Tag Archives: undefined

Equity CEFs: Global CEFs For A QE Europe

Summary After years of lagging the US markets, will Quantitative Easing by the European Central Bank inflate the European stock markets much like the Federal Reserve did for US markets? That seems to be the central question as the ECB begins its own QE bond buying program designed to help stimulate the Eurozone economies. And if the ECB is successful, then what global equity CEFs might benefit as well? If Quantitative Easing – Europe style helps European stocks much like Quantitative Easing – USA helped our equity markets, then it stands to reason that global equity based CEFs that have a high exposure to European stocks might benefit as well. Though I am not familiar with any equity CEFs that are pure European stock focused, i.e. follow an index that includes the largest and most popular European stocks like an S&P 500, you can certainly find equity CEFs that have a large percentage of their portfolios, typically around 25% to 35%, exposed to the large cap European stock markets. This is in contrast to the Asia/Pacific region in which there are quite a number of equity CEFs dedicated entirely to stocks in these markets, whether they be general equity CEFs, emerging market CEFs or more country specific CEFs. The theory, however, is that any QE – Europe would probably benefit the largest and most liquid European stock names and thus investors should focus on equity CEFs that include these securities as part of their overall portfolio. There are also several ETFs, such as the popular iShares Europe fund (NYSEARCA: IEV ) , that will give you a pure play on the largest and most popular European stocks as a non-managed index fund, but I personally like the global equity CEF approach since not only are many of these funds trading at wide discounts and are at the low end of their discount/premium range, but they also are diversified so that you don’t put all your eggs in one basket in case QE – Europe doesn’t have quite the same effect as QE – USA. Most of the global equity CEFs I follow are diversified among the US, Europe and Asia/Pacific markets and can also offer varying income strategies that help pay for their large yields, generally in the 7% to as high as 11%. For example, leveraged income global equity CEFs will often include fixed-income securities such as preferreds or corporate bonds to reduce volatility and provide further diversification to protect against any one sector underperforming. After all, we’re not looking for home runs in these funds but rather relative outperformance over their CEF and ETF counterparts. So if you want the pure play European stock approach, then IEV or some other European stock focused ETF is probably a better way to go. But as you’ll see, diversification has its merits and many of these global equity CEFs have outperformed, both at the NAV and market price levels – the most popular international ETFs such as IEV or the more broadly based iShares Morgan Stanley EAFE international index (NYSEARCA: EFA ) , which includes Europe, Asia and the Far East stock markets, hence the EAFE. Global Equity CEF 1-Year and 3-Year Performances The following two tables sorts the global equity CEFs I follow by their total return NAV performances over one-year and then three years (through January 23rd so a little longer than one-year and three-ye ar periods). All of these funds have roughly 25% – 35% large cap European stock exposure though most will still have a higher exposure to US markets and some may be more Asia/Pacific stock weighted than European stock weighted. What are not included in the tables are global equity CEFs that focus in emerging markets are country specific or sector specific funds such as global utilities or global REITs. In other words, I’m just including global equity CEFs that may be beneficiaries of any QE – Europe due to their large cap European stock exposure. Also included at the bottom of each table are the total return ETF performances of the most popular international ETFs, IEV and EFA , and from the US major market indices, the SPDR S&P 500 (NYSEARCA: SPY ) , the Powershares NASDAQ-100 (NASDAQ: QQQ ) , the SPDR Dow Jones 30 Industrials (NYSEARCA: DIA ) . 1-Year Total Return Performance 3-Year Total Return Performance Recommended Global Equity CEFs For QE – Europe Using the tables above and other proprietary information regarding relative valuations and historic NAV performance, these are the global equity based CEFs with European stock exposure that I would recommend. First is the Eaton Vance Tax-Advantaged Global Dividend Income fund (NYSE: ETG ) , $16.15 market price, $17.71 NAV, -8.8% discount, 7.7% current market yield . ETG , along with (NYSE: ETO ) , are Eaton Vance’s two global leveraged equity based CEFs that also include about 20% of their portfolios in fixed-income preferred securities. Both of these funds, along with (NYSE: EVT ) , which is Eaton Vance’s leveraged US based CEF, are higher risk, higher reward CEFs due to their use of leverage but all have been fantastic performers over the past few years both at the NAV and market price level. ETG used to have the highest valuation of all of the Eaton Vance leveraged CEFs but currently trades at a -8.8% discount, at the low end of its Premium/Discount range as shown in this 3-year Premium/Discount chart. (click to enlarge) ETG includes about 32% of its portfolio in large cap European stocks, 7% exposure in Asia/Pacific and the rest mostly in US based large-cap stocks. ETG’s overall portfolio is 82% equities and 18% preferred securities. I have followed ETG for years and I often used it as a short hedge against my long CEF positions as the fund would often spike up to trade close to a premium valuation for short periods only to drop back to a wider discount. For investors who think that CEFs don’t stray much from their premium/discount valuations over time, ETG is a good example of a fund that does. Eaton Vance’s other leveraged global equity CEF, ETO is similar to ETG but trades at a much narrower and even historically narrow -1.2% discount due to recent distribution increases and very large capital gain distributions over the last couple years. Frankly though, both of these funds have knocked the cover off the ball the last few years even with their global stock exposure and have far outperformed IEV or EFA at both the NAV and market price levels. Referring to the tables above, ETG has returned 62.4% to investors at its market price in a little over three years while ETO has returned a whopping 81.6% . Have The Alpine CEFs Finally Turned The Corner? Well, I never thought I would say this but the second group of global equity CEFs I would recommend to take advantage of a European market turnaround are the Alpine Total Dynamic Dividend fund (NYSE: AOD ) , $8.66 market price, $10.02 NAV, -13.6% discount, 7.8% current market yield and the Alpine Global Dynamic Dividend fund (NYSE: AGD ) , $9.99 market price, $11.25 NAV, -11.2% discount, 7.7% current market yield . For those of you who have followed my articles over the years, you know that I had been one of Alpine’s biggest bears ever since I started writing on Seeking Alpha due to the two fund’s ineffective dividend harvest income strategy that dramatically eroded the fund’s NAVs over the years while overpaying their distributions. Alpine finally got the message a couple years ago and brought in new portfolio managers who first took steps to minimize the use of their dividend harvest strategy while significantly reducing the distributions to a more reasonable NAV yield. Then just a year ago, Alpine implemented a reverse split (not their first) for the two funds to boost up their depressed NAV prices. Though this was tough medicine to take and the funds still reflect some of the worst NAV and market price performances of any equity CEFs since their inceptions in 2006 and 2007, it’s safe to say that the funds have finally turned it around and are seeing a resurgence in their NAV performances. Though AGD is considered the global of the two funds, the fact is both funds have similar portfolios and similar exposure to European equities, with AGD showing 32% of its portfolio in European stocks, 55% in US stocks and about 11% in Asia/Pacific while AOD’s portfolio breakdown is 29% in European stocks, 58% in US stocks and 11% in Asia/Pacific (as of 10/31/2014). Though the funds rely less on a dividend capture income strategy now and have much more achievable NAV yields of about 6.8% instead of the 12%+ NAV yields they use to have, there still seems to be hesitation by investors as to whether the funds have actually turned the corner. This is reflected in the fund’s wide discounts with AGD at a current -11.2% discount and AOD at one of the widest discounts of all equity CEFs at -13.6%. But this is where the opportunities lie because investors were wrong in their zeal for AGD and AOD several years ago (as I pointed out in many articles) when investors drove the fund’s valuations up to market price premiums as high as 50% in early 2010 and I believe they are wrong now as the fund’s drop to double digit discounts just at a time when their improved income and growth strategies could really start to pay off. A Global Equity CEF With The Highest European Exposure The last global equity CEF I am recommending is also one I used to pan because of its high valuation and lackluster NAV performance, but it also has one of the highest exposures to large cap European stocks if you believe the time is now for this region to outperform. The Voya International High Dividend Equity Income fund (NYSE: IID ) , $7.94 market price, $8.44 NAV, -5.9% discount, 10.4% current market yield targets 50% of its portfolio to be invested in European stocks, 40% in the Asia/Pacific region and only about 9% in US stocks. This minimal exposure to the US markets has resulted in IID’s severe NAV and market price underperformance over the last few years though the fund has continued to maintain a high NAV yield and offer an extremely generous market price yield, currently 10.4% paid monthly, even in the face of this underperformance. Some might argue that this is still too generous as the fund’s NAV yield of 9.8% will not be easy to achieve for an option-income CEF that targets a fairly low 20% – 50% of its portfolio to write options against. In other words, IID will need a lot more portfolio appreciation going forward if it wants to continue to pay out that high of an NAV yield. Because the alternative is continued NAV erosion and a diminishing asset base, which makes it that much more difficult to sustain the current distribution. I personally would feel even better about IID’s turnaround prospects if Voya cut the distribution to a more attainable 7% – 8% NAV yield because if the QE – Europe effect doesn’t play out, then Voya will probably have to take that step. IID , like ETG , is another fund that can vary widely in its valuation, going from a market price premium to a market price discount in a matter of weeks as seen in this three-y ear Premium/Discount graph. (click to enlarge) As you can see, IID’s current -5.9% discount is at the bottom of its range for a fund that typically can trade at a market price premium. Though IID is certainly not the most undervalued global equity CEF even at the bottom of its discount range, one reason why it trades at such a high relative valuation is because of its appreciation potential. Because if the international markets like Europe start to play catch up with the US markets, then IID is one of the best high risk/high reward equity CEFs to take advantage of that. Conclusion All of these fund’s portfolios can be seen at their fund sponsor’s websites and this analysis does not take into account a fund’s actual stock holdings though there tends to be a lot of overlap in the large-cap international stocks these funds own. In addition, most of these global equity CEFs use hedging strategies to reduce currency risk and the effectiveness of these strategies is also not taken into consideration. But if you believe that QE – Europe has the potential to do for large-cap European stocks what QE – USA did for our markets, then these global equity CEFs, offering low valuations and high yields, could be an excellent way to play off that effect.

Fire Your Investment Manager: Ideas For An Ultra-Low Volatility Index Part V

Our provisional Ultra-Low Volatility Index has reached an all time high. It handled recent market volatility splendidly. Recent market volatility has served as an excellent out-of-sample test. As before, here are the provisional Ultra-Low Volatility Index strategy’s rules. Buy the PowerShares S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF (NYSEARCA: SPLV ) with 80% of the dollar value of the portfolio. Buy the Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (NYSEARCA: TMF ) with 20% of the dollar value of the portfolio. Rebalance annually to maintain the 80%/20% dollar value split between the positions. Here are the results in a linear scale: (click to enlarge) There is no denying that the performance of the strategy has destroyed the S&P 500 on a risk/return basis. The outperformance continues in the last 12 months: (click to enlarge) The last 6 months: (click to enlarge) The last 3 months: (click to enlarge) And YTD 2015: (click to enlarge) Personally, even though the performance is outstanding, I do not feel comfortable with strategies which do not use multiple markets for hedging, but for investors who only like stock/bond mixes, this strategy index is interesting food for thought. I do not feel comfortable with strategies which rely heavily upon bonds as the hedging mechanism for equity exposure , because these strategies, such as risk parity, have benefited from a multi-decade secular bond bull market. As Bruce Kovner once said, one of his main jobs is to imagine configurations of the world that do not yet exist, but could. I believe that a multi-year, secular bear market in bonds is a high probability potential future event path. Therefore, I believe that hedging using multiple markets is the responsible thing to explore, even though our ideas for an Ultra-Low Volatility index have performed well historically and in the very recent past. Now that you’ve read this, are you Bullish or Bearish on ? Bullish Bearish Sentiment on ( ) Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Why are you ? Submit & View Results Skip to results » Share this article with a colleague

Recent Sell: Target Corporation

There’s a time to buy and a time to sell. My reasons for selling seemed rational. Don’t rely on your emotions to make investment decisions. Having a pre-arranged selling plan can be helpful when a decision to sell needs to be made. As a dividend growth investor I look for and buy stocks that appear to be a good value and have a descent dividend growth. However, it doesn’t mean I will buy and hold any particular stock in perpetuity. There comes a time when a particular stock no longer lives up to my expectations and the decision to sell has to be made. This is what has happened in my case when it came to Target Corp. (NYSE: TGT ). I had owned TGT since October 2013 which was a few months before the big data breach. Originally, I had bought the stock in the mid $60s range. As the stock fell into the mid $50s I purchased some more. I ended up with the stock at a cost basis of $61.67. As you may know, the stock started sliding after the data breach was made public and it bottomed at $55 in early February 2014. The stock meandered between $55 and $62 for much of the rest of the year until November 2014. Then it gapped up and headed north to about $77.50. Since then it has backed off to the $75 range. This is the point at which I decided it was time to exit. In the life of any investor it is just as important to know when to buy as when to sell. Buying and then forgetting about a stock could cause you much pain and suffering in your portfolio. There are numerous examples that could be referenced. Remember Enron, World Com, General Motors (NYSE: GM ), Lehman Brothers, Kmart, and etc. Many who held on to these stocks were wiped out. As the song goes, “You have to know when to hold them and know when to fold them”. I will now try and delineate why I decided to sell. Hopefully, the exercise will help both of us to be better investors. Target has no economic moat. There is no doubt it is a well known brand and has been in business some 50 years. The company now boasts a network of over 1800 stores. However, there is serious competition from the likes of Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT ), Kroger (NYSE: KR ), Costco (NASDAQ: COST ) and online vendors. It really doesn’t have any great advantage over any of its competitors. Target’s price for several reasons is a bit stretched. Morning Star puts the Fair Value price in the mid $60s. On the technical side the price is far away from both the 200 and 50 day simple moving averages. Target’s current P/E ratio is north of 30. And the question in my mind is whether earnings are going to be better near term or get worse. There is still the question of how much the exit from the Canadian market will impact Target’s earning later this year. Also, there is the question of organic growth near term. I don’t see any particular catalyst that will drive growth higher. The dividend yield is now 2.75%. For me this is not acceptable. I need yield greater than 3.5% to achieve my investment goals. The growth in the dividend has been good up to this point. Last year’s dividend was increased by almost 21%. The current payout ratio is about 80%. I don’t believe the dividend growth rate will continue at such a high level. Earnings will be a key to whether dividend growth can be sustained at such high levels. The unrealized gain was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Before I sold, I had roughly 6 years of accumulated dividends sitting in my unrealized gains. As the old say goes, “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”. Basically, the decision came down to this, sell Target before my gains evaporated and use the money to fund a position that will meet my investment goals. It the moment I am looking a Tupperware Brands Corp.(NYSE: TUP ), StoneMor Partners (NYSE: STON ), Royal Dutch Shell (NYSE: RDS.B ), or Alliance Resource Partners (NASDAQ: ARLP ). Of course, it is not for me to say what you should do with Target. Each of us has our own wants, needs, and expectations when it comes to investment decisions. But, what is important for all of us, I believe, is to have a rational reason for buying and selling. Having a plan in place ahead of time will make that decision easier and help all of us to become better investors. If we don’t have a prearranged plan we will end up relying on our emotions or a hot tip from the barber. And, that kind of investing is sure to bring disaster to anyone’s portfolio. Additional disclosure: I’m not recommending anyone buy any stock mentioned in this article. This article is intended for educational purposes only.