Tag Archives: seeking-alpha

Alternatives For The Future

The article first appeared in the December issue of REP . magazine and online at WealthManagement.com Along with other Yuletide treats, some Yanks are now anticipating the gift of a Fed rate hike. Better-than-expected employment numbers, an uptick in the manufacturing sector and pickup in wages have given the U.S. central bank the backstory for normalizing the nation’s monetary policy. The odds of a rate step-up, implied by Federal Funds futures, shot up from 7 percent to 70 percent in November. Simultaneously, expectations pushed the Treasury long bond yield up nearly a quarter of a point, effectively discounting the Fed’s anticipated action. Now that the markets have priced in the first Fed rate hike, it’s debatable whether it will be “one-and-done,” or the first step along a steady path of snugging. Either way, the die is cast: Rates are bound to rise, and sooner rather than later. With the coming of the end of the zero-rate environment, investors and advisors must rethink their portfolio strategies, most especially their alternative investment allocations. The basic question facing them now is which exposures are most likely to continue providing risk diversification in a rising rate environment. To answer that question, let’s look back at the liquid alt universe over the past five years and gauge each category’s correlation to a fixed income market proxy, the iShares Core Total U.S. Bond Market ETF (NYSEARCA: AGG ). AGG tracks an index of investment grade notes and bonds including Treasuries, agencies and corporates as well as mortgage- and asset-backed paper, all with a weighted average maturity just under 13 years. Currently, AGG offers a 2.4 percent distribution yield. Two Things An ideal diversifier should be negatively correlated to AGG. Thus, when rates rise (and AGG’s price, as a consequence, falls), the alternative investment should appreciate. There are five categories that are negatively correlated to AGG: arbitrage, hedged equity, commodities, long/short equity and market-neutral. Based on the foregoing criterion alone, the arbitrage category seems to have the best track record over the past five years. Keep in mind two things, though. First, the correlation coefficient doesn’t measure cumulative returns. It only depicts the statistical relationship between each investment’s month-to-month price movements. And second, the category performance represents the market-weighted average of several portfolios. The arbitrage category, for example, comprises five products, four mutual funds and one exchange traded fund (ETF). Market weighting gives us insight into investor behavior and allows us to more clearly see how investors are actually putting their capital to work. The stand-out arb portfolio is the relatively small Quaker Event Arbitrage Fund (MUTF: QEAAX ) with a correlation of -0.21 to AGG and an average annual return of 2.39 percent. QEAAX deals in mergers, takeovers, spin-offs and other reorganizations, hoping to capture securities mispricings. The obvious problem with QEAAX, if a problem is to be found, is its high correlation to equities. QEAAX, after all, buys and sells stocks. If the prospect of rising rates spooks the equity market, as indeed it seems to have done, the Quaker fund’s NAV will likely be pressured. Hedged equity funds are also highly correlated to the broad stock market. The “hedge” in the category’s title refers to the variety of strategies employed by constituent funds to attenuate, but not necessarily eliminate, beta. The Schooner Fund (MUTF: SCNAX ), for example, is a long-biased fund that utilizes a buy-write (covered call) strategy to boost income. That said, SCNAX, with a -0.19 correlation to AGG, benefits most from a mildly bullish equity market. SCNAX pays just 0.57 percent in dividends. Commodity funds-long-only indexed portfolios-are only modestly correlated to stocks, but are suffering from a four-year disinflationary malaise. All, save one, are negatively correlated with AGG. It’s the PIMCO Commodity Real Return Strategy Fund (MUTF: PCRIX ), which overlays an actively managed fixed income strategy atop the index portfolio, that earns a 0.04 correlation to AGG. It should come as no surprise that long/short equity funds are highly correlated to the broad stock market. Nearly half of the 16 funds in the category, in fact, correlate to the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) at better than 0.85. Of these, one with the most negative correlation to AGG (-0.31) is the Diamond Hill Long-Short Fund (MUTF: DIAMX ), a portfolio that commands a 22 percent share of the category. Market-neutral funds attempt to hedge out general market exposure, i.e., aim for a beta near zero, to allow full expression of the manager’s concentrated bets. The multi-manager Deutsche Diversified Market Neutral Fund (MUTF: DDMIX ) accomplishes this with the category’s most negative correlation to AGG (-0.16). Alternative Income There’s a category we haven’t yet examined: alternative income. Three funds, in particular, have five-year track records, two mutual funds and an ETF. Collectively, these funds exhibit a modestly negative correlation (-0.06) to AGG, though you can see there’s a fair degree of “zig” to AGG’s “zag” in Chart 2. Viewed separately, these funds offer distinct value propositions: The $7.6 billion ALPS Alerian MLP ETF (NYSEARCA: AMLP ) tracks the price and yield performance of the Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index, a modified capitalization-weighted and float-adjusted benchmark of two dozen U.S. energy master limited partnerships (MLPs). To allow a full allocation to MLPs, AMLP is structured as a C-corporation, which means it can’t pass through the full return of its underlying index. Payouts are distributed net of corporate tax, which translates into a daunting expense ratio of 5.4 percent. The good news is that most of these distributions come tax-deferred to investors, making its 8.4 percent distribution yield doubly attractive. Worse News There’s, of course, worse news: The energy sector’s tanked this year, taking AMLP’s share price with it. The fund lost 28 percent on the year through mid-November. The JPMorgan Strategic Income Opportunities Fund (MUTF: JSOAX ) is an unconstrained bond fund with an absolute return orientation. The $18.4 billion fund has the flexibility to allocate its assets across a broad range of fixed income securities and derivatives as well as strategies employing cash and short-term investments. JSOAX is not afraid to load up on high-yield securities. JSOAX tends toward a short duration and holds a heavy slug of cash, all of which reduce its interest rate risk. The fund offers a 2.6 percent distribution yield. At $698 million, the Highland Floating Rate Opportunities Fund (MUTF: HFRAX ) is the category’s smallest asset collector. Still, it’s the best performer. HFRAX invests in floating rate bank loans-obligations with interest rates pegged to a spread over Libor (the London Interbank Offered Rate). This puts the fund in the catbird seat in a credit-tightening cycle. Currently, the fund offers a 5 percent distribution yield. You can see in Table 2 the countertrend nature of the HFRAX fund in its -0.22 correlation to AGG and a Sharpe ratio 40 basis points above that of the iShares product. So what have we learned from our little exercise? Simply this: When it comes to hedging interest rate risk, fund performance doesn’t draw assets. At least not yet. The Highland HFRAX fund, despite its impressive metrics, remains relatively obscure. It accounts for barely one-half of 1 percent of the alternative funds’ assets examined here. Perhaps that makes this fund-and newer funds on similar trajectories-undiscovered gems in the upcoming rate environment.

David Einhorn And Reasons Why Widely Followed Stocks Get Mispriced

Over the weekend, I was reading David Einhorn’s book Fooling Some of the People All of the Time. I’ve had it on my bookshelf for some time, and it has always taken a back seat to other books until I decided to pick it up recently. It’s an entertaining read, basically recounting his short thesis on Allied Capital in great detail. It is a good book because it provides a glimpse into the significant amount of research and due diligence that a great investor like Einhorn performs in his investment approach. Source: Columbia Business School Don’t Count Einhorn Out Einhorn – like many well-known value investors – has had a very tough year . But we have not seen the end of Einhorn’s run as a top-quality investor. To borrow an analogy I used in a post last year – just as so many were so quick to write off Tom Brady after an early season loss to Kansas City last year that left the struggling Patriots at 2-2 and looking like a shell of their former dominant selves, I think far too many people are writing off Einhorn (as well as others) who have had a bad year. As I said last year, if the Patriots were a publicly traded equity, the stock would have been beaten down after the Chiefs blowout and it would have been one of those rare opportunities to load up. Lo and behold (and as painful as it is for me to say as a Bills fan), the Pats rattled off a long string of consecutive wins on their way to their 4 th Super Bowl title, and continued that winning streak until a surprising upset loss last night to the Denver Broncos (coincidentally led by a young QB who is temporarily replacing another legend that many are also writing off-perhaps prematurely). Back to the book – there is one chapter where Einhorn describes a meeting he had with a well-known mutual fund manager. To put this meeting in context: Einhorn was in the midst of doing significant due diligence on a company called Allied Capital, a business development company (BDC) that used aggressive accounting practices, questionable reporting of their financial results, and very liberal valuations of the illiquid equity and debt securities that they held for investment. Einhorn had been short the stock for some time, and although it slowly was becoming apparent that Einhorn’s thesis was largely correct, the stock hadn’t fallen much and continued to trade in the same general range that it had prior to Einhorn’s famous speech where he announced his short thesis. So Einhorn was introduced to this fund manager through his broker, who thought that it would be good for both sides to hear each other’s thesis on the stock (Einhorn was short and this mutual fund manager had a large long position). Einhorn showed up to the meeting fully prepared with a briefcase full of his research, and the mutual fund manager came in with nothing but a notepad and a pen. As it turned out, this fund manager hadn’t even read Einhorn’s research – this is despite being long a stock that was very publicly criticized by Einhorn and others who had published significant and detailed research laying out their thesis for everyone to see. Einhorn couldn’t believe that this fund manager owned a large block of stock and not only did he not do his own primary research, but he didn’t even read the secondary research that was easily and freely available for him to read regarding the potential problems at Allied. What’s the point here? I’ve always thought that there are two main reasons that stocks generally get mispriced: Disgust Large-cap stocks that get mispriced are almost always due to disgust. These stocks are large companies that are widely followed by investors and analysts. There is very little information that is not widely known by all market participants. However, sometimes these large companies run into a temporary problem and investors sell the stock because the outlook for the next next quarter or the next year is poor. Investors can take advantage of this situation by: a) accurately analyzing the situation and determining that the nature of the problem is in fact temporary and fixable, and b) be willing to hold the stock for 2 or 3 years – a timeframe that most individual and institutional investors are not willing to participate in. Some investors refer to this concept as “time arbitrage”. It just means that you’re willing to look out further than most investors and willing to deal with near-term volatility and negative (but temporary) short-term business results. In addition to a company specific “disgust”, these large caps can also get beaten down when the general market environment is pessimistic. In bear markets, companies with no problems at all often see their stock prices get beaten down because of macroeconomic worries or general market pessimism. So although many value investors look at small caps because they feel this is where they can gain an informational advantage, I think taking advantage of this “disgust” factor is just as effective and is an important arrow to have in the quiver. Neglect Often times, the most mispriced stocks in the market are small-cap stocks that are underfollowed and neglected. The obvious advantage here is to locate a situation that no one else has discovered by looking under a lot of rocks and in the nooks and crannies of the market. Sometimes things slip through the cracks. I would also put special situations in this category. Sometimes companies are misunderstood as well-but this is usually because they are neglected to a certain extent. The market has collectively not been willing to put the effort into understanding these situations sufficiently, and this creates potential mispricings. Einhorn’s Experience Einhorn talks a lot about “the guy on the other side of his trade”. In other words, each stock trade has a buyer and a seller and both think that they are getting the better deal (or they wouldn’t be engaged in the transaction). I don’t really spend a lot of time thinking about this angle, but it is interesting to consider who might be selling you shares that you are buying, and the reasons why. In this case, Einhorn thought he might be selling (shorting) shares to sophisticated institutional investors who disagreed with Einhorn and believed Allied was undervalued. However, as Einhorn learned, this wasn’t the case. The institutional investor was “too lazy or too busy”, as Einhorn put it, to put the time and effort into understanding what he owned. So, I’m not sure which category this type of situation would fall into, or maybe ignorance deserves its own category. But the experience with the mutual fund manager that Einhorn describes is certainly evidence of how sometimes even widely followed stocks get mispriced. If an investor is buying millions of shares for reasons that don’t have anything to do with the intrinsic value of the company, then there is the potential for a mispricing to occur. To Sum It Up I think most investors intuitively understand that it’s occasionally possible to find a bargain in an underfollowed stock, but I think just as often, large caps (or more widely followed) companies get mispriced for these reasons (disgust, ignorance, short-term thinking, or irrational behavior). Here is the passage of the book I referenced above where Einhorn met the mutual fund manager: “…so James Lin and I walked over with a briefcase full of our research. We met with Painter and Stewart in the conference room. Stewart brought nothing but a legal pad and pen. “Okay,” he said, “go ahead.” I thought this was supposed to be a two-way dialogue. “First, what did you think of our analysis?” I asked him. “Do you see anything wrong with it?” He said he hadn’t read it. While I could believe that Allied’s shareholders might generally be too busy to have read the lengthy analysis we put on our website, it was hard to imagine a professional, who was the second largest Allied holder, would come to a meeting with us and acknowledge such lack of preparation. So I asked him why he held the stock. Stewart said that in the tough market he felt it was a good time to own a lot of high-yielding stocks and his Allied holding was really part of a “basket approach”… Einhorn concludes: “I left with a new understanding of what we were up against. It wasn’t an issue of investors understanding our views and disagreeing. In addition to the small investors, Allied’s other investors were big funds managing lots of other people’s money-too busy or too lazy to worry about the details, other than the tax distribution.”

Before The Fed Rate Hike, Buy These Stocks And ETFs

When the Fed meets for the final time in 2015, many investors are expecting them to do something that hasn’t been done in nearly a decade, raise rates. The last such rate hike came back in 2006 and brought us up to 5.25%, but it didn’t last long as rates soon cratered before finding bottom near zero in December of 2008 and staying there ever since. But now with an economy on more solid footing and inflation slowly starting to creep back towards a two percent target rate, it may be time to hike rates. After all, the whole idea of zero percent rates was predicated on a crisis situation. It is hard to say that we are still in a ‘crisis’ now, suggesting it is well past the time to consider a rate hike for the economy. Some investors still remain woefully underprepared for this reality, believing that a rate hike simply will not happen. But with a parade of Fed officials coming out lately to say otherwise, not to mention a CME Fed Watch reading approaching 80% chance for a hike , it is looking more and more likely that a hike is all but inevitable at this point. There is still plenty of time to prepare though. A closer look at financial stocks and also bond instruments which will not be hit by rising rates seems like a good plan for now. As such, I have taken a look at a few such good options below, any of which could make for solid choices ahead of a rate hike, no matter when the inevitable does strike: CBOE Holdings (NASDAQ: CBOE ) The Chicago Board Options Exchange may not be the first name you think of in a rising rate scenario, but it could actually be one of the better positioned – and more overlooked – choices in the space. That is because the company’s primary products, options on the S&P 500 and volatility-linked options, stand to see more trading as the Fed adjusts rates (with volatility coming especially into focus). Analysts have also begun to adjust their opinion of CBOE stock as we have seen broad analyst estimate increases in the past quarter. The full-year consensus estimate has increased from $2.21/share to $2.41/share in the past ninety days while we have also seen a positive trend for the next year time frame too. CBOE is also riding an earnings beat streak of three straight quarters and in each of these reports the company has beaten estimates by at least 4%. So not only has CBOE been an impressive pick as of late, but it could be a stealth choice for investors to play a Fed rate hike, and especially considering this is currently a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) security right now. E-Trade Financial (NASDAQ: ETFC ) When the Fed raises rates, it is great news for investment brokers. Companies in this space make money off of the float, or invested capital that hasn’t been allocated to securities yet. And when rates increase, the return companies like E-Trade can generate is even greater. Though there are many names in the investment broker space, ETFC stands out as a great choice right now. The company is expected to see double-digit EPS growth this year while it currently has an earnings ESP of 6.9%. Best of all, analysts have begun to raise their estimates for the stock while all the recent estimates for the current year EPS have gone higher in the past two months. This has been enough to move ETFC to a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) making it a great pick ahead of a possible rate hike. WisdomTree Barclays U.S. Aggregate Bond Negative Duration Fund (NASDAQ: AGND ) A lot of investors like the safety of bonds and I can see how this can make up a decent size position of many portfolios. However, rising rates are generally bad news for bonds as bond prices have an inverse relationship with rates. Fortunately, WisdomTree’s ETFs in the bond space look to mitigate these worries with a lineup of negative duration products. These funds move higher when yields do and thus can be great bond choices for investors in this type of environment. Costs aren’t too bad here either at just 28 basis points a year, while yields come in at about 2%. And with an effective duration of roughly -4.5 years, this should benefit from rising rates but still won’t be too volatile either. Ex-Rate Sensitive Low Volatility Portfolio (NYSEARCA: XRLV ) If equities are more of your game but you are still concerned about volatility, than XRLV is definitely worth a closer look. This fund looks at 100 S&P 500 components that exhibit both low volatility, and low interest rate risk. This approach looks to exclude those that tend to perform the worst in rising rate environments, giving a tilt towards financials (28%), industrials (21.8%), and consumer staples (15%). There is definitely a large-cap focus here, but mid caps still make up nearly one-third of the portfolio too. XRLV will definitely be a lower risk choice to play the rising rate trend while it is a pretty cheap selection too at just 25 basis points a year in fees. And while volume isn’t great here, the product does have a pretty tight bid ask spread thanks to its focus on highly liquid securities trading in the U.S. market. Original Post