Tag Archives: seeking

Jeffrey Gundlach DoubleLine Asset Allocation Webcast

By VW Staff Jeffrey Gundlach’s slides from the DoubleLine asset allocation webcast: Probability of Rate Hike (click to enlarge) Sweden/Riksbank Flip Flop (click to enlarge) Central Bank Policy Rates (click to enlarge) The Difference Between Hiking and QE Infinity 50 Bps of GDP? (click to enlarge) Evolution of World GDP Forecasts by Year (click to enlarge) U.S. Industrial Production (YoY) (click to enlarge) U.S. Core CPI and Core PCE (YoY) (click to enlarge) PriceStats U.S. CPI (YoY%) (click to enlarge) U.S., U.K. and EU Headline Inflations (Eurozone Method) (click to enlarge) See full slides below Asset Allocation Core Flex Webcast Slides Disclosure: None

How ‘Economic Moats’ Can Help International ETF Investors

Companies with structural competitive advantages earn more. 5 Sources of economic moats. Increased competition drives down profitability. The Market Vectors Morningstar International Moat ETF (NYSEARCA: MOTI ) can help investors diversify into international markets and potentially provide more attractive returns. MOTI may act as a strong core position as investors seek greater overseas exposure. On the recent webcast, Improve International Stock Selection , Dan Lefkovitz, Content Strategist for Indexes at Morningstar, pointed out that investors have been slowly shifting out of U.S. stocks and taxable bonds while putting more money into international equities. Looking at the rolling 12-month flows in open-end and ETF categories, international equity funds are attracting over $200 billion, whereas U.S. equity fund flows look slightly negative and taxable bond fund funds came in about $50 billion, according to Morningstar data. Many investors may have a home bias, solely allocating toward U.S. stocks. However, Lefkovitz also noted that the world stock market is more than the U.S. The developed world stock market capitalization, as of the end of 2014, stood at about 58.4% U.S. and 41.6% foreign markets, so a diversified international investment portfolio would include about 40% foreign assets when considering total market-cap exposure. Brandon Rakszawski, Product Manager at Van Eck Global, explains that MOTI, like the popular U.S.-focused Market Vectors Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (NYSEARCA: MOAT ) , tracks a proprietary Morningstar wide moat, smart-beta strategy in selecting international components. [ Wide Moat ETF Gets an International Counterpart ] “The Morningstar’s moat philosophy aims to identify companies with structural competitive advantages that are more likely to earn above-average returns on capital over a long period of time,” Rakszawski said. Specifically, the Morningstar Moat Focus Indices target companies with a wide economic moat or sustainable competitive advantages and focuses on the most undervalued moat stocks, which have helped generate significant excess returns relative to the overall market. According to Morningstar’s indexing methodology, there are five sources of economic moats: Intangible assets that include brand recognition to charge premium prices. Switching costs that make it too expensive to stop using a company’s products. Network effect that occurs when the value of a company’s service increases as more use the service. A cost advantage helps companies undercut competitors on pricing while earning similar margins. Lastly, efficient scale associated with a competitive advantage in a niche market. “Capitalism works,” Michael Hodel, Technology Strategist at Morningstar, said. “High profits attract competition. Competition reduces profitability, but some firms stay very profitable for a long time by creating economic moats to protect profits.” Hodel also added that the Wide Moat Focus and Global ex-US Moat Focus indices track “high quality companies trading at a discount to intrinsic value.” Moreover, the Morningstar Moat Focus targets wide moat companies that may sustain economic profits for at least 20 years, whereas a narrow moat company would only be able to sustain profits for about 10 years. The opinions and forecasts expressed herein are solely those of Tom Lydon, and may not actually come to pass. Information on this site should not be used or construed as an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a recommendation for any product.

Best And Worst Q4’15: Large Cap Value ETFs, Mutual Funds And Key Holdings

Summary The Large Cap Value style ranks first in Q4’15. Based on an aggregation of ratings of 44 ETFs and 855 mutual funds. DIA is our top-rated Large Cap Value style ETF and FVSAX is our top-rated Large Cap Value style mutual fund. The Large Cap Value style ranks first out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in our Q4’15 Style Ratings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. Last quarter , the Large Cap Value style ranked first as well. It gets our Attractive rating, which is based on an aggregation of ratings of 44 ETFs and 855 mutual funds in the Large Cap Value style. See a recap of our Q3’15 Style Ratings here. Figures 1 and 2 show the five best and worst-rated ETFs and mutual funds in the style. Not all Large Cap Value style ETFs and mutual funds are created the same. The number of holdings varies widely (from 17 to 1000). This variation creates drastically different investment implications and, therefore, ratings. Investors seeking exposure to the Large Cap Value style should buy one of the Attractive-or-better rated ETFs or mutual funds from Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1: ETFs with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 (click to enlarge) * Best ETFs exclude ETFs with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings The First Trust NASDAQ Rising Div Achiev ETF (NASDAQ: RDVY ), the iShares Enhanced US Large-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: IELG ) and the State Street SPDR Russell 1000 Low Volatility ETF (NYSEARCA: LGLV ) are excluded from Figure 1 because its total net assets are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums. Figure 2: Mutual Funds with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 (click to enlarge) * Best mutual funds exclude funds with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings The State Street SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF (NYSEARCA: DIA ) is the top-rated Large Cap Value ETF and the Fidelity Rutland Square Trust II: Strategic Advisers Value Fund (MUTF: FVSAX ) is the top-rated Large Cap Value mutual fund. Both earn a Very Attractive rating. The Guggenheim S&P 500 Pure Value ETF (NYSEARCA: RPV ) is the worst-rated Large Cap Value ETF and the Dunham Alternative Income Fund (MUTF: DAALX ) is the worst-rated Large Cap Value mutual fund. RPV earns our Neutral rating while DAALX earns our Very Dangerous rating. PACCAR Inc. (NASDAQ: PCAR ) is one our favorite stocks held by Large Cap Value ETFs and mutual funds and earns our Very Attractive rating. Since 2011, PACCAR has grown after-tax profits ( NOPAT ) by 10% compounded annually. During the same time frame, PACCAR improved its return on invested capital ( ROIC ) from 17% to a top quintile 21%. Despite the strong fundamentals, the stock is down 22% year-to-date, which has left shares undervalued. At its current price of $50/share, the company has a price to economic book value ( PEBV ) ratio of 1.0. This ratio implies that the market expects PACCAR’s NOPAT to never meaningfully grow from current levels. If PACCAR can grow NOPAT by 8% compounded annually for the next 10 years , the stock is worth $64/share today – a 28% upside. Unum Group (NYSE: UNM ) is one of our least favorite stocks held by RPV and earns our Dangerous rating. Since 2010, Unum’s NOPAT has declined by 17% compounded annually on the heels of NOPAT margin falling from 9% to 4% over the same time frame. The company currently earns a bottom quintile ROIC of 3%, which is well below the 8% earned in 2010. While UNM is down nearly 5% this year, shares remain priced for exceptional profit growth. To justify its current price of $36/share, Unum must grow NOPAT by 10% compounded annually for the next 17 years. This expectation seems overly optimistic given Unum’s inability to grow profits over the past five years. Figures 3 and 4 show the rating landscape of all Large Cap Value ETFs and mutual funds. Figure 3: Separating the Best ETFs From the Worst ETFs (click to enlarge) Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Figure 4: Separating the Best Mutual Funds From the Worst Funds (click to enlarge) Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings D isclosure: David Trainer and Thaxston McKee receive no compensation to write about any specific stock, style, or theme.