Tag Archives: seeking-alpha

To Hedge Or Not To Hedge International? Revisiting The Question

Summary Currency-hedged ETFs have become a popular vehicle for international diversification with hedged currency risk. But the U.S. dollar trade has become a “crowded” and increasingly volatile trade. Does it make sense to utilize currency-hedged products in the current market environment or is it just “return chasing”? Currency-hedged ETFs have been around since 2010, but with the US dollar so strong relative to other currencies they have been gaining in popularity with investors seeking to reduce the currency risk in their portfolios. Through July there were more than 327 currency hedged products available globally, capturing an estimated $118 billion in assets. An estimated $47 billion have landed in currency-hedged products this year, representing 40% of passive flows into international products. Below is a table with the names and tickers of the largest currency-hedged ETFs: Source: ETF.com Currency-hedged international equity products can boost returns when the local currency is weakening against the dollar, but they can also be a drag on returns if the dollar weakens. Most currency-hedged ETFs use “currency forwards” to hedge currency exposure and if the trade is executed correctly, currency exposure is neutralized. The foreign currency markets can be very volatile. Just this week, the Euro rose four cents in one day against the dollar after the European Central Bank’s stimulus measures came in well short of expectations. As another example, the Swiss franc jumped by 30% in a matter of minutes last January. And then of course there was China’s currency devaluation over the summer. And ever since the global financial crisis, foreign currency volatility has markedly increased in the era of quantitative easing (QE) and monetary policy intervention. This trend has been exacerbated over the last few years thanks to the growing economic divergence between the U.S. economy and the rest of the world’s. The U.S. has emerged since the financial crisis as one of the stronger economies on the globe. Economic and currency divergence has resulted in a substantial difference in returns between hedged and unhedged investments in several regions including Developed Markets (EAFE), Emerging Markets (EM), Europe, Japan, and Germany as depicted in the chart below. (click to enlarge) Source: Bloomberg So given the fact that it is likely the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates this December, further strengthening the position of the dollar, it seems like a “no brainer” to hedge international investments. But is it? The sharp spike in the Euro relative to the dollar recently illustrates that the dollar trade is a very “crowded” trade and as a result also subject to wide swings in volatility. Even Fed Chair Janet Yellen said much of the divergence is already priced into the dollar. So by utilizing currency-hedged ETFs, as an investor are you merely piling into an already crowded trade and chasing returns? Long-term Risk Reduction Most academics would argue that over the long-term, currency investing is a zero-sum game and currency volatility cancels out over time. But currency movement does still add risk and volatility to investor portfolios. Investors unhedged to currency have excess exposure to the U.S. dollar and a rising dollar environment can severely compromise their international returns. By eliminating a form of uncompensated risk, hedging currency exposure over the long-term can serve to reduce risk and volatility. Short-term Tactical Trade As a short-term trade, currency-hedged products can also be utilized tactically to capture opportunities created by monetary policy shifts. Investors tactically playing the EU’s monetary stimulus trade for example, have been handsomely rewarded even considering the recent rally of the Euro relative to the dollar. Investors considering currency-hedged products must also consider the cost to hedge as part of their decision making process. Currency-hedged products typically have higher expense ratios and there is also a “carry cost” associated with the forward contracts. Much of the cost of the hedge is based on the interest rate differential, which provides an advantage to U.S.-based investors. Most funds reset their forwards monthly, so that may also inhibit the effectiveness of the hedge, especially in very volatile markets. But overall, currency-hedged products are a nice tool to have in the investment arsenal to help provide international diversification while mitigating currency risk. A 100% Hedge? So should investors hedge all of their international exposure in the current market environment given that much of the divergence and “flight to quality” trade has already played out? It is very easy for investors to mistime hedging. For example, there is historical evidence that the dollar tends to sell off initially after the first Fed rate hike, experiencing a “sell on the news” phenomenon. Analyzing the change in the dollar index after the last three rate hikes, the dollar has sold off the 3 months after the initial increase. (click to enlarge) A More “Balanced” Approach So perhaps the best strategy is a more balanced approach to help minimize downside risk without over penalizing upside opportunity. One such potential implementation is to allocate half (50%) of one’s international exposure to unhedged products and the other half (50%) to hedged. Along those lines, investors can create this paired exposure quite efficiently themselves with a 50/50 allocation. Another option is to utilize a 50/50 hedge ETF such as IndexIQ’s three 50% hedge products: the IQ 50 Percent Hedged FTSE International ETF (NYSEARCA: HFXI ), the IQ 50 Percent Hedged FTSE Europe ETF (NYSEARCA: HFXE ), and the IQ 50 Percent Hedged Japan (NYSEARCA: HFXJ ). IndexIQ, which is part of New York Life’s MainStay Investments, makes a compelling case for what they call in their white paper this “hedge of least regret.” And WisdomTree (NASDAQ: WETF ) recently filed for four dynamic hedging ETFs that will adjust currency hedging ratios ranging from 0 to 100 using currency-related quantitative inputs. In conclusion, currency-hedged products do indeed make sense over the long-term, but given that much of the strong dollar trade has already been priced into the market, hedging all of one’s international exposure, at least in the short-term, may be too much of a good thing.

Connecticut Water Service – A Stable Business With A Twist

Summary The company is primarily a water utility business. While the utility business is highly profitable, the return on equity is capped at around 10%. The Services and Rentals could generate significant value in the future. Connecticut Water Service (NASDAQ: CTWS ) is a utility company that focuses on water distribution. As a water utility company, the company does not have to worry about commodity fluctuations, unlike a natural gas utility company . Unfortunately, the company was not able to escape the pessimism in the market. Despite on the way to post another year of growth, the stock barely budged in 2015, fluctuating around $36. In the chart above, we can see that over the long-term, the stock tracks the company’s top-line growth. This makes a lot of sense because the company primarily runs a regulated business, so margins will be fairly consistent from year to year. More recently, the company seems to have benefited from economy of scale, as the operating margin climbed along with the growth in revenue. For any other company, this track record would suggest an extremely well-run business with the potential to generate a lot of profit. Unfortunately for investors (and fortunately for citizens), the utility business is regulated for this exact reason. The company’s two main water subsidiaries in Connecticut and Maine have a rate cap (return on equity) of 9.75% and 9.5%, respectively As you can see, ROE has fluctuated around the 10%, reflecting this cap. What this means is that the maximum growth equity investors can expect from the company’s regulated business over the long-run is around 10%. Because the company provides a critical service, I have no doubt that the company will achieve this rate of return over the long term. Of course, the company can try to apply for rate increases, but I wouldn’t count them since there is no way to know in advance whether they will be approved. While most of the revenue comes from the regulated water utility business (~90%), the company does have some non-regulated operations. On the non-regulated side, the main segment is Services and Rentals. The segment’s operation is quite diverse, ranging from typical repairs to providing emergency drinking water. While small, the company is highly profitable. Year to date, the segment’s net profit margin was 24%. This is pretty much on par with the margin of the water business (25%)! However, it would seem that the management has trouble growing it. Quarter on quarter, revenue only increased by 5%. That being said, the segment could generate significant value if the management figures out a way to scale it. While I am not seeing any promises right now, it nevertheless has good option value, after all, the segment’s services do go hand in hand with the water business. Conclusion If you are satisfied with the rate of return (~10%) over the long-term, then I think Connecticut Water Service represents a good opportunity. Due to the nature of water utility (a critical service), the company should be able to reach the rate cap over the long-run. While the non-regulated side of the business is still small, I believe that once the management finds a way to convince more water business customers to use the company’s maintenance services, there could be significant upside. Overall, I believe that the company will continue to deliver stable profits from its water business, and the non-regulated activities are an added bonus for investors.

RSX: OPEC, Sanctions On Turkey And The Stubborn Ruble

Summary OPEC fails to provide support to oil prices, posing a significant risk for RSX. The story with Turkey is evolving as I predicted, and does not add much to the bear thesis. The ruble remains relatively overvalued. Market Vectors Russia ETF (NYSE: RSX ) had an interesting November. The ETF moved up and down, fueled by implications of Paris attacks, the shooting of the Russian jet by Turkey and the fluctuations of oil prices. In this article, I’ll focus on two major developments – the Russian sanctions on Turkey and OPEC’s decision to leave things as they are. Turkey In my article on RSX that was published right after the jet incident I stated that Russia’s response won’t be harmful for RSX components. This what exactly happened. In essence, Russia banned tourism and food from Turkey. The food ban comes into power on January 1, 2016, but multiple reports from Russian media show that it is already next to impossible to bring food from Turkey in reasonable time due to customs’ intense checks. Short-term, this will increase inflation, as Russia imports most fruits and vegetables that it consumes in winter because of obvious geographical reasons. As for RSX holdings , this might hurt the retailer Magnit, but I don’t think that it will have a big impact on Magnit’s bottom line. Russian president promised more sanctions on Turkey, but so far there was more harsh talk than real actions. Given the nature of the incident, tourism and food bans are a very light response. I anticipate more words (like the recent mutual accusations of involvement in the ISIS oil trade) from both sides as politicians want to score some points, but I expect little action. Among RSX holdings, the biggest risk is on Sberbank (OTCPK: OTCPK:SBRCY ), which is the fund’s biggest holding. Sberbank owns DenizBank, which is a notable player in the Turkish market. In the latest interview to the Russian media, Sberbank’s head German Gref stated that he saw no significant risks for Sberbank in Turkey, and I agree with his assessment. OPEC OPEC’s decision to live things as they were was predictable, but, nevertheless, was bad for Russia. I think that OPEC’s inability to function as an organization will put more pressure on the oil market. I recently argued that a perfect storm could push oil to $25 per barrel. Such a drop will push RSX way past the lows of December 2014. However, even current prices present an enormous threat to the Russian economy as the country eats through its emergency funds. The ruble The ruble (which is an important factor for the dollar-denominated RSX) stays relatively strong given the current oil price. The ruble-denominated oil price stubbornly stays around 2900 per barrel, while the Russian budget for 2016 needs at least 3150 per barrel. Sanctions on Turkey limit the Central Bank’s ability to decrease the rate, which is currently at 11% . However, if oil stays weak in the beginning of 2016, I expect that the Central Bank will have to cut the rate to provide some help to the Russian budget. Bottom line I remain bearish. RSX was clearly not the easiest short trade in the last few months. There was some optimism about Russia and buying activity was real. However, I question the Russian economy’s ability to successfully operate at current oil price levels. Also, as I think that the next leg down in oil is around the corner, I expect further weakness in RSX.