Tag Archives: seeking-alpha

3 Buy-Ranked Small-Cap Blend Mutual Funds

Small-cap blend funds are a type of equity mutual fund which hold in their portfolio a mix of value and growth stocks, where the market capitalization of the stocks is generally lower than $2 billion. Blend funds are also known as “hybrid funds”. Blend funds aim for value appreciation by capital gains. They owe their origin to a graphical representation of a fund’s equity style box. In addition to diversification, blend funds are great picks for investors looking for a mix of growth and value investment. Meanwhile, small-cap funds are a good choice for investors seeking diversification across different sectors and companies. Investors with a high risk appetite should invest in these funds. Below we will share with you 3 buy-rated small-cap blend mutual funds. Each has earned either a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 (Strong Buy) or a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2 (Buy) , as we expect these mutual funds to outperform their peers in the future. To view the Zacks Rank and past performance of all small-cap blend mutual funds, investors can click here to see the complete list of funds. Fidelity Small Cap Stock Fund No Load (MUTF: FSLCX ) seeks capital appreciation over the long run. FSLCX uses a “blend” strategy to invest in small-cap companies having market capitalizations within the range of the Russell 2000 Index or the S&P SmallCap 600 Index. Factors including financial strength and economic condition are considered before investing in securities of companies throughout the globe. The Fidelity Small Cap Stock Fund has returned 6.5% over the past one year. Lionel T. Harris is the fund manager and has managed FSLCX since 2011. Lord Abbett Alpha Strategy Fund A (MUTF: ALFAX ) is a “fund of funds” that generally invests in mutual funds of Lord, Abbett & Co. LLC. ALFAX invests in value and growth stocks of companies located all over the world. The fund invests in companies having micro-, small- and mid-cap market capitalizations. The Lord Abbett Alpha Strategy A fund has returned 2.6% over the past one year. As of June 2015, ALFAX held 7 issues, with 20.18% of its total assets invested in the Lord Abbett Developing Growth I fund. TIAA-CREF Small-Cap Equity Retail Fund Adv (MUTF: TCSEX ) seeks favorable returns over the long term. TCSEX invests heavily in domestic small-cap companies having market capitalizations identical to those included in the Russell 2000 Index. The fund primarily invests in small-sized companies across different sectors. The TIAA-CREF Small-Cap Equity Retail fund has returned 4.9% over the past one year. TCSEX has an expense ratio of 0.78%, compared to a category average of 1.24%. Original Post Share this article with a colleague

The Real Danger Of Leveraged ETFs And ETNs

Summary A Seeking Alpha author highlights an unfortunate experience he had with a leveraged ETN. This article takes a closer look at the math – was the leveraged ETN to blame? The real dangers of using leverage ETFs and ETNs are presented. In a recent article entitled ” How I Got Burned By Leveraged ETNs “, Seeking Alpha author David Butler relates an unfortunate experience that he had with a 3x leveraged ETN, the VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil ETN (NYSEARCA: UWTI ). He writes about his investment: I bought in again at $3.64 believing the sky was the limit. Was it a dumb buy? Absolutely not. The mistake was not paying attention. Due to the big unrecoverable hits you can take on leveraged ETNs, you have to watch them closely and cut your losses quick if you start to lose. I was over confident. My past success had me thinking I couldn’t lose with this wonder security. Two weeks later, oil was in the beginning of its next downtrend…and I was kicking myself for losing a big portion of my previous gains. Did I take my medicine, cut my losses and sell? You all know the answer to that one. I waited. I thought “maybe oil will jump back up and I’ll get it all back”. Did it happen? You know the answer to that one too. UWTI’s chart says it all…. The author also presented an oft-quoted scenario, where the price of a security alternately increases and decreases by 10%, causing the corresponding 2X ETN to rapidly decay (original source ). In closing, David writes: Today, UWTI is trading at just around $1. Decay, combined with oil’s downward spiral killed me. Leveraged ETFs/ETNs Over the years, a number of Seeking Alpha authors have espoused on the pros and cons of leveraged ETFs or ETNs. At one extreme, Canary Cash gives reasons ” Why You Must Never Ever (Ever) Invest In A Leveraged ETN For Much Longer Than A Day “, one of which is the decay that occurs when the index increases and decreases successively. On the other hand, Dane Van Domelen has argued in an article entitled ” What The Numbers Say About Long-Term Investments In Leveraged ETFs ” that daily swings of plus- or minus-10% are exceptionally rare, and in most cases, the decay issue is much less serious than initially claimed. My personal portfolio also includes a number of income-generating, 2x leveraged funds, including the UBS ETRACS ETNs which I have written about extensively (see this article for a summary of the ETRACS line-up of 2x ETNs). By resetting monthly, these ETNs appear to partially mitigate the decay issue associated with daily-resetting funds. I have also studied the practical issues associated with harvesting this decay by shorting leveraged ETF/ETN pairs. Therefore, I was interested in further studying the reasons why David Butler’s investment in UWTI performed so poorly. Was it due to the inherent decay of leveraged ETFs/ETNs, or was it something else? At this juncture, I wish to emphasize that while much of this analysis focuses on David’s investment decision in UWTI and its associated consequences, this event could have happened to anyone, including myself. Furthermore, I do not intend to (nor am I qualified to) make a judgement on whether David’s investment at the time was “good” or “bad” – hindsight is always 20/20! The following is therefore intended to be a general analysis of the issues associated with an individual investing in any leveraged ETF/ETN. Comparing the 1x and 3x funds In his article, David writes that he bought UWTI at $3.64, but sold at around $1.00. As David did not provide the exact dates of his buying and selling, let’s assume that he bought on the last day that UWTI closed above $3.64, i.e. Jun 10th, and sold on the first day that UWTI closed below $1.00, i.e. Aug 19th. The following chart shows the price change for UWTI between those dates, together with the corresponding 1x fund, the iPath S&P GSCI Crude Oil Total Return ETN (NYSEARCA: OIL ). As expected, the 3x fund has done much worse than the 1x fund, but not three times as poorly – that would be impossible as it would take the price of the UWTI into negative territory. UWTI and OIL returned -74.6% and -39.0%, respectively, during this period. It is known that leveraged ETFs/ETNs suffer from beta decay or slippage when the underlying asset is volatile with no net change over a period of time. However, note that both UWTI and OIL declined nearly monotonically during the test period, with no notable rallies. Therefore, I would have to conclude that the beta decay or slippage of ETFs played only a small, if any, part in UWTI’s decline. The same exposure without leverage Let’s consider a hypothetical investor “Joe” who invests $10,000 into UWTI over the time period indicated above. Let’s also consider Joe’s twin brother, “Jack”, who has read about the dangers of using leveraged ETFs/ETNs and the decay associated with such funds. However, he still wants to have the same exposure to oil as Joe, so he instead decides to invest $30,000 into the corresponding 1x fund OIL. How have Joe and Jack fared over the time period indicated above? Since UWTI declined by -74.6%, Joe’s $10,000 investment has dwindled into $2,540, which represents a loss of $7,460. On the other hand, Jack’s $30,000 investment in oil declined by “only” -39.0% to $18,300, but because of his larger initial base, his nominal loss comes out to be $11,700, which is more than 50% that of Joe’s. In other words, investing $10,000 into a 3x fund rather than $30,000 into a 1x fund actually benefited Joe during oil’s decline, even though both brothers had the same apparent exposure to oil. The reason for this is quite simple. At the risk of stating the obvious, the maximum loss of a $10,000 investment is $10,000, while the maximum loss of a $30,000 investment is $30,000. Once OIL declined by more than 33% (turning Jack’s $30,000 into $20,000), there was no way that Joe could lose more money than Jack. In fact, if Jack had purchased OIL on 50% margin, a -39.0% fall in the fund will bring his percentage of equity to 18.0%, below the minimum maintenance requirement of most brokers, thus possibly triggering a margin call and leading to forced selling. The real danger of leveraged ETFs and ETNs The results of this exercise suggest that the real danger of leveraged ETFs and ETNs is not their inherent leverage, nor their associated decay. In my opinion, the first real danger of leveraged ETFs/ETNs is that investors “forget” that their investment is leveraged and neglect to position-size accordingly. This observation leads to the following advice: Only invest $10,000 in a 3x fund if you are entirely comfortable with investing $30,000 in the corresponding 1x fund . The second real danger of leveraged ETFs/ETNs is that any changes in price become amplified, leading to either of two pitfalls, the first of which is overconfidence. David Butler writes: I first bought the VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil ETN [UWTI] back in March for $2.24. Less than a month later I sold at $2.53. As the Exchange traded notes kept climbing I bought back in again at $2.82 and sold at $3.20. Suddenly, I was hooked on the volatility of oil ETFs and ETNs. David pocketed a cool 13% in less than a month on his first UWTI investment, while the underlying index might only have appreciated by around 4%. His second investment also returned 13%, although the time frame was not stated. A double-digit monthly return would undoubtedly be the envy of all of Wall Street, and it is understandable as to why an investor would become overconfident in such a situation. The second pitfall associated with amplified price changes is that when prices go south, the large proportional decrease in the leveraged fund might trigger panic in an investor, leading to selling at inopportune times. Notwithstanding the fact that such a panic sale might, in hindsight, have been the correct decision, it is a generally-accepted maxim that emotional behavior is best left out of stock-market decisions. Summary While a 74.6% loss in any investment is no fun, David Butler could possibly be comforted by the fact that had he invested three times of his UWTI investment amount into the corresponding 1x fund OIL, he would have lost over 50% as much money, despite having the same apparent exposure to oil. It is my opinion that the true dangers of leveraged ETFs/ETNs are not due to any structural issues associated with leverage or decay. Rather, I believe that the two main dangers of using leveraged products are both psychological . The first is the issue of position-sizing, and I believe that my advice from above bears repeating: Only invest $10,000 in a 3x fund if you are entirely comfortable with investing $30,000 in the corresponding 1x fund . only invest $10,000 in a 2x fund if you are entirely comfortable with investing $20,000 in the corresponding 1x fund . The second danger is that the amplified price movements of leveraged ETFs/ETNs can trigger either overconfidence (when prices go up) or panic (when prices go down) in the everyday investor. Finally, I should make the very obvious point that it is the choice of the underlying security that primarily determines a fund’s performance, and not whether it is 1x or 3x leveraged. Had Joe instead invested $10,000 into the VelocityShares 3x Inverse Crude ETN (NYSEARCA: DWTI ), the 3x leveraged short version of OIL, his investment would have ballooned to $31,670. DWTI data by YCharts I hope that this analysis was helpful for investors considering investing in leveraged ETFs or ETNs. 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.

3 Mid-Cap Value ETFs For Every Kind Of Investor

Mid-cap value ETFs are often overlooked, yet have significant upside. Quasi-active management at some funds have helped performance while reducing risk. They also offer modest dividend yield, making them exceptional for all investors. I am a value investor, meaning I look for stocks that the market hasn’t discovered yet or that are out of favor for some reason. One of my favorite areas for value stocks is the mid-cap arena. Some of my best picks over the years have been those that started as small-caps and grew due to their success. It’s these overlooked stocks whose stories I like that I spend most of my time on. However, I can’t spend all my time on them, and that’s why I’ve been hunting down 3 mid-cap ETFs to share with aggressive investors, conservative investors, and the average investor. Why own a mid-cap ETF? Other than the fact that mid-cap stocks have historically outperformed their larger brethren and offer the best chances of obtaining a multi-bagger return, you must have diversification in your portfolio. Sector outperformance occurs all the time, and the more diversification you have, the better. If you don’t have diversification, then you risk seeing your overall portfolio fall more in bad times by having your money overly concentrated. Here are my choices for mid-cap value ETFs for the average Joe investor, aggressive investor and conservative investor. For aggressive investors, have a look at the WisdomTree MidCap Earnings Fund (NYSEARCA: EZM ) . I like its very low expense ratio of 0.38%, which is more than covered by its 1.2% yield. As quasi-actively managed model, it means there’s a bit more risk involved than an ETF that seeks to mirror an index. It takes companies in the top 75% of the market capitalization of the WisdomTree Earnings Index, removes the top 500 largest companies, and is earnings-weighted in December of each year. Thus, companies with greater earnings generally have larger weight in the index. So it isn’t just blindly cap-weighted. The fund holds 612 stocks. The top 10 account for about 6% of the total asset base, and this speaks to its broad diversification. The top holdings tend to rotate quite a bit. Right now, the top three are WABCO Holdings (NASDAQ: WB ), Santander Consumer USA Holdings (NYSE: SC ) and Brunswick Corp. (NYSE: BC ) . It has 25% of assets invested in financials, 19% in industrials, 17% in consumer discretionary, 13% in IT, 6% in utilities, 6% in materials, and 5% in energy. This more aggressive approach is why it has significantly outperformed the S&P 500 since inception in February of 2007 – 79% to 37%. It’s also why it carries a beta of 1.14 over 3 years, where 1.0 means it carries about the same risk as the S&P 500. For the average Joe investor, I’m sticking with the same fund family in the form of the WisdomTree MidCap Dividend Fund (NYSEARCA: DON ). The approach is somewhat similar to the previous fund but even less actively managed. The fund holds the companies that compose the top 75% of the market capitalization of the WisdomTree Dividend Index after the 300 largest companies have been removed. The index is dividend-weighted annually to reflect what each company is expected to pay in the coming year. The dividend yield isn’t something investors will kill to own, but at 2.76%, it more than covers the 0.38% expense ratio. The fund’s assets are also nicely diversified with 396 stocks. The top 10 holdings are about 10% of the total asset base. The top components also tend to rotate a good deal. The biggest holdings now are Maxim Integrated Products (NASDAQ: MXIM ), Mattel (NASDAQ: MAT ) and Ameren (NYSE: AEE ). The fund has earned about the same return of the S&P 500 but with a beta of 0.95, meaning about 5% less risk. If you’re a conservative, then take a look at the PowerShares Russell Midcap Pure Value Portfolio (NYSE: PXMV ) . Be alert that up until May 22 the fund was known as the PowerShares Fundamental Pure Mid Cap Value Portfolio. First of all, the fund removes the largest 70% of cumulative fundamental weight from a mid-cap value index. It then takes the remaining companies and screens them via fundamental analysis – including five-year average sales, cash flow, latest book value and five-year average dividend. Then there’s another step. The stocks are compared to the sector to see which ones are valued below their peers. So this is a more actively managed fund, which I would generally characterize as carrying more risk. Yet the historic returns are such that when adjusted for risk, I feel it is a more conservative choice. It has 21% concentration in utilities, which adds to the conservative approach and also boosts the yield over 3%. This ETF holds only 161 stocks, which is a bit more concentrated than I’d like, but is perfectly acceptable. The top 10 holdings account for 11% of assets. The sector diversity is also nice, with 46% financials, 3% consumer, 6% industrial, 4% IT, 4% materials, and 11% energy. As with any article regarding investments, you should never rely on information you read without doing your own due diligence. My articles contain my honest, forthright and carefully considered personal opinion, and conclusions, containing information derived from my own research. This may include discussions with management. I do not repeat “talking points” but may quote management from an interview. I am never influenced by third parties in arriving at my conclusions. Do not solely rely on my articles or anyone else’s when making an investment decision. Always contact your financial advisor before investing in any security. 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.