Tag Archives: yahoo

SCHD: Lower Volatility Than SPY, Lower International Correlations And A New Place In My Account

Summary SCHD offers investors less volatility than broad market ETFs. The holdings themselves are not extremely diversified, but the performance over the last several years shows the ETF maintains a lower correlation with other assets. I see some benefits to including a small position in SCHD while keeping the core in broad market ETFs. Lately I’ve been considering making some modifications to my portfolio strategy. As the market fell in August I had to recognize that I’m light on bonds. Of course, when the equity markets are falling and the bond markets are rallying it is precisely the worst possible time to start buying up the bond ETFs. Rather than focus on adding the bond ETFs right away, I’m working on revising my strategy. I’m looking for a portfolio that is easier to rebalance and shows less volatility with the market. One of the ETFs that I have been admiring for a long time is the Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHD ). After the market started selling off hard in August, I decided it was time to look for a position in SCHD and put in a limit order to start buying SCHD. As I transfer more funds into the accounts, I expect to have SCHD regularly listed as a top contender for getting more buy orders and a higher allocation. Largest Holdings The internal diversification within the portfolio is much weaker than using whole market ETFs or broad market ETFs. However, the portfolio also has a lower level of volatility despite that challenge. The top holdings are shown below: (click to enlarge) The portfolio pays off a decent dividend yield, currently that yield is nearing 3% which seems fairly attractive as long term bonds are rallying. If we head into another recession, I want to be buying high quality stocks at lower prices (and higher yields) when the recession starts, when we are in the middle, and when it ends. One of the reasons I waited this long to get in on SCHD is that I was hoping for better prices and those seem to be coming through. My limit-buy orders are not very far out of the money and may have hit by the time the article is published. Expense Ratio The expense ratio on SCHD is .07%. That is low enough that I am happy to work with SCHD in my portfolio. Building the Portfolio I put together a hypothetical portfolio using only ETF’s that fall under the “free to trade” category for Charles Schwab accounts. My bias towards these ETFs is simple, I have my solo 401k there and recently moved my IRA accounts there as well. When I’m building a list of ETFs to consider I want to focus on things I can trade freely so that I can keep making small transactions to buy more when the market falls. Within the hypothetical portfolio there are no expense ratios higher than .18%. Just like trading costs, I want to be frugal with expense ratios. The portfolio is fairly aggressive. Only 30% of the total is allocated to bonds and I would consider that the weakest area in the portfolio. I’d like to see more bond options (with very low expense ratios) show up on the “One Source” list for free trading. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio The Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHB ) is a broad market index. The Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHX ) is focused on blended large cap exposure. The Schwab International Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHF ) is developed international equity. The Schwab Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHE ) is emerging market equity. The Schwab International Small-Cap Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHC ) is developed small capitalization equity. The Schwab U.S. REIT ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHH ) is domestic equity REITs. The Schwab U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHZ ) is a remarkably complete bond fund. The SPDR Barclays Long Term Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: TLO ) is a long term treasury ETF. The PIMCO 25+ Year Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury Index ETF (NYSEARCA: ZROZ ) is an extremely long term treasury ETF. Notice that the 3 international equity ETFs have only been weighted at 5% while the broad market index has been weighted at 25%. I find heavy exposure to international equity to bring more risk than expected returns so I try to keep my international exposure low. I prefer no more than 20% in international equity. Plenty of domestic companies already have enormous international operations so the benefit of international diversification is not as strong as it would be if the markets were isolated from each other. Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. When TLO and ZROZ post negative risk contribution it is because the negative correlation to most of the equity holdings results in the long term treasury ETFs reducing the total portfolio risk. In my opinion, this is the best argument for including them in the portfolio. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio and with the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ). Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. (click to enlarge) One quick thing to take away from this is that mixing SCHB and SCHX does not add any material amount of diversification within the portfolio. Investors could simply pick whether they prefer a broad market ETF or a focus on larger capitalization companies. On the other hand, SCHD does some add some diversification to either SCHB or SCHX. The core of my portfolio is currently whole market ETFs and broad market ETFs (including SCHB). I don’t expect that core to change, but I’m seeing SCHD post a correlation of “only” .95 with SCHB and a lower correlation with SCHC and SCHF which helps it provide some diversification. Despite the ETF being heavily focused on providing dividends, SCHD still posts a very negative correlation with bond ETFs. However, the negative correlation is weaker for SCHD than it is for the other equity ETFs. Since I may be using heavy rebalancing and allocating more to bonds over the next few years, I don’t want to go overboard on moving SCHD into the portfolio. I’ll probably limit my holdings to a range of around 5% to 10%. Conclusion SCHD is a very strong ETF for most investors. After admiring it from afar for quite a while I decided to take the plunge and put in an order to buy some shares if they kept getting cheaper. One of those orders activated earlier in the week. I put in another order to buy more if it drops again. The ETF offers lower correlation with some of the other holdings I’m using for international exposure or considering adding to the portfolio soon. Even though the internal diversification is not as great as broad market funds, the volatility has been lower and I’m more comfortable holding SCHD going into a rough macroeconomic environment. Disclosure: I am/we are long SCHB, SCHD, SCHH. (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. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.

Comparing 6 Of The Top International Equity Options

Summary This group of 6 ETFs offers 3 options from Schwab and 3 options from Vanguard. The ETFs that were selected each have a fairly similar match from the other ETF provider. I’m using modern portfolio theory to assess the impact on portfolio risk. The data favors Schwab at first, but after adding a bond ETF investors can get very similar levels of exposure through either option. My favorite two ETF combinations for international equity are combining either SCHC and SCHF or VSS and VEA. I would base the decision on free trading for frequent rebalancing. As I’ve been working through a comparison of low fee ETFs, it seemed prudent to do a comparison on a batch of ETFs between two of the lost cost leaders in the industry. Vanguard has a very long and proud track record of offering investors excellent diversification with extremely low fees. Schwab decided to compete in that arena and introduced a very respectable group of ETFs that also have very low expense ratios. In this piece I’m running a comparison on the international ETF options for Schwab and Vanguard. In an attempt to keep the comparison reasonable, I’ve selected the Schwab International Small-Cap Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHC ), the Schwab Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHE ), and the Schwab International Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHF ) for Schwab and the Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US Small-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: VSS ), the Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: VWO ), and the Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: VEA ) for Vanguard. SCHC and VSS invest in international small-cap companies. SCHE and VWO invest in emerging markets. SCHF and VEA invest in developed markets. The Core of the Portfolio To form the core I am using heavy allocations to SCHB and VTI. These two funds represent Schwab’s Broad Market ETF and Vanguards Total Market Index ETF. Each broad market ETF is being allocated 35% of the portfolio value and each international ETF is being allocated 5% of the portfolio value. A quick check for volatility can then be performed in the context of the portfolio by looking at which investments are adding the most risk to the portfolio. The similarity of returns can also be assessed by checking if each pair of international ETFs that I believe to be similar are actually showing high similarity in their returns so far this decade. The chart below shows the results for the sample portfolio. (click to enlarge) The highest annualized volatility measures go to VWO, VEA, and SCHE, but the more important factor is the risk contribution since volatility that is not correlated to the domestic stock market is substantially less relevant in determining how volatile the portfolio will be as a whole. When we look at the “Risk Contribution” column or the “Beta” column we can get a quick feel for which international ETFs are adding more risk than others. As it happens, VWO, VEA, and SCHE are again the three highest in each category. When I run these comparisons with portfolios that include more asset classes there is often a disconnect between the annualized volatility of the individual funds and their contribution to the overall risk profile. Quick Interpretation The notable differences are that VEA seems to be offering more volatility than SCHF and VWO seems to be more volatile than SCHE. When it comes to SCHC or VSS, the volatility has been almost precisely the same. The differences in the amount of volatility are not huge and may be within a reasonable margin of error. If investors were to compare historical returns to simply see how the funds have done, it is clear that SCHC outperformed VSS, but in the other two cases the vanguard funds with more volatility also had better returns. When We Add Bonds I ran the simulation again but this time I added in a 20% allocation to a very high duration bond fund, the PIMCO 25+ Year Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury Index ETF (NYSEARCA: ZROZ ). Using ZROZ gives the portfolio a large dose of negative beta and provides a portfolio that when considered in the aggregate is substantially less risky than the portfolio with no bond exposure. The goal is to see how the risk contribution changes when we start pushing the portfolio to be closer to the efficient frontier by reducing volatility. To keep the comparison focused on the international ETFs, I simply dropped SCHB and VTI by 10% each. (click to enlarge) Now that the portfolio contains ZROZ, we see that SCHE is contributing more risk than VWO, though the other relationships remain unchanged. The portfolio as a whole, despite using the same time frame, has reduced the annualized volatility from 16.8% to 11.7%, The difference here is fairly dramatic as the portfolio went from being more volatile than the S&P 500 to being substantially less volatile. In this portfolio with bonds it appears that we have one fund for Vanguard winning in the risk comparison, VWO, one fund for Schwab winning, SCHF, and a tie between SCHC and VSS remains. What Does It All Mean? For investors that have free trading on either the Schwab or Vanguard funds, it looks like the best strategy is to use the group of ETFs that the investor can trade without commissions. Neither group is outperforming the other by enough to warrant paying the commissions. Rebalancing Because the annualized volatility on these international investments is so high, an investor should take care to consider a strategy for rebalancing their portfolio regularly to increase their allocations to whichever investments are out of favor with the market. Within Each Group When I’m looking at a comparison between VSS, VWO, and VEA, I’m seeing VSS as a very desirable option. VSS has an expense ratio of .19% which is slightly higher than I want to see on international investments, but it also has 3369 individual holdings within the portfolio and only 3.2% of the total assets are invested in the top 10 holdings. The internal diversification is exceptional. In my opinion, VSS is a world class option for including in diversified portfolios. Within the Schwab fund I’ve shown a slightly preference for SCHF in picking the ETFs for my own holdings, but I’m also attracted to using some SCHC and I’ve got a buy-limit order placed on SCHC to pick it if it falls far enough. With the market being so volatile right now, my cash is simply covering limit orders on a few of the ETFs that I have identified as desirable. That batch currently includes the Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHD ) and SCHF. I already own some of the first two ETFs, but don’t have any SCHC yet. I have not decided if I like SCHC as much as SCHF, but I do appreciate a little bit of extra diversification that can come from using both. If I had free trading on VSS, I would be tempted to use it also. Ideal Allocations The highest total international equity allocation that I would be comfortable holding is around 20% of the portfolio value. I think my ideal allocation level may be closer to 10% to 15% though. One factor that will influence me is the simplicity of rebalancing. When rebalancing is easier, I’m willing to use slightly higher international allocations because the higher volatility can be dealt with more effectively. Current Influences I’ve been a pretty huge bear on China and was calling for some major corrections in that market. On the other hand, while the domestic market felt a little frothy, I wasn’t expecting the drawdown we have seen in August. Because of my views on the performance of China and the correlation of markets during times of stress, I’m inclined to focus my international allocations on developed markets rather than emerging markets. That causes me to see SCHC, SCHF, VSS, and VEA as the more desirable options. On the other hand, if China has a very solid crash and emerging market funds fall hard, then I’d be comfortable working a small emerging markets position into the portfolio. I’m not convinced that those prices will fall far enough for me to decide that I want to add more emerging markets rather than developed markets. If investors want to use emerging markets rather than developed markets for the international portion of the portfolio, I would suggest using a lower limit than 20%. The emerging markets have more inherent risk and a heavy allocation to the sector simply produces too much risk. To find the optimal exposure level, I think investors can use any two of the international ETFs except for combining SCHE and VWO. Going all emerging markets with no developed markets simply does not make sense for risk adjusted returns on a portfolio. Disclosure: I am/we are long SCHF, SCHB, VTI. (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. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.

An Exceptional Bond Fund For Improving Risk-Adjusted Portfolio Performance

Summary The Vanguard Short-Term Corporate Bond Index ETF is everything I would hope for in a short-term corporate debt exposure. The ETF has low volatility and low correlation with other important investments. The credit quality is respectable without being so high that it eliminates most of the yield. Using this fund as part of a diversified portfolio makes it shine. The Vanguard Short-Term Corporate Bond Index ETF (NASDAQ: VCSH ) is simply a great fund. I wish I could start more articles out with comments that are this positive. This fund is simply great. The yields are severely limited since this is short term debt with respectable credit quality, but the ETF on the whole is just exceptional when it comes to being part of an effective portfolio. Credit The following chart shows the credit quality breakdown. When it comes to a corporate bond fund there are two ways that I like to see the weightings. Either I would want a junk bond fund or I would want one with a credit breakdown similar to this. Personally, favor combining a fund like this with quite a few other bond funds to create a more complex group of bond holdings. Duration The following chart breaks down the duration of the funds. Holdings are almost all less than 5 years and usually more than 1 year. Again, this is a solid choice. If an investor wants to load up on even shorter term bonds, there are funds designed specifically for that. It is difficult to find a useful yield level on those ultra-short bonds so this is a reasonable portfolio composition. Sector The following chart breaks down the sector allocation: This sector allocation may seem absurd if an investor looks at numbers without reading the names. The names of the sectors indicate that rather than breaking down the market into all the corporate sectors, Vanguard is containing several other bond sectors that are not relevant to corporate debt. It wouldn’t make sense for this fund to have an allocation to foreign debt issues or MBS. My hypothetical portfolio, shown lower in the article, picks up those allocations through other ETFs. A Hypothetical Portfolio I put together a very simple sample portfolio using Invest Spy. Due to some of the ETFs being newer the sample period is limited to a little over two years. (click to enlarge) This hypothetical portfolio is weighted to 60% equity and 40% bonds. To break that down the weights from the equity section are 30% total market index (NYSEARCA: VTI ), 10% equity REITs (NYSEARCA: VNQ ), 5% Utilities, 5% Consumer Staples (NYSEARCA: VDC ), 10% International Equity. The bond section is holding 10% in junk bonds (NYSEARCA: JNK ), 5% in extended duration treasuries (NYSEARCA: EDV ), 5% in emerging market government bonds (NASDAQ: VWOB ), 5% short term corporate debt , 5% in short term government debt (NASDAQ: VGSH ), 5% in mortgage backed securities (NASDAQ: VMBS ), and 5% in intermediate-term corporate bonds (NYSEARCA: BIV ). This portfolio won’t be perfect for hitting the efficient frontier, but it should beat the vast majority of real portfolios investors are using on a risk adjusted basis. If long term rates were higher I would have used a higher weighting for long duration bonds due to their exceptionally correlation to major equity classes. My disclosure already states it, but I’ll reiterate that I am long VTI and VNQ. Annualized Volatility When measuring risk adjusted returns for a portfolio the most efficient method is usually to use the Sharpe ratio. For that ratio we are taking the total return annualized return and subtracting the risk free rate. Then we divide the resulting number by the annualized volatility. The problem is that this metric is only really known after the fact. Predicting the level of returns in advance is problematic but correlations and relative volatility are more reliable over time than returns. Within the chart investors can see the annualized volatility of each holding as well as the resulting annualized volatility for the portfolio. While some holdings have higher annualized volatility scores, such as EDV, the ETF makes up for that by having negative correlation to a few of the equity holdings. As a result, the ETF only contributes .6% of the total risk in the portfolio. VCSH has an annualized volatility of 1.8%, which is not bad at all. Once we adjust for correlation the risk contribution is extremely low. That means VCSH fits extremely well in this kind of hypothetical portfolio. The expected returns are not going to be very strong since this is short term corporate debt, but for an investor trying to achieve superior risk adjusted returns relative to the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF ( SPY), this is a great holding. It will usually underperform SPY, but it will result in material reduction in total portfolio risk. Correlation I want to dive a little deeper into the correlation statistics. The table below provides the correlation across each of those ETFs which should make it very quick to see which ones are work very well together. When a correlation is shown in the tan color it indicates a negative correlation which is very attractive for reaching the efficient frontier. You’ll notice that quite a few of the bond funds have negative correlations to VTI and the S&P 500. Since VTI and SPY have a correlation ranging between 99% and 99.9% depending on the measurement period, it should not be surprising that those two funds have very similar correlations to other holdings. Here is the correlation table: (click to enlarge) Conclusion When the ETF is placed within the context of a portfolio that is heavy on U.S. equities it looks like an intelligent way to reduce the overall risk of the portfolio. When it comes to generating alpha, I’ve often told investors that the secret to reaching alpha is to focus on reducing risk. Most other investors are already focused on trying to maximize their returns and many will take on more risk than they can handle. Focusing on risk reduction reduces the incentives for an investor to sell off after a big loss and makes it easier to generate alpha relative to the S&P 500 because it is easier to reduce risk through superior diversification. Disclosure: I am/we are long VTI, VNQ. (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. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.