Tag Archives: stocks

Proposed Allocation

Two weeks ago I wrote an article on Seeking Alpha discussing the ETFs that will comprise the core of our future portfolio . My goal, in all aspects of my life, is to always be learning and growing. Part of that process is to challenge myself and my ideas. My wife and I have run a bifurcated portfolio , comprised almost exclusively of individual stocks, for the past several years. While I thoroughly enjoy researching and valuing companies currently, I can see that the day is coming when I’ll want to be a much more passive investor. I anticipate achieving semi-retirement a couple years out, and at that time I’d like to transition to a portfolio which is maybe 30% individual stocks… with the rest being index ETFs and cash. Recently, I have begun to think it’s arrogant to think that our portfolio of (mostly) individual stocks can provide the diversification we require… while ‘not’ also requiring a great deal of time to manage. I also received a few comments and emails last week asking me why I wasn’t just proposing a portfolio of strictly ETF and index funds. I want to retain 20% to 30% of the portfolio in individual funds, because there are some truly amazing companies available to the investing public. I expect these companies to compound our capital for decades to come! So why not just invest in these amazing individual companies?! Two reasons: 1) I may be wrong, and it’s pure arrogance to think otherwise; and 2) I don’t believe there are enough of these truly amazing companies, that I could build a diversified portfolio out of them… even if I had the time to manage it. Simply put, I am looking to strike the right risk/reward balance. With that background expressed, below is my desired portfolio allocation. Please note that this includes my wife’s and my capital, as well as the trust fund we set up for our children. 25% Individual Stocks 20% Cash (or cash equivalents)* 15% Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (NYSEARCA: VTI ) 15% Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: VWO ) 15% Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-U.S. ETF (NYSEARCA: VEU ) 10% Vanguard REIT ETF (NYSEARCA: VNQ ) *Reduced by 10% when bonds re-enter our portfolio Individual Stocks First, let’s talk about what these categories mean. Within Individual Stocks, I mean both the amazing companies I want to hold for the long term (like Union Pacific (NYSE: UNP ), Visa (NYSE: V ), Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO ), etc.) and the “Deep Value” opportunities that present themselves from time to time. While these “Deep Value” opportunities usually manifest themselves as small and under-reported companies, they can also take the form of commodities or alternatives. Agricultural commodities are looking interesting to me today and gold will likely be appealing in a few months. My intention with this group is that the vast majority of this group be long term holdings… and the remainder be allocated toward alternatives and deep-value trades. Bonds You may have noticed, correctly may I add, that our portfolio will not have a bond allocation for the foreseeable future. Given our young age, mid-thirties, and the ultra-low interest rates… we have chosen to shift any bond allocation to other areas of our portfolio. If rates were to suddenly jump a tremendous amount, it’s possible bonds could join our portfolio… but it’s not likely for the foreseeable future. U.S. Stocks The next question I am likely to receive surrounds how we could only allocate 15% to U.S. Stocks (in the form of Vanguard’s Total Stock Market ETF ( VTI )). I will be quick to point out that the ‘vast’ majority of the individual stocks we invest in, are in fact US stocks. Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume that nearly 40% (25% individual stocks and 15% VTI) will be invested in U.S. stocks. Given that I am paid in U.S. dollars and the property we own is in the U.S., I don’t feel like we are short-changing our homeland. Around 40% of the world’s global equity capitalization is sold on U.S.-based markets. Therefore, I feel my U.S. stock allocation is right where I want it to be, especially when you back cash out of the equation. Emerging Markets I frequently receive email questions concerning why I think Emerging Markets are so well-represented in our portfolio. The simple fact is that the majority of global growth will come from countries which are now called “emerging”. Around most of the developed world, populations are barely growing… if they are growing at all. However, the populations of “emerging” markets are growing much more rapidly. There is some elevated risk that those local governments won’t enforce the rule of law, or more likely that those governments will nationalize your investment, but I think that is a risk in developed countries as well… just a little bit smaller risk. Foreign Stocks There are a ton of companies in this world, with plenty of market capitalization to go with them. To gain exposure to these markets, we will utilize Vanguard’s FTSE All World ex-U.S. ETF ( VEU ). It is important to note that nearly one-fifth (18%) of this ETF is comprised of companies from emerging market economies, so there is this overlap. The rest of the ETF is comprised of companies from developed counties (like Germany, the U.K., Japan, etc.). Real Estate Cash-flowing real estate can be a great investment. Unfortunately, our investable capital is not enough to purchase a diversified real estate portfolio in our part of Florida. We can, however, invest in real estate through Vanguard’s REIT ETF ( VNQ ), with the added benefit of instant diversification and much-improved liquidity. If I had the time and inclination to be a full-time landlord, I would prefer to go that route… but it seems unlikely on any large scale. So, with the funds listed above, we intend to transition to a simpler… and less time consuming… investment approach. Last week, I sent an email out to our subscribers discussing which current investments I was looking to rotate out of in the coming months. I also identified a few of the investments I shouldn’t have made, as I think it’s important to learn from our mistakes. If you would like to receive emails like these in the future, sign up for our email list by completing the box on the right side of our homepage. I hope this holy week is fully of good times and great memories for you all. Take care. What do you think of our allocations, and how do they compare to your own? Disclosure: Long VWO, KO, UNP, V. This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered a recommendation for anyone to buy, sell, or hold any equities. I am not a financial professional. The information above can be found at Vanguard.com.

Multialternative Funds: Best And Worst Of November

Mutual funds and ETFs in Morningstar’s multialternative category generally suffered losses in November, with the average fund losing 0.20% for the month. Year-to-date through November 30, the category averaged returns of -1.24%, but over the longer term, multialternative funds have generated three-year returns of +2.95% with a Sharpe ratio of 0.58. That’s not bad, but not all that great, either – particularly when viewed in terms of beta and alpha relative to the Morningstar Moderate Target Risk Index , an index consisting mainly of traditional stocks and bonds. In this monthly review of the best and worst multialternative funds from November, only one of the six featured funds has a track record long enough to analyze its three-year returns – and it was the month’s very worst performer, too. This shows the emerging nature of the category, which typically combines several alternative strategies, often employed by different underlying managers, within a single ’40 Act mutual fund. (click to enlarge) November’s Best Performers The top-performing multialternative mutual funds in November were: The Catalyst Macro Strategy Fund returned an impressive +4.57% in November, but those seemingly stellar returns were barely above its 2015 monthly average. The fund’s one-year return through November 30 stood at a whopping +46.90%, which is an average of roughly 3.90% in gains per month. Even better, for the first eleven months of 2015, the fund averaged gains of roughly 4.76%, with year-to-date returns of +52.40% – wow! But the fund launched on March 11, 2014, and thus it doesn’t have a track record long enough to analyze its three-year returns in terms of beta and alpha. The LoCorr Multi-Strategy Fund also launched recently, on April 6 of this year, to have three years’ worth of returns. In November, it returned +3.14%, making it the second-best multialternative fund to own that month. Finally, the Natixis ASG Global Macro Fund rounded out November’s top three with gains of 1.99%. Year to date through November 30, the fund was down 2.65%. It launched in late 2014, and thus also lacks a sufficient track record to analyze further. (click to enlarge) November’s Worst Performers The two Virtus funds were the second- and third-worst multialternative funds in November, with respective one-month losses of 3.14% (VAIAX) and 2.69% (VSAIX). Both VAIAX and VSAIX have been hampered by the decline in the energy sector. Both funds were launched on the same day in 2014, and thus, they don’t have three-year return data, but they had posted respective one-year returns of -10.27% and -10.35% through November 30. The PSP Multi-Manager Fund was November’s worst-performing multialternative mutual fund, enduring losses of 4.77% for the month. This dropped the fund’s one-year returns through November 30 to a flat 0.00%, while its year-to-date returns through that date were still moderately in the black at +0.69%. Over the longer term, the fund generated annualized returns of +2.55% for the three years ending November 30, with a 0.97 beta and a -3.43 alpha. Its three-year Sharpe ratio stood at 0.32. (click to enlarge) Conclusion As a whole, Morningstar’s multialternative category had three-year returns of +2.59% through November 30. This month’s batch of multialternative funds mostly lacked the track records to evaluate in terms of three-year betas, alphas, and Sharpe ratios – and perhaps that says something about the category and the relative youth of many of the funds in the category. Past Performance does not necessarily predict future results. Meili Zeng and Jason Seagraves contributed to this article.

Value Investing In Cyclical Stocks

Cyclical stocks tend to be reliable profit generators in a value investor’s portfolio. Cycles exaggerate the valuations because they cause uncertainty in the market. So arguably, value investing should work very well. In practice, it can be hard to identify the right investment candidates and pick the right time to invest. We all know that value investing involves buying stocks at prices depressed below the intrinsic value. Cheaper the stock, better the purchase, as theoretically, the potential returns (normalizing the price to value) are higher and the inherent risk of capital loss is lower (the stock is already at distressed levels, where investors have given up). Most cycles in essential commodities are predictable. Phase 1 – Growth and Investment: The business in an industry goes through a period of growth, managers become more confident and hire more employees, invest in assets and new projects and build new plants and increase capacity. There are new entrants in the industry as it grows with above-average profits. The analysts build Discounted Cash Flow and other models that assume good earnings growth for the near future and a possible terminal growth rate thereafter (which is almost always a positive number). This results in higher multiples being assigned to the stocks in the industry than the historical average. Wall Street firms do a lot of business with these growing companies flush with profits, and are therefore inclined to look upon them in a kind light. Investors pile in. Phase 2 – Peaking: All the capacity expansion via new capital investments and new entrants in the industry finally reaches a point where it starts to exceed market demand. The profit margins get squeezed as the marginal unit of production starts to sell at cost or below cost. The high-cost and smaller economies producers start to exit the market. A few players may merge to improve their economies of scale or add in new line of businesses to support the company until the cycle in this line of business recovers. Wall Street starts getting disappointed many quarters running, as the earnings come in lower than expected. Phase 3 – Decline and Disinvestment: Supply now starts to exceed the demand. Product price falls. Weaker and high-cost producers are unable to stay in business, and make an exit. Larger and lower-cost producers may choose to exacerbate the situation by making counterintuitive moves, such as increasing production, to drive the prices further down and hasten the exit of weaker competitors – as long as they are able to at least break even. Predatory pricing is generally illegal in most developed economies, but increasing production is not, and can easily be blamed to an error in judgment. Analysts don’t understand what is going on, and if they do understand the competitive games being played, they do not talk about it. Investors start to lose interest and move on to greener pastures. Businesses disappear, jobs are lost, capital projects are cancelled or postponed, assets are scrapped, and eventually, the supply starts to decrease. Phase 4 – Trough: Supply has finally dipped below the demand. The surviving businesses have started to gain their pricing power back and have begun to enjoy improved profit margins. They have also emerged from the cycle with a bigger market share as a large number of competitors closed shop. At this point, Wall Street has likely lost all interest in these companies, and analysts have dropped coverage of their stock. In Phases 3 and 4, the stock is likely to be undervalued. The cheapest and safest time to invest is in Phase 4. However, timing the bottom of a cycle is difficult and almost impossible. The best a value investor can do then is decide to invest some time after the decline has started and has gone to some depths, and then choose the stocks of the companies that are more likely than others to survive and come out with an increased market share. Which Kind of Industries Does Cyclical Investing Work In? In industries with low-to-zero cost of entry, such as software or internet, cycles do not exist, or if they do, they are short-lived. Some barriers to entry for new competitors can be established by increasing the switching costs for existing customers – it is difficult for the whole enterprises to switch over to Macintosh when all their business systems are written for Windows. However, these switching costs are not insurmountable. The story is very different in industries where a significant capital investment is required to enter an industry or a market. For example, airlines, mining, shipping, automotive production, most manufacturing, real estate development, etc. In these industries, capital projects may also have multi-year lead times before they start contributing to the business. Therefore, a project started today (such as a new ship ordered to be built when the market was doing very well) could take years to complete. When it is complete, though, the company may be adding new capacity in an environment of glut. Therefore, the cycle of boom and bust may be quite drawn-out in these industries. To invest profitably in these cycles, 3 things are required: Pick an industry that is not going to disappear anytime soon or be substituted out with something completely new. Pick companies that are strong enough to outlast the down cycle, or at least, are stronger than most of their competitors. Wait. Understand that these industries are going to go through structural changes and countless investor confidence ups and downs before the winners and losers are determined. Track if your pick continues to be a strong contender as a winner, but otherwise, mostly wait. Finding Values in Phase 3 and Phase 4 Stocks Finding good value stocks in Phase 3 and Phase 4 of the cycle can actually be very hard. As value investors, we are trained to look for the following: Low P/E ratio stocks – These are the companies whose earnings have been decimated. If anything, a great value stock here might actually sport a sky-high P/E ratio. The trailing 12-month or 5-year values are no longer typical, and the future earnings estimates are worthless. Low P/B ratio stocks – Since we are looking at asset heavy industries, it is worth pointing out that the valuation of the assets on the books typically get written down when the industry is in stress like this. Profitability ratios like ROI, ROA, etc. are all atypical and therefore useless. Therefore, cyclical investing for a value investor is much more of an art than science. Things like the strength of the balance sheet , economies of scale, management experience and skill, customer relationships, their ability to raise funds, cash and debt levels in the business, etc. become much more important. We still need to consider the valuation, and the valuation comes from asking the question: What is this business worth to a sophisticated buyer (competitor, private equity, etc.)? Sophisticated buyers are the ones who are buying for long-term strategic advantage. Now consider the plight of a retail investor who has no time to analyze these companies, and more than likely there is no longer any Wall Street coverage on these stocks (or if there is, it is much reduced from its heyday). These stocks will be volatile, and if you think you are getting a great value, it should not be a surprise that the stock is an even greater value a few weeks or months down the line. For most cyclical investments like this, I generally ease into my full allocation by starting small and then adding more and more over time when the cost can be improved. Sometimes, the extent of the future declines may surprise, but the declines themselves are to be expected. It takes time to hit Phase 4 and then turn around.