Tag Archives: seeking-alpha

ETF Update: John Hancock, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan And More Launched Funds This Week

Welcome back to the SA ETF Update. My goal is to keep Seeking Alpha readers up to date on the ETF universe and to gain some visibility, both for the ETF community, and for me as its editor (so users know who to approach with issues, article ideas, to become a contributor, etc.) Every weekend, or every other weekend (depending on the reader response and submission volumes), we will highlight fund launches and closures for the week, as well as any news items that could impact ETF investors. Last week we saw the first Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS ) ETF enter the arena, the ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: GSLC ). While there was a followup launch from GS this week, John Hancock made the biggest splash with its first 6 ETF offerings. The newcomer has a strong history in mutual funds and I am excited to see how these new ETFs perform in the coming months. Fund launches for the week of September 28, 2015 Another Goldman ETF opens for business (9/29): One week after the launch of GSLC, Goldman Sachs rolls out one for emerging markets , the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: GEM ). John Hancock adds 6 new funds (9/29): As stated by Andrew G. Arnott, president and CEO of John Hancock Investments, “it was important to us to develop an ETF product that seeks to address investor needs for performance potential, backed by an investment approach rooted in decades of academic research.” They are the John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: JHMM ), the John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: JHML ), the John Hancock Multifactor Technology ETF (NYSEARCA: JHMT ), the John Hancock Multifactor Healthcare ETF (NYSEARCA: JHMH ) and John Hancock Multifactor Financials ETF (NYSEARCA: JHMF ). John Hancock doesn’t seem to have pages for the 6 funds yet, but the SEC filing linked above should be a good starting point for interested investors. JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM ) launches a new U.S. Equity ETF (9/30): The JPMorgan Diversified Return U.S. Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: JPUS ) tracks the Russell 1000 Diversified Factor Index , which “seeks to provide U.S. exposure with the potential for better risk-adjusted returns.” Credit Suisse rolls out an income ETF (9/30): The Credit Suisse X-Links Multi-Asset High Income ETN (NYSEARCA: MLTI ) tracks an index “comprised of a broad, diversified basket of up to 120 publicly-traded securities that historically have paid high dividends or distributions.” IndexIQ launches a new fund-of-funds ETF (9/30): The IQ Leaders GTAA Tracker ETF (NYSEARCA: QGTA ) follows the IQ Leaders GTAA Index, which “seeks to track the performance and risk characteristics of the 10 leading global allocation mutual funds. Identifying 10 leading mutual funds is based on fund performance and asset size and is reconstituted annually.” iShares launches a hedged alternative to Japanese equities (10/1): The iShares Currency Hedged JPX-Nikkei 400 ETF (NYSEMKT: HJPX ) “seeks to track the investment results of a broad-based benchmark composed of Japanese equities.” It is a hedged alternative for the iShares JPX-Nikkei 400 ETF (JPXN). There were no fund closures for the week of September 28, 2015 One of the first comments on my article last week raised an important question : The ETF world is ever changing. Smart beta was a new thing recently. Similarly I saw few articles that talked about ETMF (Exchange Traded Mutual Funds) being the next big thing. Would love to see some research on it.. Our own Jonathon Liss came up with an answer that I feel many readers will find incredibly helpful as ETMFs start to gain traction in the market: ETMFs are not really ETFs. In fact, I think the term is intentionally confusing in an attempt to ride the popularity of ETFs. In most key ways, these products are no different than mutual funds. The fact they are ‘exchange-listed’ is meaningless for all intents and purposes. They only price once a day and are non-transparent meaning they only have to list their holdings once per quarter akin to MFs – and on a 1-2 month delay at that as is standard with 13F filings. Additionally, they have a strange auction bidding system required to buy them. They do likely share some of the theoretical tax advantages of ETFs but that’s about it. Thus, I think they should essentially be lumped with mutual funds and not ETFs. If I’m missing key details I’d be happy for others to fill me in but this is what I’ve been able to gather from the literature I’ve seen. Have any other questions on ETFs or ETNs? Please comment below and I will try to clear things up. As an author and editor I have found that constructive feedback is the best way to grow. What you would like to see discussed in the future? How can I improve this series to meet reader needs? Please share your thoughts on this first edition of the ETF Update series in the comments section below. Have a view on something that’s coming up or a new fund? Submit an article. Share this article with a colleague

Simple Pair – Switching Bond Strategy Using Mutual Funds

Summary This strategy switches between a high yield corporate bond fund and a high yield municipal bond fund based on 3-month returns. A 3-month simple moving average filter is also used. The strategy is very low risk (i.e. low standard deviation and low maximum drawdown) while maintaining reasonable growth (~10% CAGR). Backtesting from 1986 using FAGIX and MMHYX produces CAGR = 11.3%, standard deviation = 5.5%, and maximum drawdown (based on monthly returns) = -5.5%. There are essentially no losing years. No load/no fee mutual funds must be selected for practical application. They are platform-dependent; for Schwab, I selected JAHYX and NHMAX as the best available no load/no fee mutual funds. Using JAHYX and NMHAX and backtesting to 2000, the strategy produces CAGR = 9.7%, standard deviation = 4.8%, and maximum drawdown = -3.5%. There are no losing years. This article explains a rather simple strategy that tactically switches between a high-yield corporate bond mutual fund and a high-yield municipal bond mutual fund, with money market being a safety net. The goal was to develop a low risk, capital-preservation strategy with reasonable growth (CAGR ~ 10%). I also desired to use mutual funds rather than ETFs to reduce volatility. This necessitated that the strategy be updated on a quarterly basis rather than a monthly basis (my usual preference). The reason these two bond asset classes were chosen was because they are not well-correlated; typically, their correlation is about 0.15. To show the feasibility of the strategy, I used two representative mutual funds that could be backtested to 1986 in Portfolio Visualizer (PV): Fidelity Capital and Income Fund (MUTF: FAGIX ) and MFS Municipal High Yield Bond Fund (MUTF: MMHYX ). Some might object to the usage of FAGIX as the high-yield corporate bond mutual fund because a small percentage of the fund is invested in equities rather than bonds. Fidelity Advisor High Income Advantage Class A (MUTF: FAHDX ) is actually a better representative of this class, but its history starts in 1987 in PV. I wanted to include 1987 in the analysis, so I used FAGIX instead of FAHDX. But I will show results using both FAGIX and FAHDX later in this article. The strategy uses 3-month relative strength momentum ranking to determine which asset to pick each quarter. In addition, the top-ranked asset must pass a 3-month simple moving average, MA, filter in order to be selected. If the asset does not pass this filter, then the money goes to the money market. This is a pretty simple set of parameters, and others have shown that a 3-month lookback period for bonds is most satisfactory. The backtesting was performed using the free Portfolio Visualizer (PV) software. Any investor can run these calculations and trade this strategy. The backtest results are shown below for FAGIX and MMHYX. CASHX (PV’s ticker for money market) is the cash filter asset. The timeframe is 1986 – present. It can be seen that the CAGR = 11.3%, the standard deviation, SD = 5.5%, the maximum drawdown based on monthly returns (MaxDD) = -5.5%, and the worst year = -0.3%. Risk adjustment return-on-investment can be seen using CAGR/SD and/or CAGR/MaxDD. In this strategy, CAGR/SD = 2.04, and CAGR/MaxDD = 2.02. Summary Table for FAGIX – MMHYX: 1986 – present (click to enlarge) Total Return for FAGIX – MMHYX: 1986 – present (click to enlarge) Annual Returns for FAGIX – MMHYX: 1986 – present (click to enlarge) It should be noted that results are also shown for an equal-weight portfolio, i.e. both assets are held continually and rebalanced annually. This is commonly referred to as a buy & hold strategy. The equal-weight strategy has a CAGR of 7.7%, but it has a MaxDD of -27.6% and a worst year return of -25.9%. The benefit of the tactical strategy I am proposing can readily be seen: almost 50% higher growth compared to the passive buy & hold strategy (CAGR of 11.3% versus 7.7%) and much less drawdown (-5.5% versus -27.6%). If FAHDX is substituted for FAGIX, the backtest timeframe becomes 1988 – present. The results are shown below. It can be seen that CAGR = 10.5%, SD = 5.6%, MaxDD = 6.5%, and worst year = +0.2%. The CAGR/SD = 1.89, and CAGR/MaxDD = 1.62. Summary Table for FAHDX – MMHYX: 1988 – present (click to enlarge) Total Return for FAHDX – MMHYX: 1988 – present (click to enlarge) Now comes the difficult task of picking mutual funds for a real application of the strategy. I needed to find mutual funds with no loads and no redemption fees, and operating expenses (including 12b-1 fees) that are kept to a minimum. Of course, every platform has different funds that meet these requirements. I use the Schwab platform, and they provide a lot of no load/no fee options. After extensive searching, I selected Janus High-Yield T Shs Fund (MUTF: JAHYX ) as the best high yield corporate bond mutual fund, and Nuveen High Yield Municipal Bond Fund Class A (MUTF: NHMAX ) as the best high yield municipal bond mutual fund. These funds only permit backtesting to 2000. So the results shown below have a timeframe from 2000 – present. It can be seen that CAGR = 9.7%, SD = 4.8%, MaxDD = -3.4%, and the worst year = +1.6%. The CAGR/SD = 2.03, and the CAGR/MaxDD = 2.66 (a very good number). Summary Table for JAHYX – NHMAX: 2000 – Present (click to enlarge) Total Return for JAHYX – NHMAX: 2000 – Present (click to enlarge) Annual Returns for JAHYX – NHMAX: 2000 – Present (click to enlarge) The robustness of the strategy is seen in the table below. The MA has been varied between 2 months and 4 months, and the lookback timing period (TP) was changed between 3 months and 4 months. The overall results do not change appreciably. Robustness of Strategy (click to enlarge) In summary, this article presents a very conservative tactical strategy that produces reasonable growth with very low risk. It is a quarterly updating strategy that uses less volatile mutual funds rather than ETFs. The basic strategy can be implemented on any platform, but care must be exercised in finding the best no load/no fee mutual funds for any given platform. For the Schwab platform, I believe the best mutual funds for this strategy are JAHYX and NHMAX. The pick for last quarter (July – September, 2015) was CASHX. The selection for this quarter (October – December, 2015) is NHMAX.

How I Created My Portfolio Over A Lifetime – Part VI

Summary Introduction and series overview. When and why I might trim a position or two from my portfolio. The methods I use to liquidate a position. Back to Part V Introduction and Series Overview This series is meant to be an explanation of how I constructed my own portfolio. More importantly, I hope to explain how I learned to invest over time, mostly through trial and error, learning from successes and failures. Each individual investor has different needs and a different level of risk tolerance. At 66, my tolerance is pretty low. The purpose of writing this series is to provide others with an example from which each one could, if they so choose, use as a guide to develop their own approach to investing. You may not choose to follow my methods but you may be able to understand how I developed mine and proceed from there. The first article in this series is worth the time to read based upon some of the many comments made by readers, as it provides what many would consider an overview of a unique approach to investing. Part II introduced readers to the questions that should be answered before determining assets to buy. I spent a good deal of that article explaining investing horizons, including an explanation of my own, to hopefully provoke readers to consider how they would answer those same questions. Once an individual or couple has determined the future needs for which they want to provide, he/she can quantify their goals. If the goals seem unreachable, then either the retirement age needs to be pushed further into the future or the goals need to become attainable. I then explained my approach to allocating between different asset classes and summarized by listing my approximate percentage allocations as they currently stand in Parts III and III a. Part IV was an explanation of why I shy away from using ETFs and something akin to an anatomy of a flash crash. In Part V I did my best to explain why holding cash, especially when assets valuations are relatively high, may be better than being fully invested at all times. In this article I will explain when, why and how I remove positions from my portfolio. I will provide two examples, one for each of the two methods I use. When and why I might trim a position or two from my portfolio There are two reasons that I might want to sell a stock position from my portfolio. The first is when the company management changes direction or the business model in a way that does not appear to be sustainable to me. This one should be obvious, but I do not want to exclude anything that could be useful to those just starting out. If the fundamental reason I bought the stock has changed, such as the moat has been washed away by technological advances creating easy entrance by competitors, I must reassess whether holding the position still makes sense. Usually, in such a case, the answer is no. Thus, I will want to sell the stock and look for another investment with a more sustainable growth/income business model still intact. The second reason is when I sense, for many reasons, that the market and by extension some of my positions, have reached overly high valuations. I will discuss the many reasons in a moment. But, for now, suffice it to say that when I feel that I could find a better investment for my money in terms of total return potential, I consider selling the position. The method, in this case, is to sell calls. In the first case I will sell the position outright on a day when the stock is exhibiting some price strength (usually when the broader market is up and lifting most stocks higher). In the second case, I will sell the calls when the stock is over its fair value by 20 percent or more and do so while the stock is still near its 52-week high. The methods I use to liquidate a position I want to provide two examples, one to explain each situation in which I decide to sell a position. The first example is Best Buy (NYSE: BBY ) which I first recommended in this article back on October 7, 2011. But I did not buy the stock at that point because my recommendation was to sell put options in hopes of either collecting a 20 percent annualized return on cash or to buy the stock at a discount. I ended up collecting the cash and the option expired worthless. The next time I made a similar recommendation came in my December 23, 2011 article . This time I was successful, having sold two put options, collecting $2.39 per share, with a strike price of $20 while the price at the time stood at $23.28. I did not expect to get put the shares but, as it turned out, the stock fell all the way down to near $11 per share in November of 2012. I ended up owning 200 shares of BBY with a cost basis of $17.61 in mid-January 2013 with the price at $15. I had originally wanted the shares because of BBY’s position as the leading electronics retailer after a consolidation in the space and because of my personal experiences while shopping at three different BBY locations. I received some negative feedback after my original article that customer service in some areas had become less than desirable. I considered that to be more of a localized situation as my recent experiences had been superior. Then something changed. All of the highly knowledgeable employees that I had previously made my shopping experience enjoyable suddenly disappeared. The employees that replaced them barely spoke English and were not as interested in helping find what I needed but totally focused on selling me something along with some other things that I did not need. They were highly trained in selling but knew little about the products they were charged with selling. Fortunately for me this happened in September, 2013 with the price trading near $38 per share. I dumped my 200 shares on September 16th at $38.50. One of the major reasons why I had bought stock in the company, excellent customer service, had changed dramatically. I was lucky to be shopping and having the experience when I did. Sure the stock went up to over $43 per share in November of that year, two months after I had sold. But I felt no regret at the time. My decision was based upon the assumption that the company had decided to lower labor costs and try to increase dollars per sale at the expense of customer service. Management probably did not think it would be sacrificing so much in the customer experience, but, in the end, the result was horrific. Results disappointed and the stock price fell back to a low of $22.15 on January 2014. I was not tempted to add back shares at that price. While I would have profited nicely if I had, the company had broken my faith and I will not look back. Of course, the bigger future problem for BBY will be competing over the Internet with the likes of Amazon and some smaller electronics specialty sites. The stock now stands at $37.78. I believe it is over valued at that price relative to its future prospects. The second example is a company than I have held in my tax-deferred IRA account since 2006 with a cost basis of just over $30 per share. McCormick (NYSE: MKC ) is one of my all-time favorite companies but the stock has, like many quality stocks in the current environment, has become over valued by my estimates. The current share price is $79.62 (as of market close on Friday, October 2, 2015). I really do not want to sell these shares because the company is still doing everything right and the future remains bright. However, when the price of a stock gets to be over valued by 20 percent or more I like to sell calls above the current price. If the stock rallies and remains above my strike price I end up having to sell the stock for 25 percent or more above what I consider to be fair value. My estimate of fair value for MKC is $66. I get to that price base by using the dividend discount model [DDM] with a discount (or my hurdle rate) of nine percent. Dividends have increased handsomely over the past five and ten years, at nine and 9.1 percent, respectively. However, I believe that the growth prospects going forward will be lower, not only for MKC but for most multi-national corporations, as growth in emerging markets is slowing and not likely to regain the levels of the past decade in the foreseeable future. My estimated compound annual growth rate for MKC dividends is 6.6 percent. Plug in the numbers and we end up with a fair value of $66.01 per share. As I mentioned before, I do not want to lose this position but it will not break my heart if these shares get called away at $85 before year end. Since the position is in my IRA account I am not worried about a tax consequence. I would not sell calls so close to the current price if it were in a taxable account. I figure that if the position gets called away I will probably look for a better yield in another quality stock that has been beaten down more. Of course, if it does not get called away I am happy because the stock is not likely to fall much below fair value. It seems to hold up very well even during the worst recessions. Everyone has to eat and we like to season our food to taste. That goes for all seven billion of us; or at least those can afford to be choosy. That number has grown and will continue to growth but I suspect the rate of growth to slow considerably for at least the next five years. Summary I intend to get more into some of the common mistakes investors make when not paying attention to tax consequences in the next article. After that I want to get back to the basic concepts of saving and investing goals and methods, primarily for those just starting out, but also applicable to those who are nearing retirement and not quite comfortable with where they are at this stage of life in terms of having enough to last through their remaining years in comfort. There are always a few tough decisions to make but they are generally well worth considering. As always I welcome comments and questions and will do my best to provide details and answers. This is one of the best aspects of the SA community. We can learn from each other and share our perspectives so that other readers can benefit from the comprehensive knowledge and experience represented here.