Tag Archives: seeking-alpha

Building The Ultimate Bank Basket

Summary Building a basket is like creating a custom-made ETF. Simple strategies work better than complex systems. The nuts and bolts of building a custom bank basket explained. Investors like to act like art collectors. They spend years hunting for a specific Monet (or a rare investment holding) and are willing to spend anything to prevent it from slipping through their fingers. On the surface this behavior makes sense, good companies supposedly only come along rarely, and investors are rewarded for taking advantage of opportunity. Where the analogy breaks down is that art is supply constrained, there is a limited set of outstanding Monet paintings and no new paintings. There are thousands of traded companies, and tens of thousands of companies are being started every week. If an investor misses one opportunity another comes along quickly. In the world of bank investing, there are over 1,200 banks with tickers that are in theory tradable. Many of these banks are very small and illiquid and only appropriate for experienced and patient investors. But even if one eliminates all non-SEC filing banks from their pool of investments, there are still over 500 SEC filing traded banks. The question becomes: “How does one find bank investments with so many options?” I’ve made a mistake many investors do when faced with finding the best companies in a pile of potential opportunities. I’ve spent far too much time looking at inconsequential details trying to find the absolute best idea. I’ve come to the conclusion that this is a waste of time. Let me explain. Back in 2011 and 2012, I started to look at Japanese net-net stocks. These are stocks trading for 2/3 of net current assets (current assets – all liabilities). Through screening, I identified hundreds of Japanese companies trading as net-nets. The problem was there were more companies than my portfolio had room to buy, so I needed to narrow down the list. Keep in mind that every single company on the list was cheap, the market was valuing all of these companies for less than their liquidation value. What I ended up doing was spending a lot of time comparing companies against each other with metrics that had no predictive value for investment success. I ended up selecting a handful of what I thought were the best companies on my list. My companies did well, but I could have done just as well picking blindly from the initial pool of undervalued companies. As investors we fool ourselves into thinking we’re smarter than we are, and that we can identify the best performing stock from a pool of very cheap stocks ahead of time. There might be a few super-genius investors who can do such a thing, but for the rest of us mere mortals, our best bet to outperformance is by fishing in a very small pond loaded with fish. In the world of bank investing, there are plenty of companies selling at discounts to intrinsic value no matter how you define intrinsic value. For example, I ran a simple screen on CompleteBankData.com looking for banks trading below 1x TBV with a 7% or higher ROE and low non-performing assets and my search returned 10 banks. This might not seem like stringent criteria, but this search finds banks with an above average ROE at less than book value. If I drop my ROE requirement to greater than 4%, more than 30 banks match my criteria. If one were to look for banks earning an above average ROE at less than 1.5x TBV, which is the median TBV value, they’d have 96 banks to analyze. The point is that one can hunt through that list of 10 banks, or 30 banks, or 96 banks and try to identify the top one or two banks to add to a portfolio. Or an investor can take a simpler approach. In the aggregate, these banks are likely to outperform. They are all undervalued, and all have quality assets. It’s far easier to build a basket of banks and gain exposure to an area of the market not covered by ETFs rather than find the best. The second advantage to building a basket of bank stocks is that you don’t need to be an expert on bank investing to gain exposure to a segment of the market. Building your own basket is akin to buying a custom ETF. How to Build a Bank Basket? It’s easy to agree with the concept of building a basket of banking stocks, but sometimes the actual execution is difficult. “What stocks do I buy?” “How long do I hold them?” “How many should I own?” are some of the questions you might be asking about this. Let’s break down how to build an actual basket of bank stocks. Identify an investment criteria The first step is to identify the criteria you’ll use to select an investment. My advice is to keep it simple, simple criteria is better than complex criteria. For example, look for profitable banks selling below TBV with good assets. A screen for this might be: P/TBV < 1, ROE > 1%, NPA/Assets < 3%. Once you have a criteria you're satisfied with run the screen on your preferred screening platform. Sifting for investment candidates I don't recommend buying every company that matches the screen blindly. I put in the bare minimum amount of effort validating data and criteria matches. Sometimes a bank will report a high ROE as a result of a onetime gain. Or a bank might have quality assets in one or two recent quarters but struggled with significant issues in the past. Or sometimes a bank will match a screen but is in the middle of a merger or another transformative transaction. I quickly go through my matches and remove these companies. Buying and holding Once you've identified your basket candidates, it's time to buy them. If you like a clean separation of basket holdings versus non-basket holdings, I'd recommend opening a new brokerage account for these banks. Buy them as you would any stock, use limit orders and be patient in getting your trades filled. The hardest part of owning a basket of banks is holding them. I recommend at least a one-year holding period if not a three-year holding period for each name in the basket. As some banks are merged or sell, recycle those funds into new names that match the strategy. The hardest part of owning a basket of bank stocks is simply staying still and resisting the urge to tinker with the basket. Best of luck!

NiSource: Unexciting Prospects, Unless…

NiSource is the third largest natural gas distribution company in the US. Unlike some peers, the spin-off of its MLP assets was structured with no residual income or ownership. Share prices seem fully valued unless a potential acquisitioner were to pony up a nice premium. NiSource (NYSE: NI ) is a 100% regulated natural gas and electric utility. After spinning off its natural gas midstream pipelines, the assets remaining are mainly regulated by state-PUC in seven states in the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast and Midwest. Servicing 4 million customers total categorizes NI as a medium tier utilities by customer count and ranks third largest in natural gas distribution. Of this number 3.5 million are natural gas customers and 500,000 electric customers in Indiana. The company’s rate base assets are $5.0 billion in natural gas and $3.0 billion in electricity. While its natural gas interstate pipelines and the vast majority of its storage business was divested last July, NI retained 58,000 miles of distribution pipelines and about 5% of its previous storage facilities. These are reported as part of the natural gas distribution segment. NI also operates a network of four coal-fired plants with 2,540 MW capacity, along with natural and hydro plants generating an additional 745 MW. Management has previously indicated it would consider the possible sale of this business. The service territory is pictured below, from their most recent presentation . (click to enlarge) Management believes its current configuration and its capital expenditure forecast will drive earnings higher by 4% to 6% annually. Over the next 5 years, management forecasts capital investments of $6.9 billion, about evenly spread out at $1.3 billion a year, substantially increasing its rate base. The company recently received approvals for natural gas rate increases in MA and PA totally $60 million, and annual automatic “trackers”, or inclusions in rate base assets, cover about $1 billion a year of current multi-year investment projects. For example, similar to its peers, NI has an ongoing natural gas distribution infrastructure project to upgrade 7,200 miles of bare steel or cast iron pipes with plastic. Management expects to increase its rate base by 6% to 8% a year. Where is the capital for the cap ex budget going to come from? With the divestiture, cap ex needs are reduced from over $2 billion last year, but the reduced cap ex budget is accompanied by lower operating cash flow. Investors should pour over the next 3 quarters operating cash flow reports to evaluate the balance between cash flow and cap ex, with the understanding any shortfall will be made up by either more debt or dilutive equity raises. In early 2011, the company settled with the EPA concerning compliance of its coal plants. NI agreed to spend $850 million between 2011 and 2018 to bring its plants into compliance, and these improvements are part of its rate base calculations. While there is a risk the fight against coal power plants will continue to result in higher emission standards, translating into higher cap ex requirements for its aging fleet, the company should be in compliance with current standards. As with many of its peers, NI mainly uses pass-through natural gas pricing so the utility has very little commodity risk and offers a bit more stability in earnings. In addition, 45% of revenue is volume based while the balance of revenue is not, reflecting a more constant income model. According to the company, operating earnings are split 65% natural gas and 35% electric. Distractors of the company point to its high use of coal to generate electricity, the exit of top management to its MLP spin-off, and the substantial percentage of commercial and industrial customers. The CEO and CFO went with the MLP and while both replacements have extensive experience in the utility industry, they are fresh to their respective responsibilities. Residential gas deliveries accounted for 28% of volume and 55% of revenue, while industrial and commercial customers completed the balance. Some investors believe the company’s higher exposure to industrial volumes makes NI more susceptible to swings in economic growth. Of interest in the spinoff of its MLP is the lack of continuing ownership by NiSource. Many of the recent separations offer the sponsor a potentially lucrative General Partner contract and the sponsor retains a large percentage ownership of the MLP though its publicly traded unit holdings. The sponsor maintains a positive cash flow interest through MLP distributions, GP incentive distribution rights, and management fees. In the case of NI, however, shareholders received 100% ownership of both in a 1 for 1 stock distribution. The business split instills a bit more risk as the utility finds its own footing. With the recent separation and associated one-time fees, financial comparisons are difficult. Ongoing 2015 EPS are expected at slightly less than $1.00, not including the storage and transportation contribution for the first half. For 2016, the company is expected to earn $1.06, and investors may want to use this consensus number for their own due diligence research. There are few ETFs that offer sector comparisons, and the closest is the Hennessy Natural Gas mutual fund (MUTF: GASFX ) as a sector comparison. Using GASFX as a comparison, NI trades at a PE of 19.0 vs 20.6 for the fund; dividend yield of 3.2% for NI vs sector average of 3.82% and a fund yield of 2.46%. It seems at its current price, NI is fairly valued. It should be noted NI is one of only a few new additions GASFX made last quarter, buying an initial position of 1.5 million shares and NI now represents 1.77% of the funds portfolio. Within the longer term consolidation of the utility business and the current appetite for natural gas utilities, NiSource could become an acquisition target. Mario Gabelli offers an insightful quarterly review of sector events in its utility fund Shareholder Commentary report pdf. Using this report as a benchmark, a recent asset purchase by a merchant power producer pegs a ballpark price for 3,200 MW of coal and gas capacity at between $1.4 and 1.6 billion, plus the value of NI’s electric distribution assets. There have been several acquisitions in the natural gas distribution business which could be used for back-of-the-napkin comparisons. Based on customer count acquisition cost for recently acquired New Mexico Gas, Alabama Gas, and municipal utility Philadelphia Gas Works, NI’s 3.5 million natural gas customers could bring in $8 to $10 billion. With a current market capitalization of $6 billion and long-term debt of $6 billion, it would seem share prices are trading at about its value in an acquisition. While there has been a change in management in the corner office, and the other guys were open to merger discussions a year ago, with the then-CEO not directly rebutting conference call questions concerning a potential acquisition by one of the top-tiered utilities, investors should not bank on a repeat performance anytime soon. NiSource offers a steady income potential at slightly higher yields to its natural gas distribution peers, with earnings and dividend growth at industry averages, and a possible acquisition candidate. However, all these attributes are fully discounted in its current share price…Unless an acquirer decides a premium price is warranted. Author’s Note: Please review disclosure in Author’s profile.

Tilts – Searching For (Relative) Value

By Douglas R Terry, CFA The investing environment remains challenging. Equity valuations are high after a 6-year extraordinary bull market. Bonds have been in a bull market for 35 years, and yields, though off their 2012 lows, remain at historic extremes. After a 7-year, 700% bull in oil from 2001 to 2008, it gave back 90% of gains in 6 months. Oil followed this up with a 5-year bull, and again gave back 90% of gains in 6 months. Sometimes, as investors, it’s necessary to just invest in the best place possible, given a lot of historically poor choices. In these times of poor valuations, we want to stay underinvested, as embedded risk is higher than normal. We want to be nimble and try to avoid getting steam-rolled in markets that can drop 80% or more in less than 6 months. Here are some places I think we can find relative value. Equities: US equities have seen the best regional equity performance performance, but also have the highest valuations. US valuations relative to non-US stocks are at extremely high levels relative to the past 25 years. The US is performing better today than the rest of the world. Perhaps US strength can help the rest of the globe. A tilt toward Global Ex-US stocks has a good relative chance of providing portfolio value. Fixed Income: With rates at historic lows and the Fed contemplating a rise off the zero bound, one would want to be very careful in bonds. If you do venture out the yield curve, consider inflation-protected bonds. Oil has plunged over 60%, and much of the headline inflation weakness is tied to this major commodity. Perhaps, more importantly, much of the embedded future inflation expectations have dropped coincident with oil markets. If this recent soft patch is just a lull, which I believe it is, then interest rates may rise and bond portfolios would not perform well. But if the economy does prove resilient, oil may have found a bottom. Higher oil means higher inflation expectations. Stable oil means headline inflation creeps up toward core inflation. Both scenarios would be relatively good for inflation-protected bonds. In bond portfolios, consider upping the allocation to TIPs versus nominal bonds to use rising inflation expectations as a hedge against the potential of good growth and rising rates.