Tag Archives: stocks

Relevance Of Portfolio Holdings: 3 Concentrated Funds To Buy And Sell

In our previous article, we discussed how concentrated mutual funds rely on the limited numbers of stock holdings that they own. Focused funds invest in a limited number of companies, rather than having a diversified portfolio. In this context, we showed how Sequoia Fund (MUTF: SEQUX ), which has slumped nearly 70% since Oct. 18, has learnt a lesson for its nearly 30% exposure to Valeant Pharmaceuticals (NYSE: VRX ). We also spoke of funds such as Fairholme Allocation (MUTF: FAAFX ) and Fidelity Select Computers Portfolio (MUTF: FDCPX ) that have gained on the strong performance of its core holdings. However, both FAAFX and FDCPX had a relatively higher number of total issues in stock holdings. The number of holdings in a portfolio may be considered one of the measures of portfolio risk. A lower number of total issues will indicate that the fund is more concentrated and is thus more vulnerable to fluctuations in these holdings. So, if a fund invests in just five stocks, it is highly susceptible to fluctuations in them. Though northward bound stock holdings brighten the prospects of concentrated funds, the advantage of portfolio diversity is denied. In case of a well-diversified portfolio, losses in some stocks may be offset by gains in others. In addition to the number of holdings in a portfolio, the percentage of assets invested in stocks is also crucial. A fund with the bulk of its assets invested in a particular stock is most likely to be guided by the performance of that stock. This time, let’s look at three Sell-ranked concentrated mutual funds that have total issues in the stock holdings below 30 and have underperformed in recent times. For investors ready to gamble, we will also pick three Buy-ranked concentrated mutual funds that have outperformed broader markets despite holding a limited variety of stocks in its portfolio. 3 Sell-Ranked Concentrated Funds These mutual funds either carry a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #4 (Sell) or Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #5 (Strong Sell) and have total issues in the stock holdings below 30. These funds have underperformed over the year to date and 1-year periods. The minimum initial investment for these funds is below $5000. Fidelity Select Utilities Portfolio (MUTF: FSUTX ) seeks capital growth over the long run. FSUTX invests the lion’s share of its assets in common stocks of companies primarily involved in the utilities sector, and companies that derive the major portion of its revenues from operations related to this sector. FSUTX invests in both U.S. and non-U.S. firms. FSUTX currently carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #5. The number of holdings in FSUTX’s portfolio is 24. FSUTX has lost 11.3% year to date and is down 10.6% over the last 1-year period. FSUTX’s top 3 holdings include NextEra Energy (NYSE: NEE ), Exelon (NYSE: EXC ) and Sempra Energy (NYSE: SRE ) and the fund has invested respectively 15.7%, 12.8% and 10.5% in them. NextEra Energy, Exelon and Sempra Energy have lost 4%, 20.8% and 7.3%, respectively, so far this year. Tocqueville Select (MUTF: TSELX ) invests in a focused number of small and mid-sized domestic companies. TSELX normally invests in a focused group of 30 stocks. A maximum of 25% of its assets may be invested in non-US securities. TSELX currently carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #4. The number of holdings in TSELX’s portfolio is 27. TSELX has lost 10% year to date and is down 8.2% over the 1-year period. TSELX’s top 3 holdings include Web.com Group, j2 Global (NASDAQ: JCOM ) and Minerals Technologies (NYSE: MTX ) and the fund has invested 6.2%, 5% and 4.8% in them, respectively. While Web.com Group and j2 Global have gained respectively 29.6% and 32.4% year to date, Minerals Technologies has lost 12.1%. AMG SouthernSun Small Cap Investor (MUTF: SSSFX ) invests in common stocks of small cap US firms. Market capitalizations of these companies (at the time of purchase) are within the capitalization range of firms listed in the Russell 2000 Index. SSSFX currently carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #5. The number of holdings in SSSFX’s portfolio is 26. SSSFX has lost 12% year to date and is down 15.3% over the 1-year period. SSSFX’s top 3 holdings include AGCO Corp. (NYSE: AGCO ), Darling International (NYSE: DAR ) and Centene Corporation (NYSE: CNC ) and the fund has invested 5.7%, 5.3% and 5.2% in them, respectively. So far this year, while AGCO and Centene have gained a respective 7.5% and 14.5%, Darling International has lost 48.6%. 3 Buy-Ranked Concentrated Funds A counter argument in case of concentrated funds is that well-chosen stock picks that are surging can also translate into significant gains for mutual funds. So, for investors ready to bet, below are 3 mutual funds that either carry a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 (Strong Buy) or Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2 (Buy) and have total issues in the stock holdings below 30. These funds have garnered decent gains over the year to date and 1-year periods. The minimum initial investment in these funds is below $5000. Davis Financial A (MUTF: RPFGX ) uses Davis Investment Discipline to invest a minimum of 80% of its net assets in securities issued by companies engaged in the financial services sector. These companies own financial services-related assets that are at least 50% of the value of total assets or earn a minimum of 50% of revenues from offering financial services. RPFGX currently carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2. The number of holdings in RPFGX’s portfolio is 28. RPFGX has gained 3.8% year to date and is up 5.6% over the 1-year period. RPFGX’s top 3 holdings include Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE: WFC ), Markel Corporation (NYSE: MKL ) and American Express (NYSE: AXP ) and the fund has invested 8.9%, 6.9% and 6.6% in them, respectively. While Wells Fargo and Markel have gained 4.8% and 31.8% respectively year to date, American Express has lost 20.6%. ICON Consumer Staples A (MUTF: ICRAX ) invests most of its assets in equities of companies belonging to the Consumer Staples sector. ICRAX may invest in common stocks and preferred stocks of companies of all sizes. ICRAX currently carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2. The number of holdings in ICRAX’s portfolio is 23. ICRAX has gained 2.6% year to date and is up 5% over the 1-year period. ICRAX’s top 3 holdings include CVS Health (NYSE: CVS ), Reynolds American (NYSE: RAI ) and Tyson Foods (NYSE: TSN ) and the fund has invested 8.3%, 7.3% and 7% in them, respectively. Year to date, Reynolds American and Tyson Foods have gained 46.7% and 11.7%, while CVS Health has lost 2.5%. Smead Value Investor (MUTF: SMVLX ) keeps roughly 25-30 firms in its portfolio and invests in common stocks of large-cap firms. SMVLX currently carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2. The number of holdings in SMVLX’s portfolio is 26. SMVLX has gained 4.9% year to date and is up 7.9% over the 1-year period. SMVLX’s top 3 holdings include NVR Inc. (NYSE: NVR ), Amgen (NASDAQ: AMGN ) and Tegna (NYSE: TGNA ) and the fund has invested 6%, 5.9% and 5.8% in them, respectively. NVR, Amgen and Tegna have gained 29.6%, 2.1% and 10.6% respectively year to date. Original Post

Alterra Power Is Still Underestimated By Mr. Market

Summary In 3Q 2015 Alterra delivered decent financial results. Very soon the company should commence operations at two new renewable energy projects: Shannon Wind Farm and Jimmie Creek hydroelectric power plant. In my opinion, Alterra’s shares are still underestimated against its peers. Alterra Power ( OTCPK:MGMXF ) runs five renewable energy power plants with a total capacity of 553 MW (megawatts). Apart from operating facilities, the company holds a portfolio of energy projects, of which two are at their advanced stages of development. In my first article on Alterra I made a statement that the company’s shares offer an impressive upside potential. Since that time Alterra’s shares went up from $0.31 to $0.41 (August 17) and then retreated. Now they are trading at $0.34 (up 9.7% since my first article). I am not impressed – Mr. Market still underestimates these shares ignoring the fact that Alterra is quickly strengthening its position as a provider of green energy. In this article I am trying to defend my earlier investment thesis on Alterra. Time is appropriate – the company has just announced its 3Q 2015 results . Business philosophy. Alterra is focused on growing its business through construction of new renewable energy power plants. Apart from HS Orka, at which Alterra holds a majority stake, all power plants are constructed as partnerships with strong financial partners: Toba Montrose – a partnership with Fiera Axium, with Alterra holding a 40% economic stake Dokie 1 – partnership with Fiera Axium (a 25.5% stake belongs to the company) Jimmie Creek – another partnership with Fiera Axium, with Alterra holding a 51% stake Shannon Wind – partnership with Starwood Energy Group Global (Alterra holds a 50% stake) The philosophy standing behind this approach is simple – Alterra wants to grow its power plants portfolio as quickly as possible and partnerships are one of the best methods to finance the company’s development. These partnerships are accounted for using an equity method of accounting – that is why the analysis of the company’s partnership stakes is crucial to have a thorough perspective on Alterra’s performance. 3Q 2015 results Alterra is quite a complicated company to analyze. For example, although it runs five power plants and two advanced development projects, only two of them are accounted for using a consolidation method of accounting – the rest is accounted for using an equity method of accounting. In my analysis I am firstly presenting the overall results of the company and then the results reported by each plant / project, most of which are accounted for under an equity method. The overall results The table below shows basic financial measures, reported in the first nine months of 2015 and 2014: (click to enlarge) source: Simple Digressions and the company’s reports As the table shows, in the first nine months of 2015 the company’s revenue decreased 18.3%, compared to the same period in 2014. However, this revenue is attributable to two geothermal power plants, Reykjanes and Svartsengi, located in Iceland. Alterra controls these plants holding a 66.6% stake in HS Orka, a mother company to those two geothermal facilities. Similarly, other lines in the earnings statement, apart from “Share of results of equity-accounted investees”, are attributable to HS Orka and the overall corporate issues. Note: I have to remind my readers a crucial accounting rule. Although Alterra holds a 66.6% stake in HS Orka, the earnings statement considers all (100%) operations carried by HS Orka. To exclude a 33.3% stake held by other stakeholders, an appropriate correction is made at the bottom line of the earnings statement (in the line called “Net income attributable to non-controlling interest”). Therefore, during the first nine months of 2015 Alterra printed a net loss of $7,128 thousand, but the other HS Orka stakeholders, classified as non-controlling interest, booked an income of $1,566 thousand. In this way a net loss attributable to Alterra increased to $8,694 thousand. This quite poor picture of the company, presented in its earnings statement, would be much poorer if it was not partly mitigated by an item called “Share of results of equity-accounted investees”. This line shows the results reported by power plants and projects, which are accounted for under an equity method. As the table below shows, in the first nine months of 2015 these entities reported a profit of $21,251 thousand (87.5% up, compared to the same period in 2014). Let me break down this figure: (click to enlarge) As the table shows, the results, attributable to five plants / projects, are accounted for using an equity method. Three of them: Toba Montrose, Dokie 1 and Blue Lagoon are plants in operation. The other two, Shannon and “Geothermal development projects” are projects under development, of which one project, Shannon, is at an advanced stage of development. As the table shows, the biggest part of an increase in “Share of equity income” is attributable to Shannon. For a better comparison, this project should be excluded (last year Shannon was accounted for using a different method of accounting – full consolidation). However, after doing it, “Share of equity income” is still higher than last year ($13,813 thousand against $11,333 thousand). Simply put, Alterra’s power plants, other than HS Orka, are doing better than last year. In my opinion, it confirms a thesis that Alterra’s business is in good shape. Now, let me analyze the company’s plants / projects separately. Currently Alterra is a company under development. It means that it is a mix of a number of active power plants and projects at various stages of development. Let me take a closer look at these facilities and projects: Plants in operation HS Orka HS Orka consists of two geothermal power plants: Reykjanes and Svartsengi, both located in Iceland. In the first nine months of 2015 HS Orka reported revenue of $41,664 thousand (down 13.0%, compared to the same period in 2014). This decrease was attributable to the exchange rate between the Icelandic krona and the US dollar because revenue, if reported in the Icelandic currency, went up from ISK 5.31 billion in the first nine months of 2014 to ISK 5.39 billion in the same period in 2015 (an increase of 1.5%). Note: as a matter of fact, Alterra owns operating facilities located in Canada and Iceland. While the company’s reporting currency is the US dollar, Alterra’s operations are measured in the Canadian dollar and the Icelandic krona. Therefore to catch a full picture of the company, I recommend studying statement of comprehensive income (which measures the impact of exchange rates, cash flow hedges and other issues on the company’s bottom line). The HS Orka EBITDA and cash flow from operations followed revenue, expressed in ISK. EBITDA went up from ISK 1.96 billion to ISK 2.1 billion and cash flow from operations (excluding working capital issues) went up from ISK 1.9 billion to ISK 2.0 billion. Due to an increase in non-cash line called “Embedded derivatives in power sales contracts” HS Orka reported a decrease in its net income from ISK 1.2 billion in 2014 to ISK 0.3 billion in 2015. In my opinion, fluctuations in the value of embedded derivatives are standard features of this business and should not be taken as a risk. Toba Montrose Toba Montrose comprises two hydro power plants located in British Columbia, Canada. In the first nine months of 2015 Toba Montrose generated 704 thousand megawatt-hours of electricity (8.2% up, compared to the same period in 2014). The plant delivered net income of $18,403 thousand (1.9% down, compared to 2014), of which $7,417 thousand was attributable to Alterra (the company holds a 40% stake in Toba Montrose). Dokie 1 Dokie 1 is a wind farm located in British Columbia, Canada. Year to date Dokie 1 delivered revenue of $20,515 thousand, slightly above revenue reported in 2014 year to date. Due to lower costs (mainly costs of sales and financial expenses), year to date the farm showed a net income of $2,158 thousand (last year Dokie 1 incurred a net loss of $1,380 thousand). Of this income, 25.5% ($647 thousand) was attributable to Alterra. Blue Lagoon Blue Lagoon operates the legendary Blue Lagoon geothermal spa in Iceland. HS Orka owns a 30% stake in this company (Blue Lagoon) therefore this stake is reported directly in Alterra’s books using an equity method of accounting. In the first nine months of 2015 Alterra recognized net income of $6,241 thousand (up $2,057 thousand, compared to 2014). Summarizing, in the first nine months of 2015, all Alterra’s power plants operated with no major problems. Power plants, accounted for using an equity method, brought $14,305 as “Share of results of equity-accounted investees” (compared to $11,577 thousand in 2014). In my opinion, these figures confirm that Alterra’s power plants are heading for the right direction. Projects under development Currently Alterra has two projects under advanced development: Shannon and Jimmie Creek. Shannon Shannon is a wind farm project located in Texas, USA. It is owned by a partnership between Alterra (50%) and Starwood Energy Group Global (50%). Shannon is accounted for under the equity method (previously it was fully consolidated in Alterra’s books). The project is fully financed through a mix of an equity contribution (delivered by Starwood) and project financing ($286.8 million in credit facility). According to the company, commercial operations should start before the end of 2015. Jimmie Creek Jimmie Creek is a hydro power plant project located in British Columbia, Canada. It is owned by Alterra (51%) in a partnership with Axium (49%). Similarly to Shannon, this project is fully financed. In the beginning of 2016 Jimmie Creek should start delivering electricity to BC Hydro, under a 40-year power purchase agreement. The excerpt below, taken from the company’s 3Q 2015 report, summarizes Alterra’s stakes in all plants and projects (excluding HS Orka): (click to enlarge) As the picture shows, at the end of September 2015 the company was holding $186 million in various issues accounted for under the equity method. The company’s long-term performance Before writing this article I was wondering how to show the company’s long-term performance. After second thought, I have chosen book value as a leading measure. I think that any energy producing company should increase its book value in the long term. Calculating Alterra’s book value I have excluded two issues, which distort it: Accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) – it is part of the equity section of the balance sheet, representing accumulated unrealized gains and unrealized losses, such as cash hedges or currency translation adjustments. Every year or quarter this item fluctuates, very often quite much. What is more, AOCI depends on exchange rates, interest rates and other issues, which the company does not control. Therefore I have eliminated AOCI from my calculations of book value. Non-controlling interest – because non-controlling interest represents the stakes other entities hold in the company’s consolidated assets I have excluded this issue from my calculations. Now, let me take a closer look at this issue, taking Alterra as an example: (click to enlarge) source: Simple Digressions and the company’s reports The chart shows Alterra’s book value per share starting from 2011. It is not a nice picture – the company’s book value decreased from $0.69 per share (at the end of June 2011) to $0.33 per share at the end of September 2015. Someone would even say that the company was destroying value in the long-term. Well, it would be a half-truth. Since its beginning Alterra was trying to explore / develop quite a large number of projects. Part of expenditures on project development was accounted for as costs – in that case these costs were disclosed in the statements of operations. However, much larger part of development expenditures was capitalized in the balance sheet as “Development costs”. According to the company: “The Company capitalizes direct costs associated with its hydro, wind and geothermal development projects. Such costs include acquisition costs, exploration and development costs (including materials, direct labor, directly attributable overhead costs and borrowing costs), net of any recoveries and grants. Costs associated with successful projects are amortized over the useful life of the projects upon commencement of commercial production. Costs of unsuccessful projects are written off in the statement of operations in the period the project is abandoned or impaired” The last sentence is particularly important – unsuccessful projects are written off in the statement of operations. In 2013 and 2014 Alterra recognized impairments charges of $120,504 thousand and $22,439 thousand, respectively. On the per share basis it was $0.26 and $0.05, respectively. If the company did not recognize these charges, its book value at the end of September would stand at $0.64 per share, a little bit below its book value at the end 2012. Of course, it still means that the company has not built value in the long-term but every investor should remember that Alterra is at its initial development stage. At that stage a number of projects is doomed to failure. Alterra is no exception and it will take some time before the company starts to create value. Debt Alterra holds relatively high debt: (click to enlarge) According to the company (3Q 2015 Report, Note 13, page 20): “The Company currently plans to retire the holding company bonds (Sweden) through refinancing in 2016, for which the Company is currently in negotiations ” As for HS Orka loans of $81.7 million, though they are disclosed in the company’s consolidated balance sheet, they are non-recourse to Alterra – it is HS Orka, which has to pay this debt down. A holding company loan facility of $64.6 million will mature in 2023; till that time no principal payments are scheduled (the loan facility will be paid down on expiration). I believe that HS Orka will be paying down its debts so in the short-term there is only one small question mark – the company’s negotiations aiming at refinancing the holding company bonds (Sweden). Valuation To demonstrate Alterra’s market valuation I am using an Enterprise Value / EBITDA multiple. Including a non-controlling interest in the company’s valuation, currently Alterra’s shares are trading at a multiple of 11.7. The chart below shows valuations of a few renewable energy companies (as of November 20, 2015). In my opinion, Alterra’s shares are not overpriced, compared to its peers: (click to enlarge) source: Simple Digressions Summary In my opinion, Alterra is going in the right direction. Its current power plants operate with no major problems. In the coming future the company should increase its capacity through completing two additional, fully financed, energy projects. The first one, Shannon Wind, is a wind farm facility with a nameplate capacity of 204 MW. Shannon should be in operation at the end of this year. The second project, Jimmie Creek, is a hydroelectric power plant with a nameplate capacity of 62 MW. This project should start its operations in early-2016. After commencing operations at these new power plants, the company’s capacity will increase from 553 MW to 819 MW (an increase of 48.1%). Despite these positive developments, the market is valuing Alterra’s shares at an EV / EBITDA multiple of 11.7. I think it is relatively low valuation, compared to other renewable energy stocks. Editor’s Note: This article covers one or more stocks trading at less than $1 per share and/or with less than a $100 million market cap. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.

GLD Continues To Lose Its Shine

The price of GLD continues to fall. The recovery of the U.S. economy keeps raising the odds of a rate hike in December, which pressures down GLD. This week’s GDP and PCE reports will provide additional insight into the direction of the U.S. economy and could indirectly move the price of the fund. The weakness in the gold market has also kept down the shares of the SPDR Gold Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: GLD ). As the U.S. economy keeps showing signs of slow progress, the market raises the odds of a December rate hike. And this trend keeps pushing down the price of GLD. This week’s GDP and PCE will provide additional information about the direction of the U.S. economy. Additional strong results could drive GLD further down. This week, the second estimate of the U.S. GDP for Q3 will be released. In the first estimate, the GDP growth rate was only 1.5%, which was much lower than that in Q2. In terms of market reaction, even though the financial markets do tend to react to the progress of the U.S. GDP, the price of GLD doesn’t seem, as presented in the following chart, to have a consistent impact from the changes in GDP. (click to enlarge) (Source: BEA, Google Finance) The chart presents the relation, or lack of it, between the percent change in the price of GLD on the day the GDP report comes out and the “surprise” in the headline figure of the GDP annual growth rate – a positive percentage point indicates a better-than-expected growth rate. The dots don’t show a clear upward or downward trend to suggest a correction. The GDP growth rate tends to coincide with the movement of the U.S. dollar. And the latter also has a mid-strong correlation with the price of GLD – as the U.S. dollar rises, GLD tends to fall. But directly, GLD doesn’t seem to react in a more consistent way to the surprises of GDP’s headline figure. How about the relation over the long run? Although the slow recovery of the U.S. economy may have contributed, at least indirectly, to the decline in the price of gold, when you look at the two data series over the past decade, it’s hard to see any correlation as well. (click to enlarge) (Source: FRED ) These charts suggest that the progress of U.S. dollar, changes in long-term yields, the concerns over rising inflation and even, to a lesser extent, changes in the supply of gold are likely to be the main direct factors moving GLD. Does this mean the GDP report doesn’t matter? I don’t think so, especially at this stage when the FOMC contemplates whether or not to raise rates. After all, the market estimates that the chances for a rate hike next month by the FOMC are 74%. At the beginning of the month, these odds were lower than 50%. As the chances continue to climb, GLD tends to fall. It’s true that the Fed’s dual mandate refers to employment and price stability, not growth. These two targets are related to the GDP growth rate. And if GDP doesn’t rise, the Fed will be less incline to raise rates. Currently, the market expects GDP growth to come in higher than the first estimate of 2%. Any higher figure could indicate the U.S. economy is doing better than was previously estimated – another positive sign that could keep GLD prices down. It’s also worth noticing the components of the GDP report, such as changes in inventories, investments and personal spending. This week, we also have the PCE report – another indicator for the progress of U.S. inflation. In the past report, the core PCE stood at 1.3% year on year (as of September). The Fed’s annual outlook was 1.4% . If the core PCE doesn’t start to pick up, the Fed expects next year’s core PCE will rise to 1.7%. This may not delay the Fed from raising rates in December, but rather, it may maintain a very gradual rate hike pace next year, which will actually keep interest rates low and GLD from crashing. The price of GLD is still likely to further slowly decline. This week’s reports will provide additional information about the progress of the U.S. economy. As the U.S. dollar and long-term interest rates continue to climb, the downward pressure on GLD will intensify. It doesn’t mean the fund couldn’t experience short-term rallies – especially if the risk in the financial markets rises or the U.S. economy doesn’t progress or U.S. dollar changes course again and depreciates, just to name a few factors. But these short-term rallies aren’t likely, for now, to change the fact of the descent of GLD. For more please see ” GLD Continues to lose its appeal ”