Tag Archives: stocks

Improve Your Volatility Trading By Listening To The Curve

Summary Successful volatility trading requires you to understand the futures curve. There’s more to the volatility curve than just contango and backwardation. The futures curve is telling you what the market believes about the duration of the disruption. This article is for intermediate volatility traders who already understand the various exchange-traded volatility instruments. Whenever volatility spikes, Seeking Alpha readers are presented with a spate of articles suggesting that they should go short volatility. Frequently, this is a good trade. But not today. If you learn to tell the difference between these situations, you can optimize your volatility trading returns. The past couple of weeks have been rough for volatility traders. After nearly four years of declining volatility, the broader markets decided that a long-expected correction was finally in order. Consequently, volatility spiked in mid-August and remains elevated to the time of this writing, gutting the typical short volatility trade (e.g., shorting VXX or UVXY , or going long their inverse instruments, XIV or SVXY ). Simple Volatility Trading Strategies Failed Unfortunately, over the past couple weeks, Seeking Alpha readers were bombarded with a series of articles with titles like (paraphrasing): Now is the Time to Short Volatility The Volatility Short is Ready Again Short Volatility Now Many of these articles are based on simple volatility trading strategies, such as: Go short when the VIX is above 20, or another magic number the trader happens to like. Exit when the VIX is below 14 or so. If you’re very brave and the VIX is very low (say 11 or 12), reverse and go long volatility. Other authors use the VIX futures curve and look at contango and backwardation. For instance: Go short whenever the futures curve goes into backwardation. Exit when it goes back into contango, possibly after a few days delay to eek out a better return. Some authors use standard stock indicators like MACD, stochastic, or RSI to detect elevated prices of VXX or UVXY and then go short, selling when those indicators return to “normal.” Still others recommend the reader just buy into XIV or SVXY and hold for a long period, ignoring the smaller spikes or using them as periodic entry opportunities. At some level, you can’t fault these authors. For the past few years, whenever volatility has spiked, going short volatility using one of these simple strategies has been a reasonable tactic. Unfortunately, readers who blindly followed these strategies during the last month have seen their positions crushed with massive losses. XIV is down more than 50 percent from its high in early August, for instance, and could easily fall another 50 percent over the next couple of weeks. XIV data by YCharts If you were unlucky enough to short UVXY a couple weeks ago, you saw it triple, and nearly quadruple at its recent high, possibly leading to margin calls and other unpleasant conversations. UVXY data by YCharts What happened? Could these losses have been avoided? The simple answer is “partially.” Most experienced volatility traders, myself included, lost some money during the first few days of the spike by going short. But for those in the know, it was small in comparison to what it would have been if we had held. These traders exited their positions quickly when it became apparent that this was not a short-term spike. Some, depending on their risk tolerance, may have actually made significant gains by reversing their positions and going long. What signs tipped them off? Listen to the Futures Curve If you’re going to take your volatility trading to the next level, you need to understand the futures curve. Most volatility traders know about vixcentral.com and use it to understand whether the futures curve is in contango or backwardation, but the analysis often stops there. The reality is, the futures curve is giving you information about the market consensus for volatility in the future (yes, I know that sounds obvious). First off, it’s important to remember that VIX futures act as a sort of insurance system for the equities markets. Traders who are long equities will often buy VIX futures as an “insurance policy” (a hedge) against rapid market drops just like those we’ve seen in August. Speculators typically take the opposite side of that trade, selling “insurance” and harvesting a risk premium when the markets are flat or up. It’s the time dimension of VIX futures that we’re most interested in for this article. Specifically, while the VIX may shoot skyward for any number of reasons, traders in the VIX futures market are always evaluating whether the market disruption causing the VIX spike is likely to be a short-term or long-term event. For instance, if the market believes that the disruption will be very temporary, then only the front month VIX contract will rise significantly and go into backwardation. Equities traders will buy a near-dated contract to best hedge their positions, pushing prices up. Short sellers (the insurance sellers) will demand more risk premium for the front month, allowing it to rise, but will still compete aggressively for the far-dated contracts, keeping those prices suppressed. When the market thinks the spike will be short-lived, the futures curve tends to look like this, from March 14, 2014: (click to enlarge) On the other hand, if the market believes the disruption will be longer term, more of the futures curve will go into backwardation. Equities traders will buy far-dated contracts to protect their positions out in time. Similarly, short-selling insurance salesmen will demand a greater premium for far-dated contracts to protect themselves. Thus, when the market thinks the disruption will be longer, the futures curve tends to look like this, from August 4, 2011. (click to enlarge) In extreme cases, the whole futures curve will go into backwardation. We saw this in 2008, for instance. This might be interpreted as the market saying, “We don’t have a clue when this is going to end. It’s just going to be bad for a long time.” During November of 2008, the curve looked like this: (click to enlarge) Lessons for Volatility Traders The main lesson here for volatility traders is that the shape of the futures curve is determined by the “wisdom of crowds” effect, with all traders in the market making an estimation about the duration of the market disturbance. The longer the perceived disturbance, the more months of the VIX futures curve that will be pushed into backwardation. There are a few important caveats here: The number of months of backwardation is only a rough indicator. It does not tell you exactly how long the duration will actually last. If the first two months are in backwardation, it doesn’t mean the disruption will last for two months. If we could predict the markets with that level of certainty, nobody would make any money as they would be perfectly efficient. The best you can say is that when just the front month VIX futures contract is in backwardation, the market currently believes (see the next point) the disruption will be relatively short. When more contracts are in backwardation, the market currently believes the disruption will be longer. Short-lived VIX spikes typically don’t drive the futures curve into more than a month, possibly two, of backwardation (I say “typically” because sometimes you will see multiple months of backwardation associated with a short spike, but it resolves itself within a day or two). Conversely, long-lived market disruptions like we saw in 2008 or 2011 force many more months of backwardation. The upshot is, when you see many months of backwardation in the curve, the futures is market is telling you to prepare for an extended period of volatility. The market consensus reflected in the shape of the futures curve changes day by day, minute by minute, as the market takes in more information. Typically, the front month contract will go into backwardation first and then subsequent months will go into backwardation as the market develops a belief that the disruption will be longer lasting. This may take place over days or even weeks. But the markets are also fickle. If new information arrives that suggests that what the market thought was going to be a long-term event will resolve itself quickly, you can see two or three months of backwardation go back into contango within a day or two. You need to watch carefully. This is why many volatility traders went short at the start of the August disruption; only the front month was in backwardation and it looked liked a temporary spike. Days later, the second and then the third month went into backwardation, suggesting that this was more than a short term event. Savvy volatility traders exited at that point, bruised but not bloodied. What About Buy and Hold? “But so what?” I hear many volatility traders say. “I sold short a couple weeks ago. Yea, I didn’t time it very well, but I’m not worried. The VIX is ‘mean reverting’ (not in a formal statistical sense) and it’ll eventually return to ‘normal’ and I’ll recoup my losses.” Is that a bad strategy? Well, the best that can be said is that these traders are probably right, but they are in for a rough ride. A buy and hold strategy for volatility is a lot like holding equities in 2007 and 2008 on the theory that the market always recovers. That’s probably true, but it can be a long, painful road back to break-even. Further, the opportunity cost during that time can be tremendous. Equities traders who exited the market in 2007 or early 2008, at the first sign of trouble, and didn’t reenter until mid-2009 recouped their small losses faster than those who held straight through the worst of it. Their returns remain far ahead of their buy-and-hold peers to this day. The same is true with volatility trading. If you can cut your losses short, bide your time, and then reenter the market when things are going your direction, you’ll be far ahead of those who hold through the worst of it. Also, remember that losses with exchange-traded short volatility products become “permanent” the longer the futures curve remains in backwardation. In other words, while the level of the VIX influences VIX futures, exchange-traded volatility instruments (e.g., VXX, UVXY, XIV, and SVXY) are really investing in a rolling set of VIX futures with a limited lifetime. If the duration of the disruption was large, then even if the VIX falls back to “normal,” the prices of these instruments will not return to where they were in early August. The share prices of the inverse instruments (XIV and SVXY) are “eaten away” by persistent backwardation during long-lived market disruptions. You may still have losses that will take you months or even years of persistent contango to recoup. Finally, every trader should remember that gains and losses are asymmetric . It takes a 100 percent gain to recover from a 50 percent loss and a 300 percent gain to recover from a 75 percent loss. What to Do Now If you recognized the signs and exited the market when this downturn started, congratulations. You probably walked away with a loss, but it could have been a lot worse. You’ll easily recoup that loss once the futures curve goes back into contango. If you bought in at the start of the spike, or even a week later, and then held to this point, you have a painful choice to make – sell or hang tough? You’re probably sitting on a large loss. Unfortunately, it’s impossible to tell whether it’s better to exit or to remain short. As of today, the first three months of the futures curve are in contango and the fourth month is flat (see figure, below). The fifth and sixth months are in backwardation and the seventh is flat. This suggests that this is going to be an extended period of volatility and we have some more pain still in store. You’re probably better off exiting and waiting for contango to return before you reenter. You might be even better off going long volatility (long VXX or UVXY) if the markets remain volatile. But be careful here! Volatility is very sensitive to market sentiment and going long against the natural short bias of volatility is always risky. There are no good answers here. (click to enlarge) In either case, make sure you listen to the volatility futures curve the next time and take appropriate action, swift and sure. Finally, if you’re interested in trading volatility, I invite you to follow me here at Seeking Alpha. Just click the “+ Follow” link up at the top of this post, by my name. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, but may initiate a long position in UVXY over the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

An Introduction To Merger Arbitrage And Available ETF Options

Summary Everyone is fascinated by Merger Arbitrage. This is an introduction. You have a few options ETF wise. Find out why I don’t like them. I recently discussed gaining exposure to spinoffs through an ETF. If gaining exposure to such deals passively is a good idea, one might ask whether other “Hedge fund strategies” can be attained through ETFs. We’ve all heard of famous billionaire arbs such as John Paulson (although he didn’t make his billions with merger arbitrage), and we might be tempted to have a go at such strategies. In this article I will: Go over the basics of merger arbitrage for readers who are not familiar with the practice. (If that’s not you, skip below.) Highlight the main risks linked to the strategy. Take a look at two Merger ETFs and the construction of their underlying indexes. Explain why I don’t think such ETFs make a good addition to your portfolio. THE BASICS Merger arbitrage attempts to profit from merger activity through spreads between offer price and trading price. Here is a simple example which expresses the strategy. Company A is trading at $10 a share. Company B is trading at $20 a share. Company B offers to buy company A, offering owners one share of Company B for each share of Company A. Following the announcement company A’s stock surges to $15. If the deal goes through, owners of Company A will have a security which is worth $20 today. To lock in the $5 spread between current price and offer, investors can go long A, and Short B; simultaneously buying the same asset for $15 and selling it for $20. Why would a security trade for $15 if someone is going to pay you $20 for it, and how do we interpret this? For a number of reasons, which we will discuss further, the deal might not go through. In such a case, the target’s (Company A) stock will usually fall back to pre-merger announcement prices ($10 in our example). Therefore the price at which a security a security trades between the acquisition’s announcement and its completion reflects the odds the market assigns to a deals completion. The basic math is: [(Current Price)-(Price before deal announcement)] / [(Offer Price)-(Price before deal announcement)] In the case of our example: (15-10)/(20-10)=50% As a deal gets closer to going through, you can expect the spread between security A and B to diminish. Whether A goes up, B goes down, or they meet somewhere in the middle, going long A and short B would net a profit as both prices converge. Since deals can go south for a number of reasons, investors must determine when the odds the market gives any given deal don’t match their own estimation of the odds. If an investor believes our deal has a 70% chance of being completed, the trade would seem attractively priced today (70%> 50%) and he could take a long position in A and a short position in B. Likewise if an investor believes our deal has only a 30% chance of being completed, he might view today’s price as expensive, and decide to go short A and long B, on the basis that the spread could get wider. Since large initial increases in shares of the target firm occur after the announcement, the downside if the deal doesn’t go through is usually larger than the possible gain (the spread). So there you have it. This traditional strategy is mostly used in the case of a stock for stock offer. In the case of a cash only offer, shorting the acquirer will be of no use in capturing the spread. THE RISKS While being a risk arbitrageur seems like an interesting strategy since your simultaneous long and short positions reduces your systematic exposure, many things can go wrong. The returns are mostly deal driven, so risks come primarily from regulation and financing issues. Even if most mergers are allowed by regulators, it is imperative to assess antitrust concerns before regulators rule. In deals where antitrust issues are a primary concern it is likely the spread will narrow shortly after the deal has been approved by regulators. There is no free lunch here, investors must do their own research and due diligence to assess how these issues can impact the deal’s timing and viability. Regulators being fun as always, might also cancel the deal for many other reasons, such as nationalistic concerns. Also if part of the deal involves a cash transaction, financing issues must be taken into account. Which Banks are working with both companies? Is financing secured, or likely to be? Merger Arbitrage returns are negatively skewed. If deals go through, small consistent gains are made, but investors are exposed to large losses when they run in to problems. In other words, large upswings occur a lot less than large downswings, distributing the returns somewhat as such. So as I mentioned above, the real opportunity lies in detecting deals where the probabilities of a deal going through are significantly different than what the market price implies. On Seeking Alpha, Chris Demuth does a great job at getting all the M&A info and ideas you need. But we do both agree on one point, Merger Arbitrage is research intensive. MERGER ETFS Given the extensive research required, you might be tempted to gain exposure to merger arbitrage plays through ETFs. Here is a brief overview of two of them, the IQ ARB Merger Arbitrage ETF (NYSEARCA: MNA ) and the Proshares Merger ETF (BATS: MRGR ). The IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF tracks the IQ Merger Arbitrage index which is a rule based index which seeks to gain exposure to companies all over the world in which a merger or acquisition announcement has been made. The index is rebalanced monthly, and excludes deals which have an offer price inferior to the price of the stock prior to the announcement. If the implied probability of completion is less than zero or greater than 100%, the positions will be held until the deal completes or 180 days pass after the announcement. When an implied probability is between 0 and 100, existing positions will be held for up to 360 days. Here are a few key points to keep in mind: Long positions in the target only Equity Hedge achieved through shorting sector or regional ETFs Cash exposure is kept in short term treasuries. No qualitative assessment of individual deals. No stock can be above 10% of the index. MNA data by YCharts The Proshares Merger ETF tracks the S&P Merger Arbitrage index. A maximum of 40 long positions and 40 short positions are included in the index at any given time. Deals are subject to liquidity and sizing constraints (Must be bigger than $500 mi). Everyday, if a new merger is announced, the position is added to the index. If there are already 40 positions, the position with the weakest performance since inclusion in the index is removed and is replaced with the new one. A few things to remember: Long and short positions in individual stocks are taken, unlike MNA. When included into the index, positions are sized at 3%. Like MNA this is a rule based index with no qualitative analysis. SPY data by YCharts MY TAKE ON THESE. MNA data by YCharts Let’s start with what is to be liked. Both ETFs are diversified and give exposure to a bunch of deals worldwide. Over the last 3 years, we can say that MNA has achieved its objective of attaining consistent absolute returns with little correlation to traditional equity markets. On the other hand MRGR has produced negative returns overall. And I believe this underperformance -as in less than 0%- is due to a structural problem in the Index’s construction. If 40 positions already exist when a new deal arrives, the deal with the worst performance is excluded. This defies the underlying logic if capturing the spread in the current price and offer price: To capture it, you hold until completion or until completion is totally priced in! As such MRGR might be discarding the most lucrative deals because of a structural flaw. MNA has its own flaws. By using ETFs as a hedge, you are partially removing market risk, but not locking in a spread between a target and an acquirer. In the case of an all stock offer, if the acquirers price was to converge towards the targets price rather than the other way round, you wouldn’t profit. But my main problem re$mains the ignorance of risks. Successful M&A investing revolves around finding mispriced deals to go long or short. In both of these indexes you don’t account for the annualised return which is possible, and you don’t stack it up against the risks. CONCLUSION As such I chose to not invest in either of these ETFs. If I had to chose, I would pick MNA, although I am not a fan of its structure, it is less harsh than that of MRGR. Target companies tend to depend on event risk more than market risk, so shorting out market exposure does allow for exposure to M&A deals, even though it doesn’t do so in an ideal manner. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.