Tag Archives: seeking

Avoiding Portfolio Panic During A Sell-Off

Summary Stocks took a hard dive in a very short period of time, and now everyone is scrambling to forecast the future or come up with a game plan. It has been vicious on the downside, and no matter how well prepared you are for it, there is now a sense of foreboding about what the future holds. Keeping a level-headed approach to the market will allow you to make changes in the face of adversity with far greater success than a fear-driven impulse will. By now you have likely realized something is up in the stock market. If you are like me, you have probably consumed a tremendous amount of reading material this weekend that has framed and/or extrapolated this recent pullback in a number of different scenarios. The end result is that stocks took a hard dive in a very short period of time, and now, everyone is scrambling to forecast the future or come up with a game plan in the midst of the chaos. One of my favorite metaphors for the stock market is that it “takes the stairs (or escalator) on the way up and the elevator on the way down”. The elevator analogy most aptly describes this current drop. It has been vicious on the downside, and no matter how well prepared you are for it, there is now a sense of foreboding about what the future holds. Let’s look at a sample of the major world markets through Friday’s close. @MichaelBatnick posted this chart showing some of the drawdowns from the 52-week highs. The 7.51% drop in the S&P 500 index translates into a total return of -4.27% year to date. Certainly not the optimistic spot I thought we would be in at this point in the year, but not a catastrophe either. Percent from 52-week high (closing basis). pic.twitter.com/Ps8Dp6fg6y – Irrelevant Investor (@michaelbatnick) August 23, 2015 For a more balanced perspective, the iShares Growth Allocation ETF (NYSEARCA: AOR ) is down -2.08% this year. This index represents a 60/40 mix of stocks and bonds that is more in line with a typical investor portfolio. Now, there are a million technical indicators that you can point to as evidence that the market “has to” or “should” bounce from here. Conversely, the bears are enthusiastic that the fundamental backdrop of equity valuations are now being re-priced closer to historical norms and are salivating to press their short bets. Keep in mind that the market doesn’t have to do anything. It can stay oversold for far longer than you thought possible, or it could reverse to new highs for seemingly no reason at all. I have no idea what the next move will be, but at this stage, I am more inclined to take advantage of the sell-off than hoard more guns, canned goods, and gold. If you are worried about what the remainder of 2015 may bring, take a step back and evaluate your positions from an objective standpoint. These three concepts may help you along the way. Avoid becoming overly pessimistic or reading too far into things. It’s easy to feed into the hype and extrapolate that the next two weeks may bring about the same ferocious selling that we have experienced over the last two weeks. I’m not trying to make light of the situation, but sell-offs of 5-10% occur in every type of market with astonishing regularity. So far, this is a very orderly and typical event. If you find yourself leaning too hard on the risk side of the ledger, look for opportunistic exit points (such as a short-term rally) to reduce exposure or transition to lower-volatility positions . Watch out for the “I told you so” crowd. Anyone that is overly excited about this sell-off likely has an ulterior motive, were lucky to sell near the highs, or have been wrong for quite some time . Taking victory laps as the market tanks doesn’t help anyone’s confidence or emotional capital. Rather, it’s important to focus on your investment process to ensure you have an appropriate asset allocation to meet your goals and risk tolerance. Make sure you identify the difference between a short-term trader that moves to cash quickly and a more strategic investment process that focuses on longer time frames or trends. Have a clear game plan for multiple scenarios. We could be at the brink of the next bear market or simply hitting a short-term speed bump. From a technical perspective, the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) has come right down to its January lows, which is a likely area of support. Nevertheless, a break below those levels could draw in more sellers looking to avoid the next significant drop to the October 2014 lows. Remember that if you do end up reducing your equity exposure, that swift rallies may lead to performance chasing on the way back up. It’s important to weigh the benefits and risks of changes to your asset allocation in the context of your investment plan rather than short-term emotional pressures. The Bottom Line Keeping a level-headed approach to the market will allow you to make changes in the face of adversity with far greater success than a fear-driven impulse. There have been several opportunities this year to take advantage of new trends or step up your risk management plan as needed. The key is to stay as objective as possible when making changes, to ensure that they align with your long-term goals. Disclosure: I am/we are long AOR. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: David Fabian, FMD Capital Management, and/or clients may hold positions in the ETFs and mutual funds mentioned above. The commentary does not constitute individualized investment advice. The opinions offered herein are not personalized recommendations to buy, sell, or hold securities.

MLP Screening – Did The Market Overreact To Some 10%+ Yielding MLPs And Should We Value Them Differently?

Summary MLPs have held up relatively well against the commodity price decline until it recently plunged ~20% in the last 3 months. Alerian MLP ETF currently yields 8.5% with a select number of names trading well above 10% distribution yield. MLPs have largely been safe yield vehicles – will there be a shift in investor base and change in how investors value MLPs? Disclaimer: For avoidance of doubt, any reference to MLP excludes E&P MLPs for the purpose of this article. Alerian MLP Index (AMZ) Price Performance (click to enlarge) Alerian MLP Index Yield vs. Other Indices (click to enlarge) MLPs have been an efficient route for midstream asset owners to monetize their stake in assets that have largely contracted or recurring cash flow characteristics at valuations that far exceed private transaction multiples. For investors, it has been a very attractive/safe yield vehicle (and tax friendly) underpinned by a consistent and high growth profile as billions of new capital got deployed for new drilling and infrastructure developments. At a very high level, most MLPs service the upstream and/or downstream value chain in providing long-term recurring services. A recurring revenue stream ensures stable cash flow and given that 90% of distributable cash flows are required to be distributed in order to maintain MLP classification, investors enjoyed stable cash yield. Continued expansion of infrastructure and oil & gas exploration activities also led to high-single digit to double-digit growth in distribution. As a result, distribution yield (with growth embedded) kept falling and valuations kept going up. MLPs were also able to grow through acquisitions, using its extremely cheap cost of capital to acquire businesses at high multiples, which were still accretive from a distributable cash flow (“DCF”) point of view. While investors can view MLP businesses using more traditional valuation metrics such as EV/EBITDA and P/E, in real life, and in a grossly oversimplified form, valuations are quoted based on distribution yield. Again, in a very simplified manner, if you were to dissect distribution yield, the market essentially assigns a cost of equity (what level of levered cash flow the business should generate in perpetuity) and subtracts a growth rate on the DCF – and this dictates the distribution yield that the market bases its valuation/stock pricing for that particular MLP company. Let’s dig a little deeper in terms of this valuation concept. This was a perfectly feasible method of valuation for a number of reasons. 1) DCF for an MLP is actually very predictable and stable (EBITDA – maintenance CapEx – interest expense was very stable), 2) because it is very predictable and MLPs are required to distribute that DCF to investors, it made even more sense to value the business from a DCF/distribution perspective, 3) growth through backlog and continued capital spend in the broader oil & gas industry was also very visible and the implied valuation derived from a yield (or multiples if you invert the yield) standpoint was far in excess of general market valuation, and therefore, using EV/EBITDA or P/E where the general market trades at ~9-10x EBITDA and ~16-18x earnings obviates any sense of comparability. Said in a different way, DCF growth rate is what moved the needle from a valuation standpoint and was therefore the most important variable in determining how the stock price would move. To avoid any psychological biases, let’s remove the “MLP” classification for a second and just consider them as a normal c-corp business. Also, let’s work under the premise that there is no debate around the fact that the commodity price environment is challenging and there are lots of uncertainties and macro headwind pervading the market. For simplicity, let’s take out the near-term growth component and say there is no growth for the next year or two. Even without growth prospects, these are excellent businesses with contracted/recurring cash flows, minimal capital requirement to maintain earnings power, and minimal operational complications (often times there are pricing protection through contracts and even annual CPI escalators). How much would you pay for this type of business? Maybe there will be a slight dent in EBITDA this year or next year (not many names are really taking a hit on cash flow, they are just growing at a slower rate), but if the premise is that there is always cyclicality in the commodity market and things will turnaround to get back into a nice growth trajectory in a year or two from now, how much would you pay off next year or two-year forward FCF? To take a more draconian stance, even if there was no growth trajectory in a year or two from now, is it truly justifiable to say that many of these businesses should trade at 500-1000bps above debt instruments with equivalent credit ratings? When was the last time you were able to pick up a stock for 4-9x levered free cash flow even if there was a dim outlook for businesses that possess this quality? For the purpose of identifying “better” quality – off the top of my head, few high level components to look for in terms of evaluating the fundamentals of these businesses: 1) Contract structure (duration, minimum volume commitment, take-or-pay % vs. throughput %, fixed fee vs. commodity price dependent fee, inflation escalator); 2) Customer credit (liquidity, credit ratings, leverage), types of customers (E&P, refinery, other midstream, logistics, export demand, etc), customer diversity (having customer concentration through an excellent customer may sometimes be more favorable than having mediocre quality diversified customer base); 3) Liquidity (cash + RCF availability); 4) Geography (if volumes are growing at a certain geography or basin, it doesn’t matter if commodity prices are falling for the midstream provider); 5) Maintenance capital as % of EBITDA; 6) Growth capital need and payback period (some businesses like a pipeline are capital intensive in the beginning but it’s all about maintaining existing volume and increasing utilization whereas some businesses require continued capital spend to service both existing and additional customers; it’s a tough dynamic if you are in a spot today where you are asked to spend capital in hopes that you will utilize them in the future) While there was always some level of premium/discount for MLPs depending on sub-sector, commodity price exposure, contractual structure, maintenance/growth capital need to maintain cash flow profile, geographic footprint and size consideration, today’s market where many players are trading at yields that imply distribution cut and at a meaningfully compressed valuation relative to few months ago and versus the broader market, it definitely seems like an interesting environment where MLPs are interesting not just as a safe haven and perpetual dividend asset but an opportunity to generate alpha through capital appreciation. During this oil crash since summer of 2014, you have consistently seen sub-sectors get crushed, only to see a lagged pick up among “better quality” names (E&P, OFS, LNG, Petchems, etc). This sequence of overreaction immediately followed by a quick and steep rebound among quality names is common across all sectors during a market sell-off. While this article does not address a specific recommendation and may be repeating what is already well recognized among investors, I wanted to provide 1) a quick screening of MLP names that are under oversold categories and 2) perhaps a different perspective around decoupling from the prevalent methodology of looking at MLPs like a fixed income security to a more traditional equity security (especially in light of what the valuations imply at today’s price and for those who think investing in MLPs today is like catching a falling knife). Below is a quick screening based on MLPs trading above 10% 2015E distribution yield (I am sure I am missing a few names that have above 10% yields). Second table excludes names with net debt/’15E EBITDA above 5x. There is not much science for drawing the line at 5x but wanted to exclude names that may be trading at compressed valuations due to distress and/or were previously highly levered to rapid growth prospects. Again, I have no idea if the excluded names are truly in distress or sized debt prematurely with too much embedded growth – just wanted to make the bifurcation. MLP Universe (NYSEARCA: AMLP ) – Names trading above 10% distribution yield Source: Capital IQ – Crestwood Midstream (NYSE: CMLP ), Crestwood Equity (NYSE: CEQP ), Southcross Energy (NYSE: SXE ), Azure Midstream (NYSE: AZUR ), Hi-Crush (NYSE: HCLP ), Natural Resource Partners (NYSE: NRP ), CSI Compressco (NASDAQ: CCLP ), Cypress Energy (NYSE: CELP ), American Midstream (NYSE: AMID ), Teekay Offshore (NYSE: TOO ), Capital Product Partners (NASDAQ: CPLP ), Midcoast Energy (NYSE: MEP ), Martin Midstream (NASDAQ: MMLP ), Exterran Partners (NASDAQ: EXLP ), Targa Resources (NYSE: NGLS ), DCP Midstream (NYSE: DPM ), USA Compression (NYSE: USAC ), Teekay LNG (NYSE: TGP ), NGL Energy (NYSE: NGL ), Oneok Partners (NYSE: OKS ), Suburban Propane (NYSE: SPH ). MLP Universe – Names trading above 10% distribution yield and less than 5.0x net debt / ’15E EBITDA Source: Capital IQ – Crestwood Midstream, Crestwood Equity, Azure Midstream, Hi-Crush , CSI Compressco, Cypress Energy, Teekay Offshore, Capital Product Partners, Martin Midstream, Exterran Partners, Targa Resources, DCP Midstream, Oneok Partner , Suburban Propane. Disclosure: I am/we are long CELP. (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.

Counting The Down Days For Favorable Odds

SPY closed lower for the fourth consecutive day on Friday. Historical data analysis shows that the probability of another day in red is below 40%. Expected return for the next trading session is +0.3%. S&P 500 and its tracker SPDR S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) finished this trading week crashing like there is no tomorrow. It was a move not seen for a while that got market participants panicking. This was also the fourth consecutive trading session when the market went down. With a bit of simplistic historical data analysis I would like to explain why this presents a favorable setup for short term traders. SPY began trading on January 29, 1993, which gives us 5,683 trading days of data. Out of all those days, SPY closed lower on 2,580 occasions. This means that over the last 22 years the probability of a down day was 45.4%. If we investigate at what happens after a down day, we will see that on 1,141 occasions, or 44.2% of time, SPY went lower again. After two consecutive days down, the probability of another close lower decreases to 42.3% (483 instances). Extending this type of analysis to more days, we get the following table: One will immediately spot that thus far SPY has never gone down 9 trading sessions in a row . There was also only one instance when it closed lower for 8 consecutive trading sessions (any guesses when that happened?). More importantly, it is clear that the probability of a down day decreases gradually with each trading session in red. The probability spikes up at the 7th day but the sample in that category is already too small for statistical inference. One caveat about the table above is that some runs will be included in the data multiple times. For example, the recent four day decline will generate one instance (Friday) in the 4 days down bucket, 2 instances (Thursday and Friday) for 3 days down and so on. To account for that, we also take a look at the setups with exact number of down days preceded by a trading session with a nonnegative return: The interpretation of the figures above is as follows: after a nonnegative day, SPY went down 46.4% of times. After exactly one day down, SPY went lower on 45.7% of occasions and so on. Despite a slightly different methodology, the drift remains the same – the probability of a down day decreases gradually as the market slump persists. So with SPY having closed lower for the fourth time in a row on Friday, this gives us a pretty nice setup where the chance of another decline in the next trading session appears to be below 40% . Obviously, the probability in isolation is not enough and we need to complement it with expected return. The next table compares average and median return after exact number of down days: The returns tell even a more persuasive story. It turns out that not only the probability of a decline decreases with each down day but at the same time the expected return rises steadily. History tells us that with the current SPY streak of 4 down days, the expected return for the next trading session is 0.30% . Not a bad profit for a single day, which would compound to over 110% return annualized. This is not to say than one should trade such a setup without taking other factors into consideration. Proper risk management and exit strategies are required. They could also be complemented with trend indicators, seasonality metrics, fundamental ratios, etc. But at the very minimum it is a good starting point. I went long SPY at the close on Friday. Disclosure: I am/we are long SPY. (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.