Tag Archives: yahoo

Be Knowledgeable About Liquidity, Don’t Get Fooled By KNOW

Summary I’m taking a look at KNOW as a candidate for inclusion in my ETF portfolio. The average volume looks high enough that the low correlation would seem reliable. Checking the historical data on volume shows that there were a striking number of days with no trades recorded. Despite the interesting concept and strong returns so far, I’m not fond of a very high expense ratio being combined with an ETF that frequently sees a volume of 0. I’m not assessing any tax impacts. Investors should check their own situation for tax exposure. How to read this article : If you’re new to my ETF articles, just keep reading. If you have read this intro to my ETF articles before, skip down to the line of asterisks. This section introduces my methodology. By describing my method initially, investors can rapidly process each ETF analysis to gather the most relevant information in a matter of minutes. My goal is to provide investors with immediate access to the data that I feel is most useful in making an investment decision. Some of the information I provide is readily available elsewhere, and some requires running significant analysis that, to my knowledge, is not available for free anywhere else on the internet. My conclusions are also not available anywhere else. What I believe investors should know My analysis relies heavily on Modern Portfolio Theory. Therefore, I will be focused on the statistical implications of including a fund in a portfolio. Since the potential combinations within a portfolio are practically infinite, I begin by eliminating ETFs that appear to be weak relative to the other options. It would be ideal to be able to run simulations across literally billions of combinations, but it is completely impractical. To find ETFs that are worth further consideration I start with statistical analysis. Rather than put readers to sleep, I’ll present the data in charts that only take seconds to process. I include an ANOVA table for readers that want the deeper statistical analysis, but readers that are not able to read the ANOVA table will still be able to understand my entire analysis. I believe there are two methods for investing. Either you should know more than the other people performing analysis so you can make better decisions, or use extensive diversification and math to outperform most investors. Under CAPM (Capital Asset Pricing Model), it is assumed every investor would hold the same optimal portfolio and combine it with the risk free asset to reach their preferred spot on the risk and return curve. Do you know anyone that is holding the exact same portfolio you are? I don’t know of anyone else with exactly my exposure, though I do believe there are some investors that are holding nothing but SPY. In general, I believe most investors hold a portfolio that has dramatically more risk than required to reach their expected (under economics, disregarding their personal expectations) level of returns. In my opinion, every rational investor should be seeking the optimal combination of risk and reward. For any given level of expected reward, there is no economically justifiable reason to take on more risk than is required. However, risk and return can be difficult to explain. Defining “Risk” I believe the best ways to define risk come from statistics. I want to know the standard deviation of the returns on a portfolio. Those returns could be measured daily, weekly, monthly, or annually. Due to limited sample sizes because some of the ETFs are relatively new, I usually begin by using the daily standard deviation. If the ETF performs well enough to stay on my list, the next levels of analysis will become more complex. Ultimately, we probably shouldn’t be concerned about volatility in our portfolio value if the value always bounced back the following day. However, I believe that the vast majority of the time the movement today tells us nothing about the movement tomorrow. While returns don’t dictate future returns, volatility over the previous couple years is a good indicator of volatility in the future unless there is a fundamental change in the market. Defining “Returns” I see return as the increase over time in the value known as “dividend adjusted close”. This value is provided by Yahoo. I won’t focus much on historical returns because I think they are largely useless. I care about the volatility of the returns, but not the actual returns. Predicting returns for a future period by looking at the previous period is akin to placing a poker bet based on the cards you held in the previous round. Defining “Risk Adjusted Returns” Based on my definitions of risk and return, my goal is to maximize returns relative to the amount of risk I experienced. It is easiest to explain with an example: Assume the risk free rate is 2%. Assume SPY is the default portfolio. Then the risk level on SPY is equal to one “unit” of risk. If SPY returns 6%, then the return was 4% for one unit of risk. If a portfolio has 50% of the risk level on SPY and returns 4%, then the portfolios generated 2% in returns for half of one unit of risk. Those two portfolios would be equal in providing risk adjusted returns. Most investors are fueled by greed and focused very heavily on generating returns without sufficient respect for the level of risk. I don’t want to compete directly in that game, so I focus on reducing the risk. If I can eliminate a substantial portion of the risk, then my returns on a risk adjusted basis should be substantially better. Belief about yields I believe a portfolio with a stronger yield is superior to one with a weaker yield if the expected total return and risk is the same. I like strong yields on portfolios because it protects investors from human error. One of the greatest risks to an otherwise intelligent investor is being caught up in the mood of the market and selling low or buying high. When an investor has to manually manage their portfolio, they are putting themselves in the dangerous situation of responding to sensationalistic stories. I believe this is especially true for retiring investors that need money to live on. By having a strong yield on the portfolio it is possible for investors to live off the income as needed without selling any security. This makes it much easier to stick to an intelligently designed plan rather than allowing emotions to dictate poor choices. In the recent crash, investors that sold at the bottom suffered dramatic losses and missed out on substantial gains. Investors that were simply taking the yield on their portfolio were just fine. Investors with automatic rebalancing and an intelligent asset allocation plan were in place to make some attractive gains. Personal situation I have a few retirement accounts already, but I decided to open a new solo 401K so I could put more of my earnings into tax advantaged accounts. After some research, I selected Charles Schwab as my brokerage on the recommendation of another analyst. Under the Schwab plan “ETF OneSource” I am able to trade qualifying ETFs with no commissions. I want to rebalance my portfolio frequently, so I have a strong preference for ETFs that qualify for this plan. Schwab is not providing me with any compensation in any manner for my articles. I have absolutely no other relationship with the brokerage firm. Because this is a new retirement account, I will probably begin with a balance between $9,000 and $11,000. I intend to invest very heavily in ETFs. My other accounts are with different brokerages and invested in different funds. Views on expense ratios Some analysts are heavily opposed to focusing on expense ratios. I don’t think investors should make decisions simply on the expense ratio, but the economic research I have covered supports the premise that overall higher expense ratios within a given category do not result in higher returns and may correlate to lower returns. The required level of statistical proof is fairly significant to determine if the higher ratios are actually causing lower returns. I believe the underlying assets, and thus Net Asset Value, should drive the price of the ETF. However, attempting to predict the price movements of every stock within an ETF would be a very difficult and time consuming job. By the time we want to compare several ETFs, one full time analyst would be unable to adequately cover every company. On the other hand, the expense ratio is the only thing I believe investors can truly be certain of prior to buying the ETF. Taxes I am not a CPA or CFP. I will not be assessing tax impacts. Investors needing help with tax considerations should consult a qualified professional that can assist them with their individual situation. The rest of this article By disclosing my views and process at the top of the article, I will be able to rapidly present data, analysis, and my opinion without having to explain the rationale behind how I reached each decision. The rest of the report begins below: ******** (NYSEARCA: KNOW ): Direxion All Cap Insider Sentiment Shares Tracking Index: Sabrient Multi-Cap Insider/Analyst Quant-Weighted Index Allocation of Assets: At least 80% within the index Morningstar® Category: Mid-Cap Blend Time period starts: April 2012 Time period ends: December 2014 Portfolio Std. Deviation Chart: (click to enlarge) (click to enlarge) Correlation: 62.75% Returns over the sample period: (click to enlarge) Liquidity (Average shares/day over last 10): About 10,000 Days with no change in dividend adjusted close: 180 Days with no change in dividend adjusted close for SPY: 5 Yield: 1.13% Distribution Yield Expense Ratio: Gross 1.69% and Net 0.65% Discount or Premium to NAV: 0.06% premium Holdings: (click to enlarge) Further Consideration: Yes Conclusion: KNOW is a very interesting and aptly named ETF. The ETF is investing by tracking movements by insiders. It is an interesting strategy and an ETF that automates the strategy may provide much lower costs than an investor attempting to use the strategy by themselves. While I’m not convinced that the strategy works any better than holding SPY, I find the idea of doing it through an ETF novel so I will keep it on the list. If there is actually a lower correlation because of movements in the positions it could be a useful ETF under modern portfolio theory. However, despite an average trading volume of over 10,000 shares, there were 180 days with no change in the dividend adjusted close. I thought that was strange so I ran a volume test over the period checking for days in which 0 shares were traded. There were 174 days in which that happened. That reinforces the theory that despite decent trading volumes in the average over the last 10 days, the calculated correlation has been dramatically altered by liquidity that is much worse than it would have seemed at first glance. In this case I would advise investors to be very wary of relying on the average volume as a sole indicator of liquidity. The distribution yield may be subject to change as the holdings of the ETF change, so I wouldn’t recommend this for anyone needing a consistent yield out of their portfolio. As any of my frequent readers know, I won’t be a fan of the expense ratio. I recognize that the ETF may have significantly more trading costs to cover because of their strategy, but I don’t like seeing values that are so high. The net expense ratio is substantially below the gross expense ratio because of waivers and reimbursement policies in place through September 1st, 2015. I can deal with poor liquidity in the sense of weak average volume, but the frequency of a recorded volume of 0 combined with the expense ratios make it unlikely that KNOW will survive the next round of cuts, even though I’m putting it through to the second round for now. 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. The analyst holds a diversified portfolio including mutual funds or index funds which may include a small long exposure to the stock.

QGBR Is An Interesting ETF For Foreign Exposure

Summary I’m taking a look at QGBR as a candidate for inclusion in my ETF portfolio. The expense ratio relative to the diversification within the ETF is not very good. The extremely low correlation with other major funds (like SPY) is great, but is probably just the result of poor liquidity distorting trading data. Low volume makes commission free trading on the ETF a requirement to even consider it. I’m not assessing any tax impacts. Investors should check their own situation for tax exposure. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. I’m working on building a new portfolio and I’m going to be analyzing several of the ETFs that I am considering for my personal portfolio. One of the funds that I’m considering is the SPDR® MSCI United Kingdom Quality Mix ETF (NYSEARCA: QGBR ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. What does QGBR do? QGBR attempts to track the total return of the MSCI UK Quality Mix Index. Normally at least 80% of the assets are invested in funds included in this index, but there appears to be some leeway under unusual market conditions. QGBR falls under the category of “Miscellaneous Region”. Does QGBR provide diversification benefits to a portfolio? Each investor may hold a different portfolio, but I use (NYSEARCA: SPY ) as the basis for my analysis. I believe SPY, or another large cap U.S. fund with similar properties, represents the reasonable first step for many investors designing an ETF portfolio. Therefore, I start my diversification analysis by seeing how it works with SPY. I start with an ANOVA table: (click to enlarge) The correlation is only 32%, which is incredible for modern portfolio theory. Extremely low levels of correlation are wonderful for establishing a more stable portfolio. However, this may reflect the poor liquidity distorting the reported closing price. Standard deviation of daily returns (dividend adjusted, measured since June 2014) The standard deviation is fairly acceptable. For QGBR it is .8570%. For SPY, it is 0.7232% for the same period. SPY usually beats other ETFs in this regard, so that is not a major concern. Major risks The ETF suffers from absurdly low volume. The average volume at times is less than 500 shares per day, which is a major liquidity risk. Investors needing liquidity should avoid this risk. Going through the closing values on a day by day basis shows the problem is even worse. It was very common for the closing value to be identical for several days at a time. While it is possible that shares were traded at that price, it is also possible that this represents a day in which no shares traded hands. The resulting value for the daily return, 0.00%, could cause the standard deviation and correlation that are calculated to be substantially less than the real values. Investors need to be aware of this risk when considering the security. I plan to rebalance my ETF portfolio frequently, but the funds will be in a retirement portfolio that I will not have access to for a long time. Investors that need more liquid securities should avoid this market. Mixing it with SPY I also run comparisons on the standard deviation of daily returns for the portfolio assuming that the portfolio is combined with the S&P 500. For research, I assume daily rebalancing because it dramatically simplifies the math. With a 50/50 weighting in a portfolio holding only SPY and QGBR, the standard deviation of daily returns across the entire portfolio is 0.6429%. With 80% in SPY and 20% in QGBR, the standard deviation of the portfolio would have been .6538%. If an investor wanted to use QGBR as a supplement to their portfolio, the standard deviation across the portfolio with 95% in SPY and 5% in QGBR would have been .7019%. Why I use standard deviation of daily returns I don’t believe historical returns have predictive power for future returns, but I do believe historical values for standard deviations of returns relative to other ETFs have some predictive power on future risks and correlations. Yield & Taxes The SEC yield is 3.21%. That appears to be a very favorable yield. For retiring investors the yield may be tempting, but remember that this is not a very liquid security. I’m not a CPA or CFP, so I’m not assessing any tax impacts. Expense Ratio The ETF is posting .30% for an expense ratio. I want diversification, I want stability, and I don’t want to pay for them. The expense ratio on this fund is a tiny bit higher than I want to pay for equity securities, but not high enough to make me eliminate it from consideration. Market to NAV The ETF is at a .91% premium to NAV currently. Premiums or discounts to NAV can change very quickly so investors should check prior to putting in an order. I would only consider using this ETF with limit orders and no commissions on trading. Largest Holdings The diversification within the ETF is pretty bad. There were 7 companies that were each more than 3% of the total holdings. Diversification costs money. I want the expense ratio to be covering the costs of acquiring a more diverse set of securities. (click to enlarge) Conclusion I’m currently screening a large volume of ETFs for my own portfolio. The portfolio I’m building is through Schwab, so I’m able to trade QGBR with no commissions. I have a strong preference for researching ETFs that are free to trade in my account, so most of my research will be on ETFs that fall under the “ETF OneSource” program. I’m interested in QGBR because of the very low correlation, but I’ll need more data before I feel comfortable coming to a conclusion. My general premise at this point is that the stock is so absurdly illiquid that the statistics are substantially misleading it. I think investors should be very wary of buying into any assets with such a painfully low level of liquidity. Before investing, I would probably record the bid-ask spreads at several times throughout the day on several days and compare those values to the NAV at the end of the day. I might consider a small position in the ETF, but even with no liquidity needs I would want to make sure I didn’t get taken for a ride on the entry price. 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. The analyst holds a diversified portfolio including mutual funds or index funds which may include a small long exposure to the stock.