mutual fund. PRFZ earns a Dangerous rating and FDYAX earns a Very Dangerous rating. Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC ), is one of our favorite stocks held by All Cap Blend funds and earns our Very Attractive rating. Since 2009, Intel has grown after-tax profit (NOPAT) by 13% compounded annually. Much of this NOPAT growth can be attributed to Intel maintaining NOPAT margins upwards of 18% every year since 2008. The company currently earns a top-quintile return on invested capital ( ROIC ) of 21%, which is a slight improvement from 17% in 2013. Despite the fundamental strength of the business, the stock remains undervalued. At its current price of ~$29/share, Intel has a price to economic book value ( PEBV ) ratio of 0.8. This ratio implies that the market expects Intel’s NOPAT to permanently decline by 20%. If the company can grow NOPAT by just 3% compounded annually over the next ten years , the stock is worth $42/share – a 45% upside. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. (NYSE: ABR ) is one of our least favorite stocks held by All Cap Blend funds and earns our Dangerous rating. Arbor Realty Trust never quite recovered from the financial crisis in 2008 and NOPAT has declined 55% compounded annually ever since. As opposed to Intel, Arbor Realty Trust has been unable to preserve its once-impressive NOPAT margin of 25% achieved in 2008 as it has since declined to 0.5% in 2014. The market has overlooked the declining nature of the business in favor of focusing on ABR’s 9% dividend yield. To justify its current price of $6/share, Arbor Realty Trust must grow NOPAT 29% compounded annually over the next 17 years . Almost no level of dividend yield can protect investors from the capital loss that would occur if ABR traded at its economic book value of ~$1/share. Figures 3 and 4 show the rating landscape of all All Cap Blend ETFs and mutual funds. Figure 3: Separating the Best ETFs From the Worst Funds (click to enlarge) Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Figure 4: Separating the Best Mutual Funds From the Worst Funds (click to enlarge) Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings D isclosure: David Trainer and Max Lee receive no compensation to write about any specific stock, style, style or theme. 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.

Navigating Water ETFs

There is an impending water shortage, resulting in investment opportunities. Water ETFs provide a safer, albeit expensive, way to invest in the fragmented water industry. FIW has the best holdings, but a potentially very expensive fee structure. CGW offers nice global exposure to water investments and is my favorite of the four ETFs. PHO and PIO have a surprisingly strong emphasis on alternative energy. THE WATER OPPORTUNITY For several years I have followed an investing thesis I believe will significantly outperform the broader market: water. Water is essential to all forms of known life. Humans are particularly dependent on water. Without it we die within a week, and most die in three or four days. However, humankind’s uses for water extend way beyond drinking, or even household consumption such as cooking, bathing, or cleaning. Agriculture accounts for an impressive 70% of global water use; other vital industries such as mining , oil and gas , hydroelectric power, and general manufacturing are all highly water intensive. The dire water situation becomes even more evident when the future is taken into account. For one, shifting weather patters associated with climate change will likely cause dry areas to face more frequent and persistent droughts. Even more importantly, today’s global population is expected to jump from the current 7 billion people to 9 billion by 2040 . The extra 2 billion people on the planet, along with a rapidly growing global middle-class , will increase demand for water and the vital goods (food, energy, materials, and technology) it produces. With these facts in mind, let’s consider the global water situation . 97.5% of water is salt water in the oceans. Of the remaining 2.5% of water that is fresh, over half (~69%) is locked up in glaciers and snowpack. If global temperatures increase as expected over the next 85 years (between 2° and 11.5° F) , we can expect a significant amount of this fresh water to melt, flow into oceans, and become salt water. Of the ~0.8% of Earth’s water that is fresh and liquid, a significant amount is also polluted, especially in developing countries. So despite all the blue that you see on a picture of Earth from space, a generous estimate would render only about 0.67% of it immediately ready for human use, with several trends working to reduce that percentage even further. HOW TO GO ABOUT INVESTING IN WATER The water industry is very fragmented, meaning that investors should tread with caution-there is no “Exxon” of the water industry, where you can simply park your money with a dominant player. While there are many companies in this sector that I am very bullish on, the fragmented nature of the water industry makes it a prime candidate for ETF investments. In this article I will give my thoughts on the four water ETFs: First Trust Water Index (NYSEARCA: FIW ), Guggenheim S&P Global Water Index (NYSEARCA: CGW ), PowerShares Water Resources Portfolio (NYSEARCA: PHO ), and PowerShares Global Water Portfolio (NYSEARCA: PIO ). MEET THE ETFs FIW: This ETF is by far my favorite in terms of holdings and organization. First Trust gave FIW a strong weighting towards industrials (60%); Utilities account for 25% of the ETF, and IT, materials, and healthcare comprise the other 15% of the portfolio. I am particularly partial to this fund because Lindsay (NYSE: LNN ), my favorite play in the water industry, is its top holding. For those interested, last fall I wrote an article about Lindsay. PICO Holdings (NASDAQ: PICO ), which accounts for 1% of the fund, may raise some eyebrows because it is labeled as a financial. PICO is technically a financial (it is an insurance company), but it owns valuable water rights in Arizona and Nevada, hence its inclusion in the ETF. Source: First Trust I favor water ETF’s with strong industrial weightings, along with IT, materials, and health care, because these companies generally have reasonable OpEx and face very little regulatory oversight, meaning they are in prime condition to profit from investment in water infrastructure. On the other hand, water utilities have high OpEx and must have regulatory approval for rate increases. Granted, utilities provide income and stability, but my goal for water stocks is growth, rather than a bond substitute. This said, FIW’s organization provides some risk mitigation. Of FIW’s 37 holdings, none account for more than 4.5% of the portfolio, and none account for less than 1% of the portfolio (top 10 assets account for 41% of the fund). Almost all are American companies, and all trade on the NYSE or NASDAQ. (click to enlarge) Source: First Trust While there is a lot to like about FIW, it does have some flaws. For one, its dividend yield is only 0.74%. As I mentioned, I expect little in the ways for yield when investing in water, but a yield between 1%-2% would be better. FIW’s average daily trade volume of 57.5K is another potential red flag for investors, though PHO is the only other water ETF with a higher average volume. Finally, and most disappointingly, FIW will very likely assume a very high expense ratio. For the moment, its 0.59% expense ratio is actually the lowest of the four ETFs. However, the prospectus states that the true expense ratio is 0.84%, but that First Trust has agreements to keep the fees at or below 0.60% “at least through April 30, 2016.” Though it seems the fee reimbursement could continue beyond this date, investors need to be prepared for an almost 50% increase in the expense ratio within the next year. FIW trades 0.13% below its net asset value, so maybe the market has already factored in some degree of a discount. CGW: Guggenheim’s water ETF truly provides global exposure: only 38% of the fund is based in the US. The top domestic holdings are Pentair (NYSE: PNR ), Danaher (NYSE: DHR ), American Water Works (NYSE: AWK ), and Xylem (NYSE: XYL ). Global utility behemoths such as Veolia SA ( OTCPK:VEOEY ), United Utilities Group PLC, Severn Trent PLC, and Suez Environnement SA account for some of the top foreign assets. Although CGW has 50 holdings, it is weighted quite heavily towards the top holdings, as the top 10 account for 52% of the fund. I would prefer the allocation to be more diversified, but the majority of the top holdings fit the water theme very well (I consider IDEX a bit of a stretch, but understand Guggenheim reasoning of wanting to give water metering meaningful inclusion). Source: Guggenheim 40% of CGW’s holdings are in utilities, which is a higher percentage than I would prefer. However, the weighting towards utilities provides a nice counterbalance to the volatility that comes with investing in foreign companies. The utilities also strengthen the yield, which, for what amounts to a growth investment, comes out to a very respectable 1.75%. Unfortunately the dividend is paid yearly (on the last business day of the year), so the compounding power is reduced to annual compounding rather than quarterly. Another disappointing aspect to CGW is its low trading volume-it only averages 25.7K a day, so investors must be prepared for a relatively illiquid investment. CGW’s expense ratio of 0.65% is only slightly higher than FIW and PHO’s, but unfortunately it trades at 0.3% premium to its net asset value. This is cause for concern, but I do think that CGW deserves a premium due to its foreign holdings. Anyone who has owns foreign securities knows there is quite often an ADR fee and, quite possibly, taxes on foreign dividends. Finally, CGW owns securities that are otherwise difficult for Americans to own. For example take Guangdong Investments, which is a major provider of water in Hong Kong and China, but only trades on Hong Kong’s exchange. Finally, Schwab investors interested in water investments should give CGW a particularly close look. This is because CGW trades for free. I use Schwab, and the feature is wonderful-I have legitimately bought one share of CGW and it worked as advertised. This makes it easy to buy a few shares every payday without having to worry too much about trading fees or market timing. Out of all the options, I believe CGW to be the best. PHO: On the surface, PowerShares’ domestic water ETF seems to share a great deal in common with FIW. It has a small utility component (13%), is comprised of 35 holdings (vs. 37 for FIW), and is generally composed of industrial, life science, and materials companies. Because of this, like FIW, PHO is weighted more towards growth stocks, and has a very low dividend (0.60%). Source: Invesco However, a shallow dive into the holdings reveals a strong emphasis on energy. PHO has 15% of its assets in First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR ) and SunEdison (NYSE: SUNE ); all together over 20% of the fund is devoted to renewable energy. Overall, I understand what PowerShares is aiming for-hydroelectric is entirely reliant on water, and oil and gas use and pollute water during extraction and refinement. Of course, PHO does have significant holdings in companies more closely related to water, such as Pentair, Ecolab (NYSE: ECL ), American Water Works, Xylem, and Valmont (NYSE: VMI ). That said, a 20% weighting in alternative energy seems like overkill to me. I would prefer to have higher weightings in desalination, filtration, pumping, irrigation, and metering, with 5-10% devoted to alternative energy. Additionally, given that the top 10 holdings account for 61% of the fund, I would favor a more balanced allocation to lower volatility and risk. Source: Invesco On the plus side, PHO’s expense ratio is a relatively reasonable 0.61%, which is slightly higher than FIW’s, but would be the lowest if/when FIW’s new fee program kicks in. As of now, PHO does not trade at any premium or discount to its net asset value. Perhaps most importantly, PHO’s daily trading volume averages 121K shares, giving it a huge advantage over FIW, CGW, and PIO in terms of liquidity. PIO: PIO is PowerShares’ international water ETF , and its 39 holdings resemble a blend of PHO and CGW. Like PHO, PIO has significant holdings in alternative energy, though the asset are limited to FSLR and SUNE, which account for 10% of the fund. Pentair, Veolia, Suez, and Severn Trent are a few major holdings in common with CGW’s. Source: Invesco Similar to CGW, PIO holds 33% of its assets as domestic companies; additionally, many of the foreign holdings overlap with CGW’s, though PIO’s exposure to the United Kingdom and France are noticeably higher. With utilities accounting for 45% of PIO’s holdings, it has the largest utility weighting of the group. Like CGW, this is a bonus for volatility, though given that people often view water as a fundamental right, I would be wary about putting too much money in utilities operating in left leaning countries. Fortunately for holders of CGW and PIO, many of these utilities, especially Veolia and Suez, are global companies that do business around the world, including the United States. Source: Invesco Despite PIO’s heavy utility holdings, it only yields 1.27%, though the strong dollar could be somewhat to blame for the muted dividend. PIO’s 0.76% expense ratio is very high, and it currently trades at a 0.1% premium to its assets. Additionally, PIO has very low liquidity, as its volume averages only 18.8K a day. Source: Investco CONCLUSION Much like individual water stocks, there are advantages and disadvantages to each of the ETFs. FIW’s holdings are by far my favorite, but if the new expense ratio rolls out, it will difficult to justify paying a 0.84% fee. Water ETFs already have high costs, and I would shy away from paying any more than necessary. At 0.76% cost ratio, PIO isn’t much better, leaving CGW and PHO as the “low fee” water ETFs. For me, PHO’s solar presence is too strong for my liking, though I may eventually buy some shares. PHO has strong liquidity, and I do like their thought processes behind the solar investments. CGW’s holdings are my second favorite behind FIW’s, and it pays an almost 2% dividend. That said, its current 0.3% premium is somewhat concerning, especially given that these specialty ETFs come with high expense ratios. Since I have a Schwab account, and can trade CGW for free, I have decided to pair CGW with individual water stocks. I will likely continue to slowly add to CGW until I reach a full position. I have no immediate plans to buy PHO, but will probably open a moderate position at some point. While there is no absolute winner, I think CGW is the best option. It offers both domestic and international exposure, is very “water focused,” has a reasonable fee structure, and pays the best dividend. That said, despite their underwhelming performance since their inceptions, I expect all of these ETFs to outperform the broader market over time. However, the high costs, low liquidity, and occasional bizarre holdings leave much to be desired. Hopefully as more investors look to invest in water, additional water ETFs with lower fees and higher liquidity will stream into the market. Disclosure: I am/we are long CGW, PNR, VEOEY, LNN, VMI. (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.

U.S. Treasury ETFs Rise On Yuan Devaluation

The global investing world across asset classes was caught off guard on August 11 as Chinese policymakers devalued the country’s currency by 2% against the greenback to boost its waning export profile. The step resulted in the largest single-day decline since the historical devaluation in 1994 , after China arranged its official and market rates in a line. As a result, yuan has now plunged to a four-year low level. The Chinese central bank defended its currency intervention ‘as a free-market reform’, but global experts apprehend a currency war in the near future, especially among the Asian tigers. Most export-centric economies are likely to resort to currency devaluation to rev up their exports. However, yuan devaluation took the global markets in its grip as most asset classes were in red. In fact, the move was criticized by U.S. lawmakers and viewed as means of taking undue favor in exports. Bloodbath in global equities, commodities and currencies spurred a flight to safety for a valid reason. Several ETFs on safe haven assets including greenback-based PowerShares DB US Dollar Index Bullish Fund (NYSEARCA: UUP ) and gold bullion-based SPDR Gold Shares (NYSEARCA: GLD ) added gains on August 11. UUP gained 1.5% after hours and GLD added 0.5% in the key trading session. Here investors should note that the UUP’s strength came mainly on the back of Yuan devaluation and the looming Fed rate hike concern; a safe haven criterion played a lesser role for its ascent. On the other hand, though gold advanced for a day, we are skeptical about its momentum as the metal is due for a southward ride (presumably) in the near term due to a number of issues. In fact, this yuan devaluation will likely curb the import demand of gold from China (a key gold consuming nation) as a feebler currency will turn imports pricier. U.S. Treasury: True Safe-Haven In such a backdrop, investors started to position themselves for the imminent volatility in the risky assets and started to park their money in the safer U.S. treasuries, despite the Fed rate hike worries. Most U.S. treasury ETFs, specially the long-dated ones, added considerable gains on August 11. Yields on the U.S. benchmark 10-year notes, slipped to 2.15% on August 11 from 2.24% the day before. Below we have highlighted four Treasury ETFs that have hogged investors’ attention lately and added gains despite the looming rate hike concerns. Vanguard Extended Duration Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: EDV ) This fund provides exposure to the long-term Treasury STRIPS market by tracking the Barclays U.S. Treasury STRIPS 20-30 Year Equal Par Bond Index. The fund holds 71 bonds in total with effective maturity of 25.2 years and average duration of 24.8 years. Expense ratio comes in at 0.12%. The product has amassed $379.2 million in its asset base. Its gains came in at 2.14% in the yesterday’s session (on August 11). Pimco 7-15 Year U.S. Treasury Index Fund (NYSEARCA: TENZ ) The fund looks to track the returns of the BofA Merrill Lynch 7-15 Year US Treasury Index. The index is unmanaged and tracks the performance of the direct Sovereign debt of the U.S. Government with at least $1 billion in outstanding face value and a remaining term to final maturity of at least 7 years and less than 15 years. The fund has amassed over $24 million in assets so far and charges 15 bps in fees. The fund holds 15 bonds in total with effective maturity of 9.03 years and average duration of 7.89 years. TENZ was up over 2.8% in the last session. iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: TLT ) The ultra-popular long-term Treasury ETF – TLT – tracks the Barclays Capital U.S. 20+ Year Treasury Bond Index and has AUM of $4.92 billion. Expense ratio comes in at 0.15%. Holding 29 securities in its basket, the fund focuses on the top credit rating bonds with average maturity of 26.82 years and effective duration of 17.35 years. The fund was up 1.6% on August 11. SPDR Barclays Capital Long Term Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: TLO ) The fund considers U.S. treasuries that have a remaining maturity of 10 or more years. The $201 million-fund holds 45 securities with average maturity of 24.98 years and effective duration of 17.23 years. The fund charges 10 bps in fess and was up about 1.5% on August 11. Bottom Line Having said this, we would like to note that the bond market is in a volatile mood. Especially the U.S. fixed income space is in a tug of war between safe haven demand and the imminent Fed rate hike. Though U.S. benchmark yields fell lately, any hint at Fed policy normalization will once again push up interest rates. So, edgy investors need to be hawk-eyed before playing the safe-haven fixed-income securities in this choppy market. Original Post