Tag Archives: stocks

Fall Review: ‘Savvy Senior’ Portfolio (Betting On Horses To Finish The Race, Not To Win It!)

Summary Total return (paper profit) lags as high yield and related sectors remain in the market “doghouse”. But cash returns have grown by over 11% since a year ago. Yields and re-investment rates over 10%. Credit still represents a more attractive way to earn “equity returns” than real equity. In other words, it is safer to bet on your horses merely FINISHING the race, rather than their having to win it. As we review our “savvy senior” IRA portfolio partway through the 4th quarter of 2015, the trends mentioned in recent articles ( here and here ) continue unabated. These trends are: 1. Our deliberately income-focused portfolio continues to crank out a steady stream of distributions and dividends, currently yielding 10.9%. We see no economic reason for these highly diversified income streams not to continue indefinitely. 2. With the compounding effect of re-investing our cash dividends at these high rates, we have seen our income stream (the output from the portfolio that we think of as our income “factory”) grow to where it was 11.5% higher for the first 9 months of 2015 than it was for the first nine months of 2014. This growth should also continue, as long as we continue to re-invest income, which the IRA structure encourages. 3. Even though the “factory” is producing 11.5% more current income than it was a year ago, the market has continued to value the asset classes we own – high yielding bonds and loans, high yielding structured vehicles (i.e. collateralized loan obligations), MLPs, BDCs, and closed end funds in general – pretty negatively. 4. This has lowered our total return (cash income plus market appreciation or depreciation) to date in 2015 to a negative (- 2.97%), while also providing us with some terrific re-investment opportunities, with numerous solid, well-managed closed end funds sporting discounts in the teens. Overall Strategy To use a horse race betting analogy, my investment philosophy is like betting on a whole lot of horses to “finish the race” rather than on individual horses to “win the race.” Most of the funds I own are credit or credit-oriented investments rather than investments in equity. When you invest in credit funds you are betting that the companies in the fund will merely stay in business (i.e. pay their bills and not go bankrupt). That’s a pretty low hurdle. Yet by making credit investments via the closed end fund market, you can earn what I consider a pretty steady “equity” return of 9-10%. That is because you start with high-yield companies that pay interest rates on their debt of 5 to 8%. (High yield means non-investment grade, and remember that the great majority of all companies in the US and the world are non-investment grade companies, so we should not let the term “high yield” or even “junk” scare us. High yield debt – bonds and loans – had historically high default rates as one would expect during the recession, but as asset classes they performed well and investors who held on and didn’t sell in a panic made out very well.) You put those in a closed end fund structure where you can often buy at a discount, which adds another 50 or 100 basis points, and then you add in the benefit that CEFs can leverage themselves modestly (less than one-half times) which may add another 200 basis points or so, and you are up to yields in the high single-digits and higher. As I’ve written before, I sleep well with this sort of a strategy. A bet on hundreds or maybe thousands of companies staying in business, paying their bills, or if they are utilities and other types of infrastructure companies, continuing to operate and pay their dividends, seems like a more reasonable and predictable bet than an equity bet, where the company has to not only survive, but grow and increase its dividend over time for the bet to pay off. (Some of my funds are equity funds too, mostly of the high-yielding dividend variety, but the bulk of the portfolio consists of credit-oriented investments.) My approach seems compatible with the current economic situation, where it seems we are on track for steady but hardly spectacular domestic growth, within a weak global economic context, and a volatile domestic and global political context. That suggests that interest rates, when they do rise here in the US, won’t rise by much; and that inflation is pretty well contained as well, given that wages in the US (for ordinary workers, not for CEOs) are held down by the global outsourcing option and the continuing post-recession reluctance of many businesses to add permanent workers. This situation – slow growth in the US, but lots of overall uncertainty – suggests to me that a somewhat predictable 10% return (received in cash and immediately re-investable) from credit risk beats a less predictable higher return from taking equity risk. Some other more traditional equity-oriented, dividend-growth approaches have done better so far this year than my approach from a total return (i.e. paper profits) perspective, but the dividend yield (i.e. money in the pocket) has been far less. Here are some examples: · Vanguard’s Dividend Appreciation ETF (NYSEARCA: VIG ): YTD total return of – 0.76%, with a yield of 2.28% · Vanguard’s High Dividend ETF (NYSEARCA: VYM ): YTD total return of 1.66%, with a yield of 3.1% · ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats (NYSEARCA: NOBL ): YTD total return of 0.96%, with a yield of 1.89% · SPDR Dividend ETF (NYSEARCA: SDY ): YTD total return 0.72%, with a yield of 2.44% · Vanguards’ Wellesley Income Fund (MUTF: VWINX ): YTD total Return of 2.52%, with a yield of 2.83% · Vanguard’s Wellington Fund (MUTF: VWELX ): YTD total return of 2.1%, with a yield of 2.58% I have attached my entire portfolio, listing the securities (most of which are closed end funds), their yields and premiums or discounts from NAV, the percentage each represents of the total portfolio income, and the percentage each represented back in April when I last posted the entire list. Readers will see that the previous list only accounts for 85% of the income from the current portfolio, which means 15% of the previous list’s income came from investments since eliminated and replaced. Those investments are listed separately at the bottom. New Positions Added: · Cohen & Steers MLP Fund (NYSE: MIE ), which I bought because it seemed some of the distribution, storage and transportation MLPs were being unfairly tarred with the same brush as the exploration and production MLPs, despite their being in different businesses. The market can’t make up its mind on this and MIE’s price gyrates wildly from day to day. Having sold at over 20 last year it is now in the 12’s, paying a 10% dividend. Seemed like a good opportunity to me. · Babson Capital Partners (NYSE: MPV ) , which is a decades old fund that buys and holds the sort of private placements that insurance companies like the fund’s parent Massachusetts Mutual have been doing successfully for years. I switched into this because it seemed like a nice “hunker down and forget it” sort of investment, paying close to 8%, with an 11% average annual return since 1988. · Cohen & Steer’s Infrastructure Fund (NYSE: UTF ) , which I’ve owned off and on with good results. It seemed that utilities were getting beaten up by the market unduly, so I created a new position in UTF, which I will be adding to in the future as well. Has been up over 22 and now sells under 20 and yields 8%. Cohen & Steers are long-time, experienced managers. (Similar thinking in the increased position in Duff & Phelps Global Utility Fund (NYSE: DPG ) . Yield of 8.5% with a 15% discount to NAV.) · Blackstone Long/Short Credit income Fund (BGX ) is essentially a loan fund. I think the long/short part means they have the authority to short loans and other instruments that they think may default. I opened the position because loans had taken what seems to me an unreasonable beating in the market and yields and discounts had gotten pretty attractive. Currently BGX is discounted 15% and yields 8.3%, which is pretty good for a fund that holds well-secured floating-rate loans (i.e. virtually no interest rate risk). · Nuveen Tax-Advantaged Total Return Strategy Fund (NYSE: JTA ) . I added a small position here when I read Douglas Albo’s valuable piece in mid-summer pointing out the unusual value this seemed to represent. Yields 8.88% and sports an 11.4% discount. Here is Doug’s article for anyone who wishes to read it. Some other changes to my portfolio: · Added to both Oxford Lane Capital (NASDAQ: OXLC ) and Eagle Point Credit (NYSE: ECC ) after attending OXLC’s annual meeting and then also meeting with ECC’s management. I think both funds have been beaten up price-wise unduly by (1) the general drop in high yield assets overall, (2) the fact that in both cases the traded stock as opposed to what is owned by institutions is apparently rather small and therefore the price bounces around a lot based on small volume while most of the stock sits quietly in the portfolios of long-term holders, and (3) the disconnect between reported GAAP earnings and the actual cash flows and taxable earnings from which distributions are paid is a bit too complicated for most investors to understand, despite recent efforts by the managements to try to explain it better. The confusion in the market about the effect of the Dodd-Frank legislation on the ability of new CLOs to be issued and/or held by their underwriters and managers doesn’t help either. My take on all this is that I will keep monitoring the funds’ quarterly reports to look for any signs that their cash flow is eroding or insufficient to pay their future distributions. So far both funds appear to have healthy future cash flows. I also know that lots of institutional investors made a lot of money holding CLOs in the past and the structure “works” as far as creating good returns for equity investors. The managers of both funds sound like they know what they’re doing whenever I’ve met with them. So for now, I’m in. · Third Avenue Focused Credit Fund (MUTF: TFCIX ). This fund has taken a pounding like all high yield bond funds. I cut my position in half because since it was a mutual fund, not a closed end fund, I could take my money out at the NAV and then re-invest it in similar assets, if I chose to, or even different assets, in any number of closed end funds, at a 10% or higher discount to their NAVs. So I figured if I were going to wait around for the market in high yield bonds to turn up, I might as well get paid a bonus for doing so. · For a similar reason I sold the PowerShares CEF ETF (PCEF ) and bought more of Cohen & Steers CEF Opportunity fund (NYSE: FOF ) . With FOF you can buy the shares at a discount, get active management as opposed to an index approach, and get a slightly higher yield. Some of the other moves represented an attempt to move out of equities and into specific credit-oriented securities that seemed particularly cheap and beaten down at the time (i.e. moves out of Eaton Vance Risk Managed Dividend Equity Income Fund – NYSE: ETJ – and Wells Fargo Advantage Global Dividend Fund – NYSE: EOD ) . Like many of my moves and portfolio tweaks, these were not because I disliked these funds, but because I saw particular opportunities on occasions in other funds. Often in the closed end fund market, because prices and discounts can be so quirky, it is a case of saying “This looks too good to be true. What can I sell to take advantage of it?” So you end up selling a position you are perfectly happy with, in order to buy something you are even happier with. (My Income Manager excel spreadsheet, that some of you also use, allows me to see at a glance as I add or subtract positions in the portfolio, what the impact is on the annual cash distribution of the entire portfolio. Anyone who wants a copy, please send me a message with your actual email address and I’ll send it to you. It’s not fancy but it works. Helps to refocus attention from the market value of the “income factory” to what the output of the factory is.) Hope that’s useful and/or interesting. As Porky Pig used to say, “That’s all, folks!” Savvy Senior Portfolio 10/29/2015 Symbol Current Yield CEF Premium/ Discount Portfolio Income % This Holding Portfolio Income % Last April Increase/Decrease as % of Portfolio income Eaton Vance Limited Duration EVV 9.22% -12.49% 10.41% 6.8% 3.57% Oxford Lane Capital Corp. OXLC 21.07% -17.94% 7.95% 4.2% 3.78% Eagle Point Credit Co. ECC 14.18% 6.95% 7.22% 3.8% 3.45% Pimco Dynamic Credit Income Fund PCI 10.44% -13.33% 7.15% 7.3% -0.17% Cohen & Steers CEF Oppty Fund FOF 9.04% -11.67% 6.52% 5.8% 0.74% Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund CHW 11.04% -15.25% 4.37% 2.7% 1.64% First Trust Specialty Financial Oppty Fund FGB 11.24% -1.27% 4.37% 2.3% 2.02% Ares Dynamic Credit Allocation Fund ARDC 9.78% -15.43% 4.21% 4.73% -0.52% Cohen & Steers MLP Fund MIE 10.51% -11.61% 4.15% 0.00% 4.15% Pimco Income Strategy Fund II PFN 10.39% -6.29% 3.86% 4.15% -0.29% Nuveen Real Asset Inc & Growth Fund JRI 9.01% -8.19% 3.50% 3.76% -0.26% UBS ETRACS Leveraged CEF CEFL 21.90% NA 3.38% 3.80% -0.42% Babson Capital Global Shrt Duration HiYld BGH 1.97% -12.62% 3.17% 1.41% 1.76% Duff & Phelps Global Utility Fund DPG 8.59% -15.02% 2.93% 1.27% 1.66% Third Avenue Focused Credit Fund TFCIX 9.97% NA 2.92% 7.23% -4.31% UBS ETRACS Leveraged REIT MORL 23.70% NA 2.70% 2.90% -0.20% First Trust Inter. Duration Pfd & Inc FPF 8.94% -7.98% 2.61% 2.30% 0.31% Babson Capital Partners MPV 7.96% -0.59% 2.51% 0.00% 2.51% Eaton Vance Tax Mgd Global Div Inc Fund EXG 10.66% -8.22% 2.32% 3.83% -1.51% Pimco Income Opportunity Fund PKO 9.66% -3.24% 2.19% 0.26% 1.93% Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Fund UTF 8.07% -16.93% 1.85% 0.00% 1.85% TICC TICC 18.07% NA 1.79% 1.79% 0.00% Blackstone Lg/Sht Credit income Fund BGX 8.30% -15.35% 1.61% 0.00% 1.61% John Hancock Pref Income HPI 8.43% -8.79% 1.12% 2.86% -1.74% Eaton Vance Tax Mgd Global Buy Write Fd ETW 9.89% -1.58% 1.07% 3.58% -2.51% Western Asset High Income Fund HIX 11.95% -8.82% 1.02% 1.09% -0.07% Nuveen Tax Advantaged Total Return Fund JTA 8.88% -11.42% 0.85% 0.00% 0.85% Brookfield High Income Fund HHY 12.06% -11.30% 0.80% 2.61% -1.81% Nuveen Preferred Income Oppty Fund JPC 8.70% -10.47% 0.80% 3.10% -2.30% Voya Natural Resources Eq Income Fund IRR 13.33% -16.30% 0.66% 0.89% -0.23% 100.00% 84.53% Positions Eliminated Previous % of Portfolio Income Eaton Vance Risk Mgd Div Equity Income Fd ETJ 4.20% Wells Fargo Advantage Global Div Fund EOD 3.00% Credit Suisse High Yield DHY 1.70% THL Credit Senior Loan Fund TSLF 1.60% Wells Fargo Advantage Inc Oppty Fund EAD 1.40% VOYA Global Advantage Fund IGA 1.00% Powershares CEF ETF PCEF 1.00% Cohen & Steers Ltd Dur Pref Inc Fund LDP 0.90% First Trust Strategic High Income Fund FHY 0.60% 15.40%

A Primer On Alternate Energy ETFs

Despite a multitude of macro challenges like deflationary worries in Europe, a slowdown in China and Japan, along with the oil price carnage in the market, the long-term outlook for the alternative energy space has held up pretty well. Climate change is one of the defining challenges of the century. Given the attempts to combat global warming worldwide, environmental considerations have been driving demand for alternative energy sources. The latest report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (“EIA”) shows that renewable energy will be the fastest growing power source through 2040. “Clean energy” has long been the focus of the current administration. President Obama’s “Climate Change Action Plan” and the favorable green energy trends have already done a lot in pushing the sector northward. On Aug 3, 2015, the White House revealed the final version of the ambitious climate policy. This Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) program seeks to cut CO2 emissions from the nation’s power plants. The Obama administration has vowed for CO2 reduction of 28% by 2025 and 32% by 2030 from 2005 levels. This version turns out to be a little stronger than the draft proposal released last summer, wherein the EPA had proposed total CO2 reduction of 29% by 2025 and 30% by 2030. Per the International Energy Agency, the share of renewables in total power generation is expected to rise to 33% in 2040 from 21% in 2012 globally. Again, the EIA report reveals that electricity generation from renewable sources is projected to increase to 18% by 2040 in the U.S. Wind and solar production have been rising at an exponential rate and renewable energy sources can now generate electricity at a price very close to the electricity generated by fossil fuels. Per the latest report released by the Solar Energy Industries Association (“SEIA”), the U.S. solar energy industry grew 8.7% year over year to reach 1,393 megawatts (“MW”) DC in the second quarter 2015. This is a landmark for the market, with cumulative installations reaching the 20 GW DC mark, buoyed by strong contributions from each of three segments: utility, commercial and residential. The SEIA expects the U.S. PV market in 2015 to witness yet another strong year, with installations reaching 7.7 GW DC, representing a 24% increase over 2014. Again, the American Wind Energy Association (“AWEA”) reported that the U.S. wind industry installed 1,661 MW during the second quarter of 2015, bringing the first half 2015 installations to 1,994 MW. This is more than double the capacity installed in the first half of 2014. Just as pro-environment regulations have given a boost to the alternative energy sector, trade conflicts between some of the major solar product manufacturing countries have complicated the landscape. Solar trade relations have particularly heated up with China and the U.S. trying their level best to protect homegrown interests. The Commerce Department in December 2014 set anti-dumping duties at about 52% on most module imports from China and at 19.5% on most imports of Taiwanese cells. It has also slapped 39% anti-subsidy tariffs on most China-made panels. The new duties would further escalate trade tensions between the two countries at a time when the two nations were planning to work together in the common fight against global warming and carbon emissions. The U.S. believes that Chinese manufacturers have hitherto benefited from unfair subsidies offered by their government. Globally, China, the world’s prime manufacturer of solar panels, is emerging as the market leader for solar PV to meet the growing need for clean energy. The Chinese economy has been struggling and its stock market has sold off dramatically in recent months. As the world’s biggest producer of solar panels is now contending with lower growth forecasts (below 7% for 2015), decreasing exports along with industry overcapacity as well as the ongoing decline in the stock market, its solar industry may also be at risk. Beyond the China factor, the sector as a whole – and solar stocks in particular – have taken a beating ever since oil prices began to tumble last June. This weakness has persisted this year as well. The decline in oil prices has made renewable energy stocks unattractive, sparing neither U.S. nor Chinese solar companies. While the solar energy sector’s long-term potential is undeniable, the industry is faced with a number of near-term challenges that will likely keep these stocks under pressure. That said, the demand for solar energy is strengthening at a rapid clip and analysts see no fundamental correlation between the oil plunge and solar share losses. ETFs to Tap the Sector For investors seeking to play this trend in ETF form, the following series of alternative energy ETFs could make interesting picks. PowerShares WilderHill Clean Energy Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: PBW ) Launched in March 2005, PBW tracks the WilderHill Clean Energy Index and manages an asset base of $102.9 million which it invests in a portfolio of 45 stocks. It is well diversified across various sectors. Information Technology takes the top spot with a 51% allocation followed by Industrials (18%) and Utilities (15%). The fund’s top 10 holdings jointly contribute 31.7%. The product invests almost 90% in companies that are involved in the generation of cleaner energy and conservation. It charges a hefty 72 basis points in fees. Market Vectors Global Alternative Energy ETF (NYSEARCA: GEX ) Launched in May 2007, GEX tracks the Ardour Global Index, focusing on companies that are primarily engaged in the business of alternative energy comprising solar power, bioenergy, wind power, hydro-power and geothermal energy. The fund holds about 31 stocks in its pocket, has assets under management of $84 million and charges an expense ratio of 64 basis points annually. Apart from robust holdings in the U.S., the product offers solid exposure to China and some European countries. From a sector perspective, Industrials and Information Technology take the largest share with a respective 45% and 27.7%. Further, the fund’s top 10 holdings jointly contribute 62.69% to the fund. Vestas Wind Systems A/S, Tesla Motors Inc. (NASDAQ: TSLA ) and Eaton Corp Plc (NYSE: ETN ) are the top three holdings, with 28.88% of asset allocation in total. PowerShares Global Clean Energy Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: PBD ) This ETF follows the WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation Index, giving investors exposure to about 105 companies that are engaged in renewable sources of energy and technologies facilitating cleaner energy. Assets under management are just over $62.7 million and the expense ratio is 76 basis points a year. The fund’s top 10 holdings contribute 17.95% to it. PBD is heavy in Industrials, as this represents 31.36% of the fund. This is followed by Information Technology (30%) and Utilities (27.15%). In terms of countries, the U.S. dominates with 30.17% followed by China with 17.16%. First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index ETF (NASDAQ: QCLN ) This ETF tracks the NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index and follows a benchmark of clean energy companies, giving exposure to 48 such companies in total with an asset base of $83.3 million. The fund charges investors 60 basis points a year in fees for the exposure. The top 10 holdings comprise 55.18% of the total fund. Technology firms dominate this ETF, accounting for 31.96% of the assets, followed by Oil and Gas stocks with about 22.66%. In terms of geographical diversification, the fund is almost entirely focused on the U.S. market. iShares S&P Global Clean Energy Index ETF (NASDAQ: ICLN ) This ETF tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy Index with 29 holdings and an asset base of $71.8 million. ICLN charges investors 47 basis points a year in fees for the exposure. In terms of geographical breakdown, China leads the list with 26.33%, while the U.S. holds the second spot with 24.12%. ICLN is more inclined toward Renewable Electricity, representing 26.29% of the fund, although Heavy Electrical Equipment receives a big chunk as well (20.31%). The fund appears to be highly concentrated in the top 10 holdings with a share of 58.11%. Bottom Line The depletion of fossil fuel reserves, new and advanced technologies, accompanied with more competent alternative energy applications have made green power more feasible, injecting optimism into the sector. Yet, investors should closely track the political factors that could impact the sector. These include eco-friendly mandates and renewable energy agendas to see if potential benefits will spill over to the renewable companies and the sector ETFs. Original Post