Tag Archives: scho

Time Management?

Time is our most precious resource. When we’re investing, the length of time an investment can be held is the single most important factor to consider. Given enough time, risky investments become safe, and safe investments become risky. Having an investment plan that takes time into account is critical to investment success. Because there’s always enough time, if we use it well. Time is our most precious resource. We can’t make more of it, it’s difficult to manage, and everyone wants some of yours. We can try to stretch time, to enjoy an event or experience for longer, but the clock ticks relentlessly forward: time waits for no one. When we’re investing, the length of time an investment can be held is the single most important factor to consider. Given enough time, risky investments become safe, and safe investments become risky. Over the last 30 years, risk-free T-Bills have averaged 3.3% per year – barely above inflation. By contrast, the S&P 500 – with all its ups and downs – has grown 10.6% per year. Source: Bloomberg If your goal is to retire in 30 years, safe investments don’t help very much. But if you want to retire in 5 years or less, having all your money in stocks is foolish. There can be multi-year periods, where you’d have to draw on the funds when the market is down. Safe investments keep you from having to sell stocks after they’ve fallen – turning temporary price fluctuations into permanent losses. But the longest duration investments – those that in the short-run are the most volatile – are the ones that return the most over a long period. Having an investment plan that takes time into account is critical to investment success. Because there’s always enough time, if we use it well. Share this article with a colleague

Baby Boomers: Cash Is NOT Trash

Summary Record low cash allocations exist in the market. Investors should use this as a contrary indicator and raise cash. Think safety first in a market this extended. With persistent, historically low interest rates, it’s no wonder people think ‘cash is trash’. Cash equivalents (Money market, U.S. government T-Bills, etc.) essentially yield nothing so it seems like a very logical place to avoid as one approaches, or has recently entered, retirement. But that’s exactly where we think you should be overweighting. It runs so contrary to most investors, which is precisely why it’s so actionable. Little thought exists to what happens if the stock market sells off and remains low for a long period of time. The only fear evident in the current environment is being underinvested and missing out on further gains (evident last week when the VIX hit 10.88, the third lowest reading since before the financial crisis). The nest egg many baby boomers have toiled for and nurtured is very vulnerable if positioned too aggressively, whether in a reach for yield scenario (junk-rated debt, MLPs, REITs, BDCs) or simply being fully invested, possibly even on margin, to buy solid ‘blue chips’. There is no shortage of scary commercials by asset managers insinuating that you’ll run out of money in retirement unless you’re fully invested (with them). Prudential’s (NYSE: PRU ) commercials come to mind (“How old is the oldest person you’ve ever known?)”. But a scarier one might feature someone trying to re-enter the work force in a few years whose portfolio’s value has been cut in half. Contrary to popular opinion, the stock market’s function is not to provide you with an income stream to live off of . Cash is not Trash But first, is there really an aversion to holding cash? Unequivocally, yes. Here’s two data points that bear out the aversion to cash: 1) The data we’ve seen in mutual funds corroborates this. There have been record lows in cash on a sustained basis with another new all-time low in the mutual fund cash ratio of 3.2% for June. This low demand for cash is remarkable and is one of several factors we believe portends a steep market selloff in the not too distant future. While it’s true that cash levels have been low for years now, we think a turn is imminent. A worrisome chart we came across from Acting Man illustrates the sentiment very well: (click to enlarge) In the chart above (we tweaked it a bit – we added the orange line, the yellow and pink shaded zones and the boxed labels with red arrows and try and put into context the severity of the current complacency) that for the entire period of the 1980s and most of the 90s (until the dotcom boom kicked in), cash levels were dramatically higher, ranging between 7%-12% versus today’s 3.2%. In fact, the ratio during the entire yellow-shaded range was also markedly higher than the 6% we saw during the panic at the March 2009 lows . To put things into perspective, the U.S. market capitalization was around $2 trillion near the beginning of the yellow shaded area and is now almost $25 trillion, according to Bloomberg . If cash levels even begin to return to these former (one might say ‘responsible’) levels, given the amount of money currently invested in our stock markets, there will be a severe shock to our economy and way of life. 2) We also see this by looking at retail accounts, where the money market ratio (assets in money market funds and not invested in the stock market) is a measly 2.47%, which is just off the all-time low of 2.45% earlier this year. Again, people are fully invested and probably reaching for yield. There has been an intensifying decline in the money market ratio over the last 4 years built on the dual pillars of extreme complacency and continued optimism. Many boomer retail accounts have been heavily invested in three sectors that have, unfortunately, probably all peaked – REITs (NYSEARCA: VNQ ), utilities (NYSEARCA: XLU ) and energy MLPs (NYSEARCA: AMLP ). We’ve been amazed at the amount of follow-on equity offerings (often overnight or ‘spot secondaries’) for energy stocks, often MLPs, over the last few years. This is a key source of financing for MLPs. We’ve already witnessed the carnage for high-yield bonds of the energy sector with the Shale collapse – when the appetite on the institutional side really disappears for their junk debt, these companies will be scrambling for capital even more than they are now. On the retail side, the retail investor’s powder is running dry, as it appears to be now given the above ratios, and the selling pressure should persist, especially as natural gas and crude oil should continue their slides. We see WTI getting back to the low $30s. Back to the Future Below is a great chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average going back to 1900 (we added some data to try and give some perspective). In the early 1980s, everyone was in cash (and avoiding the stock market) when 3-month T-Bill rates were over 16%. The stock market had essentially gone sideways for about 17 years (1965-1982), investors were exhausted from the whipsaws and economic conditions (inflation) were terrible. People just wanted to be in cash. “Why risk it in a stock market going nowhere when we can get these high Treasury yields”? Eyeballing the chart above, mutual fund cash levels then were roughly 11% (versus 3% today). Completely logical thinking but also completely wrong. The market ascended around 14-fold over the next 17 years. (click to enlarge) Below is some monthly data from the St. Louis Fed on 3-month U.S. Treasury bill yields: A logical investor in 1982, seeing this data set above and the long-term Dow Jones chart, probably followed the Flock of Seagulls hit from that year and ‘Ran so far away…’ from the stock market. It is really amazing to see these numbers from the early 1980s, especially when compared to today’s yields: A logical investor in 2015, looking at the last two years of T-Bill rate data above, might say, “why would I put my money into this instrument that pays [essentially] nothing, when I can put it into the stock market that has been on fire for 6 straight years. There’s plenty of individual securities paying high single-digit returns, and the overall market yield is about 2% (which is 2% more than nothing) – I need the yield to live off of.” Sounds perfectly logical, but we think many investors are ignoring the risk side of the equation and only looking at the return side. A measly 2% market yield is unacceptable for a tremendous amount of market risk, in our opinion. We think these miniscule T-bill (or money market) rates are exactly where investors should be going at this point . From page 445 of Robert Prechter’s book , Conquer the Crash, from October 1998 through March 2008, the S&P 500 returned 3.84% while investments in U.S. T-Bills returned 30.22%. Today’s investors should be listening to ‘Timber’ by Pitbull and the message it portends. Safety with Benefits Here are three benefits for raising cash – 1) your capital will be preserved (at a time when markets look very frothy), 2) you have the potential for an increase in purchasing power if the deflation we’re seeing around the world hits here, which seems more likely than not and 3) you’ll reap the benefit of higher rates by rolling over whatever ultra-short term investments you’re in (T-Bills, money market funds, etc) and especially any floating rate securities the money market fund has. We want ‘cash’ in a money market fund that will hold up through a crisis or a sustained interest rate rise. Don’t forget, money market funds are portfolios of debt (shorter term and safer types, but debt nonetheless). You may even want to avoid a more traditional money market fund and opt for a lower yielding one that’s tilted towards very short-term Treasuries. But the government shutdown debacle in 2013 showed that there is risk involved in even that. ( Recall the yield on one-month T-Bills shot up from two basis points to sixteen in a week when there were very real worries of a default on short-dated T-bills). The dysfunction in Congress was serious enough that firms like BlackRock (NYSE: BLK ), JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM ) and Fidelity were scrambling to sell or reshuffle their securities (T-bills in the money market funds) that were most likely to be impacted by a default. So it might pay to ‘diversify’ with a couple different money market funds (preferably held at different brokerage accounts) if you have that option. There’s even some ETFs that try to achieve similar safety. Charles Schwab (NYSE: SCHW ) has the Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHO ) which we prefer to Vanguard’s Short-Term Bond fund (NYSEARCA: BSV ) which is slightly longer in maturity and has commercial paper. Summing it Up Again, we like the idea of raising cash. Cash in a bank, referred to as ‘free cash’ at some institutions. Now if your assets are in a deferred retirement account, taking the money out would probably incur a tax liability (and possible penalties). So if you want to avoid that, liquidating perhaps one of the funds you have but keep the sale proceeds in the sweep account (presumably some type of money market fund). As long as it stays in the account, there won’t be any distribution so you’ll avoid tax or penalty as a result of that. If you have a defined contribution plan like a 401(k), you should have a few choices and look closely at the ones with the lowest yield. Lower yield money markets will probably have more of a short-term treasury component and less repurchase agreements, commercial paper and ‘asset’-backed securities which could become problematic in a crisis and certainly aren’t worth the risk for potentially another fraction of a percent in interest. By taking a portion of your money, if interest rates rise, you will benefit by rolling into higher and higher rates (given the short duration). We like the idea of putting at least a quarter of your portfolio into cash (or an equivalent) given these market levels. If you are adamant about not selling anything outright, one option could be simply taking the dividends you are getting in your funds and not reinvesting them – instead take them as cash and they’ll automatically go into the sweep vehicle or money market. If interest rates rise, you’ll benefit if you own ultra-short investments such as T-Bills since you’ll have the flexibility to roll over the investments as rates go higher. It appears more than likely that rates in the U.S. have bottomed and is being confirmed by the 3-month LIBOR. This should usher in a new era of rate increases worldwide. Raising cash on one-quarter of your portfolio plus hedging another quarter of your portfolio with the long-dated put option (an idea we highlighted in last week’s article ) could effectively cut your portfolio’s risk by half for the next almost 2 ½ years. As we’ve said before, we think now is a time to think independently and play defense with your portfolio and we look forward to the future when we can ‘back up the truck’ when things really go on sale. But that time doesn’t appear to be any time soon. 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: I/we are not registered investment advisors and these ideas are not recommendations to buy or sell any specific security.

SCHP: The Best TIPS Exposure Investors Can Get

Summary TIPS offer very weak yields, but SCHP is designed the right way for investors. The ETF offers a very low expense ratio, easily beating a much larger competitor. The difference in expense ratio alone should be enough to make SCHP an easy winner for an investor planning to keep part of their portfolio in TIPS. If I were retiring and really needed access to the inflation protection, I would be planning to convert part of my holdings to SCHO at the start of each year. Combining SCHP for inflation protection with SCHO to get some yield off a position that would otherwise be cash provides a nice interaction between the two bond ETFs. The Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHP ) has everything investors could hope for other than strong yields. The yield issue is not surprising; there are no good yields to be achieved on TIPS. When it comes to comparing SCHP to competitors, SCHP looks like the gold standard. As I’ve told investors, I’m avoiding TIPS because I want to see better yields. If I were a retiring investor and needed inflation protected bonds, SCHP would be the champion on the list of options. Portfolio Characteristics Investors should start with looking at things like the duration risk. Keep in mind that the since the portfolio is holding TIPS the risk of inflation over time is already built into the portfolio. Since there are many retirees that could use more stability in their portfolio, there should be very strong demand for TIPS. Honestly, I would love to have the inflation protection in my portfolio but I don’t want it bad enough to accept the yields on TIPS. Simply put, other investors want that inflation protection more than I do and they have demonstrated that desire by buying up the TIPS until the yields were incredibly low. The effective duration on the portfolio is 7.79 years which matches the average effective duration for the iShares TIPS Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: TIP ). Since the portfolio is 95.3% in TIPS with the rest in a mix of U.S. Treasury securities and a very small amount of cash, the question for each investor simply comes down: “Do you want inflation protection enough to accept the very weak yields after inflation?” There is not one correct answer. For some people it should be yes and for others it is no. This is not meant to be 100% of an investor’s portfolio but it would be a useful holding for stabilization of portfolio values. If you are buying an ETF filled with TIPS, you’re accepting having a yield that is just barely above inflation and even getting a positive yield after inflation requires taking some duration risk. The Next Question If an investor does not want to buy TIPS, there isn’t much reason to consider an ETF packed with them. For the investor that does want the TIPS in their portfolio, the next question is “Which ETF Should I Use?” In my opinion, the Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF is a clear winner in this category for many investors though some of them may not know it. The biggest competitor is the iShares TIPS Bond ETF. With the same effective duration, the actual allocation to individual security length is not identical. However, the holdings are similar enough that I am fairly confident that over the next 10 years the difference in returns between the two would come down to the expense ratio. For TIP the expense ratio is .20%. For SCHP it is only .07%. This is a case of a lower expense ratio outweighing virtually all other considerations because the portfolios being held are so similar. I don’t see any good argument for TIP to beat SCHP over the long haul when portfolios are similar and SCHP is willing to let investors keep an extra .13% of the portfolio value. Remember that these bond yields are not great; a difference of .13% on the expense ratio should make a meaningful difference over time. If SCHP is able to match TIP in gross returns, then SCHP is offering investors about another 1.3% to their portfolio value over a decade. The next factor is that investors holding Schwab portfolios are getting free trading on SCHP. If the investor wants to be able to frequently liquidate small positions and avoid holding a large amount in cash, then SCHP is offering another benefit by not charging a commission on the trade. For the retiree that wants to be able to withdraw one or two grand at a time to supplement their other income sources, saving a trading fee on the transaction will be an enormous factor. Investors paying trading fees would be saving around .45% to .9% of the value of the distribution. When we are talking about securities with a very small real yield, saving the trading costs can become material. Return Comparison SCHP has a fairly limited history, but it is playing out as I would expect so far. The distribution yields for TIP and SCHP have been almost identical (.85% for tip, .83% for SCHP). When we look at the NAV return over the last year SCHP was down 1.81% while TIP was down about 1.9% (rounded). The difference may be significantly tied to SCHP having a benefit from the lower expense ratio. The difference in price return over the period also favors SCHP by a small amount. These results are precisely what I would expect when the two ETFs hold extremely similar assets. If I Was Using SCHP If I was retiring, I would probably be holding part of my portfolio in SCHP. While the TIPS provide a return that automatically adjusts for inflation, there is still some volatility due to the duration risk on the portfolio. Therefore, I would consider pulling out money from SCHP at the start of the year. I would take the amount that I was pulling out of SCHP and reinvest it in the Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHO ) to hold that cash until I needed to pull it out. I find SCHO to be a fairly acceptable substitute for cash in a portfolio. It does not provide inflation protection, but the very low duration works nicely. Keep in mind that this strategy would only work with free trading. Without free trading it would be better to just hold the cash rather than parking it in SCHO. My View I assume investors looking heavily at the Schwab funds probably opened a Schwab account to take advantage of those funds the same way I did. Schwab doesn’t give me anything for covering their ETFs, but I frequently choose Schwab ETFs to research because I want to know more about the ones I can trade without paying commissions. I’m adding to my portfolio several times per year and my investment mentality absolutely despises paying any unnecessary costs. Best Contender In my opinion, the best contender for the title of “Best TIPS ETF” would be the Vanguard Short-Term Inflation-Protected Securities ETF (NASDAQ: VTIP ). For investors seeking shorter duration, VTIP is a solid alternative. For investors willing to take on longer term TIPS as part of their retirement strategy, I think the SCHP portfolio’s longer duration is acceptable to seek stronger yields. If the investor had free trading on VTIP but not on SCHP, they would probably be better off with VTIP. If there were no free trades on either, I would favor SCHP for longer term allocations. Conclusion If investors want to put TIPS in their portfolio, SCHP looks like the way to do it. As long as investors are willing to accept the yield on TIPS, there is no weakness for SCHP. It easily beats other major ETFs on expense ratio while offering investors (through Schwab) the opportunity to avoid commissions on the trades. I’m not willing to accept the yield on TIPS since I expect to be working for a long time and can absorb any hits from inflation over my career. When I get to that point, hopefully yields will be stronger. Even if yields are weak, SCHP embodies all the other things I would be looking for. As for TIP, I don’t see any value in higher expense ratios. When it comes to SCHO, I’m planning to start using SCHO in my portfolio as a way to park cash while still generating a positive yield with very little risk. 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.