Tag Archives: spy

How A Magic Goldfish Might Short The Stock Market

Summary US equities look wobbly. Buying downside protection is in vogue. Skew is high. Let’s put it to use. Put on your contrarian boots Market participants are wired to cheer for bull markets. Anyone even marginally attached to the finance industry knows what I mean. Every trading floor has a guy with his hair on fire. He is screaming about an imminent collapse in the stock market. He spends his days reading David Stockman’s blog and cruising Zerohedge. Sometimes he mumbles things about an electromagnetic pulse. The marketing department spends at least three hours of every day thinking up ways to get him fired. Nobody likes that guy. Not even me. (Despite my affinity for Mr. Stockman. And let’s be honest, who doesn’t like themselves some good Zerohedge?) Anyway, markets are structurally wired to be long only. Bears have been earning themselves a bad rap since 2009. Here is a fun trick that you can use to avoid ridicule while showing your bearish side. Just call it “Portfolio Protection” One reasonable way to play the trick is to buy put options. Sometimes people ask me to teach them things about options. I start by warning them about the dangers of being a goldfish. It is my adaptation of the 10th Man’s explanation for why efficient market theory is nonsense . Goldfish have crappy memories. They probably don’t spend much time thinking about the future either. When the goldfish gets to the future, it doesn’t think about how it got there. The goldfish is just living in the moment. Think about that if you are using charts like this to analyze an options trade. This is what I call a “goldfish chart.” It is a slice of what the goldfish’s wallet might look like when the option expires. On expiration date, you could ask the goldfish how it got there. It’ll shrug and say something like, “I don’t care.” Don’t be a goldfish I mean, you are probably not a goldfish. You spend a fair amount of your time thinking about your portfolio. You probably care about what your profit and loss will be tomorrow. You certainly care what it will look like when you retire. You pretty much continuously care about your portfolio performance. Goldfish charts narrow your focus onto some arbitrary date called “expiration.” That’s dumb. Much to do about skew While going through the morning routine here, I came across this little gem entitled “Who’s the Bear Driving Up the Price of U.S. Stock Options? Banks” All it really says is that the implied volatility curve is highly skewed. But that sounds like rocket science. So, the author did a really nice job breaking it down. If you want to buy a put to protect against losses in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, often you’ll pay twice as much as you would for a bullish call betting on gains. Get it? There are a lot of market participants with their hair on fire. They are bidding up high prices on out of the money put options. Portfolio protection is getting expensive. Let’s create a synthetic security! Sounds like fun, right? There is some magic math we could do to create something that looks a lot like buying a put option on the S&P 500 (NYSEARCA: SPY ). [Long Put] = [Short Put] + [Long Call] + [Short Stock] Let’s not think about it too much. Just take my word for it. To a goldfish, the combination of things on the right of the equals sign (the “Synthetic Put”) looks a lot like the thing on the left of the equals sign (just a normal put). Remember when that guy at Bloomberg said that buying puts cost twice as much as buying calls? Take another look at that synthetic put. [Short Put] + [Long Call] + [Short Stock] The goldfish wants to buy a put. But puts are expensive. So instead, the goldfish sells an expensive put and buys a cheap call. Short some stock and… Voilà! That my friends is magic math. How a magic goldfish might short the stock market Let’s do some magic goldfish math. We would like to buy an SPY put with a 204 strike and a March expiration. The market is asking $7.90 for that at the moment. Here is the goldfish chart again. We could just buy the overpriced put for $7.90, but that’s dumb. Let’s build a better mousetrap. We sell a 173 strike SPY put for $1.30. Then we buy two 210 call options for $4.58 each. Adding those things up we have paid $7.86 in net. Then we short 200 shares. Here is what the synthetic looks like compared to the at the money put. That is magic charting! At about the same price we are getting much more protection. How can this be? I have a couple of theories. Maybe three theories. One is that the market is structurally wired to trade long only. The typical market participant doesn’t have a margin account with permissions to go out selling put options and shorting stocks. But the banks do. Why don’t the banks jump in and arbitrage this? I have a theory for that too… First, this is not really “arbitrage.” The synthetic is very short skew. That doesn’t matter much to a goldfish, but it matters a lot to a hedge fund, or a bank, or someone like them. It should matter to you too! You’re not a goldfish. Second, if you are a bank, you are probably going to have a hard time explaining to Mr. Dodd or Mr. Frank what you are doing. Try telling a politician you want to add downside protection by selling a put and buying a call. It sounds a little bit like bullish speculation. The politician is not going to be interested in your magic math. The trade Anyone considering buying portfolio protection should be looking at a synthetic put. Skew is high. It could go higher. There are some other risks. Like, the market is not giving me an early Christmas present. Still, it feels like I would be sufficiently compensated for going short skew. Maybe you will feel like that too. But don’t go out creating synthetic securities just because a stupid chart looks attractive. Don’t be a goldfish.

Examining An ETF Strategy For Your U.S. Equity Exposure

Summary Reviewing several ETFs with exposure primarily to the U.S. equity space to see which combination will produce the highest risk-adjusted returns. I have used a mixture of large, mid, and small cap ETFs to get broad exposure to the U.S. stock market. Using fifteen years of historical data, I believe increasing exposure to a smaller-cap ETF will produce higher long-term risk-adjusted returns. With Christmas just around the corner, many investors begin their focus on asset allocation and reviewing their portfolios. It has been a turbulent year for global equities with many different macro events affecting returns throughout the world. With the recent economic news coming out of the U.S., specifically the Friday jobs report and the imminent rate hike from the Fed later in December, I’ve turned my focus onto the U.S. equity space to ensure my exposure to this market is balanced, poised for long-term growth, and well-diversified in terms of sectors. For the purposes of this article, I have narrowed down my selection of ETFs to include those that are simply focused on different market capitalizations within the U.S. equity space. That means I have eliminated funds that may be dividend-focused, value/growth focused, sector-specific, or other specialty funds. I’ve done this to keep my analysis simple and ensure I get as broad and diversified as possible. Once I narrowed it down my list, I had three broad categories – Large Cap, Mid Cap, and Small Cap – as defined by the fund companies themselves. Next, I wanted to focus on just a few from each category to see which performed better. For the Large Cap ETFs, I chose the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) and the SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF (NYSEARCA: DIA ). For the Mid Cap space, I chose the iShares Core S&P MidCap ETF (NYSEARCA: IJH ) as well as the SPDR S&P MidCap 400 ETF (NYSEARCA: MDY ). Finally, for the Small Caps I only had one fund that had enough historical data to do the simulation, so I chose the iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: IJR ). Timing When I was narrowing down my list of ETFs, I wanted to ensure they have been active long enough to see some of the more significant events of the last decade and a half. That way, the results would capture the tech bubble, the financial crisis, as well as the bull markets that accompanied them. Since most of the iShares ETFs were launched in May 2000, I chose to begin my analysis on July 1, 2000. SPY data by YCharts Assumptions All the daily share price data was pulled from Yahoo! Finance and I used the adjusted close price for all of my analysis. In addition, I used the 3-month treasury bill rates from the Federal Reserve website for each calendar year to calculate excess returns and risk-adjusted returns. Finally, I pulled the most recent MER information for each fund from Yahoo! Finance as well and reduced each year’s gross returns by that percentage before calculated the excess return information. Analysis Below is the summary of each of the five funds performance over the 15 years of data. To make my analysis easier, I used the last trading day of each year to calculate the yearly portfolio return to compare against the risk-free rate. (click to enlarge) Sources: Yahoo! Finance, Federal Reserve website As can be seen above, the small cap fund IJR offers the highest risk-adjusted return profile of the five funds I analyzed. Furthermore, you should note that as you move from the large cap funds of SPY and DIA to the mid-caps and then small, both absolute and risk-adjusted returns become stronger. I found this to be quite interesting as typically smaller cap funds comparatively have higher risk profiles. Since I wouldn’t recommend having all your U.S. equity exposure in one fund, I calculated some hypothetical portfolios with different weights for each of the three categories. From the data above, I also was able to narrow down which fund to use for each category; DIA for the Large Cap, IJH for Mid Cap and IJR for Small Cap. I also used $10,000 as a starting investment for each portfolio. Portfolio #1 – One third (1/3) invested in each of the three funds Portfolio #2 – 50% invested in the small cap, 25% in the others Portfolio #3 – 50% invested in the large cap, 25% in the others I found it quite interesting, although not surprising, just how much stronger the performance was on portfolio #2, which had 50% invested in the small cap ETF and ultimately how it also offered the strongest Sharpe Ratio. Overall, portfolio #2 outperformed the “standard” portfolio #1 by over 4.3% and the large-cap focused #3 by almost 12%. I also wanted to look at the sector breakdown of each fund to see if there was a significant difference in the three portfolios based on how the funds would be split up. As you can see below, there is some variance in the sector breakdown of each fund as you move from the large to small caps as well as with each portfolios’ hypothetical breakdown, but there is nothing overly significant to note. Most of the funds keep a relatively similar balance in the sectors with the exception of Real Estate which has zero exposure in the DIA. Conclusion I’ve always been well aware of the fact that, over longer periods of time, small cap stocks will tend to outperform large caps. For the most part, I was always of the impression that this higher return came with higher risk. However, after doing this analysis and seeing the results I would be inclined to increase my overall U.S. equity exposure to smaller cap companies as I am looking to hold onto this portfolio for an extended period of time. This sort of analysis is something I will continue to do each year to ensure if there are significant changes in the performance and risk profile of each fund that I capture them and adjust my investments accordingly.

(Non)-Correlated November

Depending on your perspective, November proved to be a rather correlated or non-correlated month. U.S. stocks and Managed Futures are the only two asset classes we track with positive results in November (likely from unique return drivers), while Long-Only Commodities continues to plummet, and Managed Futures is positive on the year. Those that know that Managed Futures can find return drives when the markets are moving up, down, and from various different sectors won’t be surprised to see that it was also able to make a +2.84% gain, when the iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: GSG ) had another big downward move in November, down -9.03%, bringing the YTD performance to -27.34% (Disclaimer: Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results) . As FT Alphaville points out, this is the 5th-worst November the index has ever had. Believe it or not, November 2014 was worse, as was its full-calendar year performance . As for the actual return drivers from Managed Futures in November, a trending dollar is Managed Futures’ friend . Many are speculating that if the Fed decides to raise interest rates, it could push the dollar higher, and in doing so, could give Managed Futures that extra help before the year draws to a close. Many are waiting to see what happens to the markets in December, pending the Fed decision. It will be a nail-biter to the end. (click to enlarge) (Disclaimer: past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.) Source: All ETF performance data from Morningstar Source: Managed Futures = Newedge CTA Index, Cash = 13-week T-Bill rate Bonds = Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (NYSEARCA: BND ) Hedge Funds= IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (NYSEARCA: QAI ) Commodities = iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust ETF ( GSG ) Real Estate = iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF (NYSEARCA: IYR ) World Stocks = iShares MSCI ACWI ex-U.S. Index ETF (NASDAQ: ACWX ) US Stocks = SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY )