Tag Archives: power

TECO Energy: Exiting TECO Coal To Drive The Stock Significantly Higher

Summary TECO Energy is strategically exiting its TECO Coal business in order to boost earnings. We believe the stock should trade at a premium valuation compared to its peers post TECO Coal divestiture. Investors should buy the stock at the current price in order to maximize gains. The shares of TECO Energy (NYSE: TE ), an energy-related holding company with regulated electric and gas utilities in Florida and New Mexico, have fallen significantly post its unimpressive fourth-quarter 2014 earnings few days ago. Furthermore, reduction in sale price of its TECO Coal subsidiary to Cambrian Coal by $30 million was also responsible for the correction in the stock. However, we believe the correction offers a decent entry point to long-term investors as TECO Energy is expected to be an interesting growth story post the TECO Coal divestiture. TE data by YCharts Investment Thesis The investment thesis is primarily based on TECO Energy’s future growth in net income following the divestiture of TECO Coal that is seeing operating losses with coal markets continuing to weaken. The company’s other three subsidiaries, such as Tampa Electric, Peoples Gas System and New Mexico Gas Co. or NMGC, are growing impressively. Exiting TECO Coal will boost the company’s overall bottom-line significantly. TECO Energy’s electricity sales for 2015 by Tampa Electric, one of its key subsidiaries, should rise modestly as a result of thriving Florida economy, particularly the Hillsborough County, Tampa Electric’s primary service territory. The electricity sales pattern in the Tampa area is bouncing back to the pre-economic downturn level, which is positive for TECO shareholders since most of the company’s earnings come from Tampa Electric. In addition to the electricity business, the stronger Florida economy is also responsible for sales growth of TECO’s Peoples Gas System unit by around 2-3% yearly driven by stronger commercial and industrial customer growth. Further, TECO Energy’s acquisition of NMGC in September is also expected to drive earnings due to healthy customer growth supported by large presence of oil and gas industries in New Mexico. Fundamental Analysis We believe TECO should trade at a premium in terms of EV/EBITDA compared to its peers, such as Southern Company (NYSE: SO ), American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP ), Exelon (NYSE: EXC ), and Edison International (NYSE: EIX ) as a result of favorable economic conditions in the states it operates. Dominion Resources (NYSE: D ), which operates in Virginia and North Carolina, is trading at a significant premium compared to the peer group due to its favorable jurisdiction, and TECO can also trade closer to such valuation post its TECO Coal exit. TE EV to EBITDA (Forward) data by YCharts Assuming normal weather in 2015, TECO’s 2015 EBITDA is expected to see around 15% year-over-year growth, and should be around $1 billion. As a result, enterprise value should be around 13 billion at 13x forward EV/EBITDA, the valuation at which Dominion Resources is trading. However, 13x forward EV/EBITDA might be too optimistic and we feel 10x is a more reasonable valuation, at which TECO’s enterprise value should be around 10 billion, and market cap should be close to $6.5 billion. We believe the stock is heading toward $27.70 based on 10x forward EV/EBITDA. Potential Risks If Florida’s economic conditions and housing markets see any weakening going ahead, Tampa Electric’s or Peoples Gas System’s earnings could be negatively impacted, resulting in negative returns for TECO shareholders. Since Florida is exposed to extreme weather conditions including hurricanes, investors should be prepared for volatility in the share price due to temporary reduction in the company’s earnings as a result of any damage to the company’s facilities. Since the company operates in a highly regulated environment, if it earns return on equity above allowed ranges, earnings could be subject to regulatory review and eventually might be reduced. Conclusion The current year is going to be TECO’s first full-year of ownership of NMGC, and the company expects it to be EPS-accretive in the first full-year. However, we believe NMGC will be a sustainable growth driver for the company. NMGC’s bottom-line growth coupled with TECO’s strategic exiting of the TECO Coal business should be considered long-term positive for the stock. Investors are advised to buy the stock at the current price. Business relationship disclosure: The article has been written by a BB Research stock analyst. BB Research is not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). BB Research has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. 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.

Alternate Current: The Power Of Diverse Return Sources

By Christine Johnson After a long period of calm, global markets now face tumbling oil prices, geopolitical risks and monetary policy changes. Investors looking for new ways to diversify in this uncertain environment should take a long look at investments that don’t take their cues from stock or bond market movements. The Key: Un-Stock-Like Return Patterns Alternative investments have that name for a reason: they don’t act like traditional investments. Adding alternatives thoughtfully to a portfolio may lower its sensitivity to the stock market and interest-rate fluctuations. Alternatives also have the potential to enhance long-term returns and reduce risk. Investors may be surprised to learn that over the last 25 years, alternatives have produced higher returns than stocks, bonds or cash – with less than half the volatility of stocks (Display). A big part of the equation? Managers’ use of flexible investment approaches, and their ability to act opportunistically to exploit mispricings within and across asset classes. How Do Alternatives Handle Stress? On average, alternative investments haven’t been up as much as stocks in bull markets, but they also haven’t been down as much as stocks in bear markets. By losing less than traditional equity strategies during times of market stress, alternative strategies have historically preserved investors’ capital. In 2001 and 2002, as markets struggled to recover from the dot-com bust, alternatives provided more downside protection than stocks. In 2008, alternatives also lost less than stocks. Alternatives in the Portfolio Context Investors want more diversification in their portfolios; we think investments that don’t track stock and bond markets as closely as traditional investments offer that potential. Many alternative strategies provide returns driven more by a manager’s skill in decision making than by broad market movements. And there’s a lot of variety among alternatives. Investors can choose narrowly-focused alternative strategies – nontraditional bond or long/short equity, for example. Or they can opt for a more diversified strategy like multi-manager. This offers exposure to diverse approaches – and even diverse managers. A manager’s investing skill is integral to alternative investing, and the returns of individual strategies can vary greatly. A diversified strategy may prove valuable. Challenging market periods turn up unexpectedly, and a diversified investing approach that incorporates alternatives may help portfolios’ performance across diverse market conditions. Not all strategies will be in or out of favor at a given time. This point is particularly relevant in terms of US stocks. The lofty returns of the last couple of years won’t last indefinitely – so it makes sense to look for strategies whose return patterns offer something different from those of the broad market. The views expressed herein do not constitute research, investment advice or trade recommendations and do not necessarily represent the views of all AB portfolio-management teams. MSCI makes no express or implied warranties or representations, and shall have no liability whatsoever with respect to any MSCI data contained herein. The MSCI data may not be further redistributed or used as a basis for other indices or any securities or financial products. This report is not approved, reviewed or produced by MSCI. Christine Johnson is Managing Director of Alternative Investments at AB (NYSE: AB ).

This Is How You Invest In Oil Right Now (Without USO)

Summary Many investors are making big bets on oil since it bottomed last month. However, the oil futures curve is in extreme contango, making ETFs like USO and USL very costly. Until the curve flattens, non-integrated oil drillers are a much safer play. This article presents a dynamic model for oil investing to better capitalize on an oil turnaround. Note: This article originally appeared on Hedgewise in October 2014. It has been updated with additional data and republished. Introduction Just about everyone is betting on an oil turnaround sometime soon and trying to figure out how to capitalize on it. Unfortunately, most instruments that provide exposure to oil prices are riddled with high long-term holding costs. One of the most popular oil ETFs, The United States Oil ETF (NYSEARCA: USO ), often suffers from paying high premiums on futures contracts (called “contango”). As you can see here , these costs are particularly severe right now. Investing directly in companies which drill, distribute, or sell oil is a reasonable alternative, but these companies often fail to track the spot price of oil very closely. For example, in 2008, when oil went up 200% , Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM ) was only up 88%. This article breaks down the nature of this problem, and presents a dynamic methodology for investing in oil that seeks to avoid these pitfalls. A back-tested simulation that applies this logic can be seen in the graph below, under the label “Dynamic Oil Portfolio.” This portfolio is a rule-based index that invests in a single oil futures contract when the market is in backwardation, or a non-integrated oil company ETF when it is not. It significantly outperforms a long-term investment in USO, and has drastically outperformed in the last few months. This methodology can be applied to any portfolio by keeping track of current market conditions, and then choosing the appropriate ETF (or futures contract) accordingly. Comparison of the WTI Oil Spot Price, USO, and the Dynamic Oil Portfolio, May 2006 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance, Hedgewise Internal Research The Problem First, it is worthwhile to do a quick review of the problems with investing in oil. The most direct way to invest is with an oil futures contract, which commits you to buying oil at an agreed upon price at some point in the future. Unfortunately, much of the time there is a premium on the price of oil futures, called “contango,” because people are betting the price of oil will go up. For example, say the current spot price of oil was $50, and you could buy a futures contract for next month at $55. If the price of oil were to stay exactly flat for the next month, you would probably lose about $5 on that contract. If this were to keep happening, you would lose about 10% per month for the entire year! How This Applies to Oil ETFs The effect of this problem can be seen by examining the performance of ETFs that specialize in trading oil futures contracts. For example, USO has a policy of rolling over the nearest oil futures contract every month. This results in significant cost whenever the market is in contango, which explains its underperformance over time. The iPath S&P Crude Oil Total Return ETN (NYSEARCA: OIL ) and the United States 12 Month Oil ETF (NYSEARCA: USL ) are affected in a similar way. Performance of USO, OIL, and USL vs. WTI Oil Spot Price, December 2007 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance You might notice that USL has performed the best. This is because USL invests in 12 different futures contracts at all times while OIL and USO only invest in the futures contract of the nearest month. This has helped to avoid some of the dramatic costs of trading futures in periods of heavy speculation, such as early 2009. However, it is not enough to avoid the problem altogether. Still, the relative performance of USL provides an important insight. Since different oil futures contracts trade at different prices, there is an opportunity to pick the cheapest one at any point in time. This is the mandate of the PowerShares DB Oil ETF (NYSEARCA: DBO ), and, in theory, should lead to improved performance. Unfortunately, in practice, it has not. Performance of USL and DBO vs. WTI Oil Spot Price, December 2007 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance The main reason that DBO has failed to outperform USL is because of the consistency of the futures curve. It is often upward sloping over time, such that the adjusted cost is about the same no matter which contract you buy. It is helpful to zoom in on different time periods to get a better sense of how this works. You might have already observed how well DBO and USL performed from January 2008 to January 2009. We can examine the futures curve over that time period to understand why this was possible. Note that a “2-Month Oil Futures” contract is one that expires 2 months from today, and a “4-Month Oil Futures” contract is one that expires 4 months from today. If the “4-Month” price is higher than the “2-Month” price, this indicates that the market is in contango. WTI Oil Spot Price vs. 2-Month and 4-Month Futures Contract Prices, January 2008 to January 2009 (click to enlarge) Source: Energy Information Administration The important observation is how close the price of both futures contracts was to the spot price over this entire period. In fact, at some points, the price of the futures contracts was actually below the spot price, which is a case of backwardation. This allowed USL and DBO to outperform. However, this trend changed dramatically in 2010. WTI Oil Spot Price vs. 2-Month and 4-Month Futures Contract Prices, January 2010 to January 2011 (click to enlarge) Source: Energy Information Administration Here, the futures curve was upward sloping, with the price of the 4-Month contract consistently above that of the 2-Month contract. As a result, all of the ETFs involved in trading oil futures suffered. This demonstrates the general point that if you are going to get oil exposure using futures (whether directly or via ETFs), you need to be constantly monitoring the futures curve and adjusting accordingly. When the curve is upward sloping, trading futures will cost a hefty sum over the long term. Unfortunately, this has been the case about 60% of the time over the past decade. Thus, it is necessary to identify alternative ways to get oil exposure, such as investing directly in individual companies. Investing Directly in Oil Companies The most obvious candidates for direct investing are the two largest energy ETFs, the Energy Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLE ) and the Vanguard Energy ETF (NYSEARCA: VDE ). Both ETFs invest in most of the biggest energy companies in the world. Performance of XLE and VDE vs. WTI Oil price, June 2006 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance This performance is not terrible, but there is a great deal of tracking error. While in this period the overall effect has been positive, it could just as easily have been negative as it was from 2008 to 2009. The nature of this tracking error can be traced back to the fundamentals of the oil market. First, most large energy companies are grouped into the ‘oil & gas’ sector. This is because natural gas is often found alongside oil, and comprises a significant part of their business. However, the price movements of natural gas are often uncorrelated to the price movements of oil. Second, there are three main functions in the oil industry. Exploration and drilling Equipment and transportation Retail sales Many of the big oil players are involved in all three functions, but equipment, transportation, and retail sales don’t really depend on the current price of oil. For example, if you are selling oil equipment, you would not expect short-term oil fluctuations to change your sales outlook. If you are a gas station, you receive a small mark-up on the price of oil after buying it wholesale. Only exploration and drilling companies (a.k.a., ‘non-integrated’ oil companies) have very direct exposure to oil prices since they are the ones who actually own the oil fields. The good news is that there are ETFs which track these non-integrated oil companies. Two of the largest are the iShares U.S. Oil & Gas Exploration & Production ETF (NYSEARCA: IEO ) and the SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production ETF (NYSEARCA: XOP ). Performance of IEO and XOP vs. WTI Oil Spot Price, June 2006 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance Surprisingly, these stocks actually have an even higher tracking error. To understand why, we have to take a look at the largest actual holdings within the ETFs. XOP primarily invests in smaller-sized owner-operators of oil fields, such as Magnum Hunter Resources Corp. (NYSE: MHR ) and Western Refining, Inc. (NYSE: WNR ). Performance of MHR and WNR vs. WTI Spot Oil Price, June 2006 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance The problem is that these small companies are hugely susceptible to swings due to idiosyncratic factors, like their recent discoveries and the prospects for their particular oil fields. As such, they are fairly uncorrelated to the price of oil. It makes more sense to focus on companies which are diversified across many oil sources rather than only a few, which is the focus of IEO. Two of their biggest holdings are the Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (NYSE: APC ) and EOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE: EOG ), both big drilling companies. Performance of APC and EOG vs. WTI Spot Oil Price, June 2006 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance There is still company-specific variance, but it is muted because these companies are better diversified. Because of this, IEO is likely a better play on oil exposure than XOP. However, it remains unclear whether IEO is a better option than the bigger ETFs; XLE and VDE. Unfortunately, there is no way to make a determination on numbers alone. All three of the ETFs hold oil companies that also invest in natural gas. Each of those companies will have independent factors that affect it year to year. It seems logical that non-integrated oil companies would be more directly exposed to fluctuations in the oil price than the bigger players involved in equipment, transportation, and retail sales. Yet, their relative performance suggests the difference thus far has been pretty negligible. All three are probably reasonable alternatives when the futures market is in contango. Performance of IEO, XLE, and VDE vs. WTI Spot Oil Price, June 2006 – February 2015 (click to enlarge) Sources: Energy Information Administration, Yahoo Finance How to Apply the Model The outcome of all this logic is relatively simple. Invest in the cheapest futures contract (optimizing between USO, USL, and DBO if using an ETF) when there is a downward sloping futures curve, and use a general energy ETF like IEO, XLE, or VDE otherwise. While this requires a little extra work, it may drastically reduce the costs of investing in oil over the long run. We’ve also made this a little easier for you by tracking the current state of the futures curve and its estimated impact on each ETF (linked above). Though the outcome of this model is not perfect, it is certainly more compelling than many of the alternatives. Disclosure: Hedgewise is an Investment Advisor that helps clients implement custom strategies like the one described in this article inexpensively and tax-efficiently. This information does not constitute investment advice or an offer to invest or to provide management services and is subject to correction, completion and amendment without notice. Hedgewise makes no warranties and is not responsible for your use of this information or for any errors or inaccuracies resulting from your use. To the extent that any of the content published may be deemed to be investment advice or recommendations in connection with a particular security, such information is impersonal and not tailored to the investment needs of any specific person. Hedgewise may recommend some of the investments mentioned in this article for use in its clients’ portfolios. Disclosure: The author is long IEO, XLE. (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.