Tag Archives: applicationtime

16 Implications Of ‘The Phases Of An Investment Idea’

Registered investment advisor, bonds, dividend investing, ETF investing “}); $$(‘#article_top_info .info_content div’)[0].insert({bottom: $(‘mover’)}); } $(‘article_top_info’).addClassName(test_version); } SeekingAlpha.Initializer.onDOMLoad(function(){ setEvents();}); My last post has many implications. I want to make them clear in this post. When you analyze a manager, look at the repeatability of his processes. It’s possible that you could get “the Big Short” right once and never have another good investment idea in your life. Same for investors who are the clever ones who picked the most recent top or bottom… they are probably one-trick ponies. When a manager does well and begins to pick up a lot of new client assets, watch for the period where the growth slows to almost zero. It is quite possible that some of the great performance during the high-growth period stemmed from asset prices rising due to the purchases of the manager himself. It might be a good time to exit, or for shorts to consider the assets with the highest percentage of market cap owned as targets for shorting. Often when countries open up to foreign investment, valuations are relatively low. The initial flood of money often pushes up valuations, leads to momentum buyers, and a still greater flow of money. Eventually, an adjustment comes and shakes out the undisciplined investors. But when you look at the return series to analyze potential future investment, ignore the early years – they aren’t representative of the future. Before an academic paper showing a way to invest that would been clever to use in the past gets published, the excess returns are typically described as coming from valuation, momentum, manager skill, etc. After the paper is published, money starts getting applied to the idea, and the strategy will do well initially. Again, too much money can get applied to a limited factor (or other) anomaly, because no one knows how far it can get pushed before the market rebels. Be careful when you apply the research – if you are late, you could get to hold the bag of overvalued companies. Aside for that, don’t assume that performance from the academic paper’s era or the 2-3 years after that will persist. Those are almost always the best years for a factor (or other) anomaly strategy. During a credit boom, almost every new type of fixed-income security, dodgy or not, will look like genius by the early purchasers. During a credit bust, it is rare for a new security type to fare well. Anytime you take a large position in an obscure security, it must jump through extra hoops to assure a margin of safety. Don’t assume that merely because you are off the beaten path that you are a clever contrarian, smarter than most. Always think about the carrying capacity of a strategy when you look at an academic paper. It might be clever, but it might not be able to handle a lot of money. Examples would include trying to do exactly what Ben Graham did in the early days today, and things like Piotroski’s methods, because typically, only a few small and obscure stocks survive the screen. Also look at how an academic paper models trading and liquidity, if they give it any real thought at all. Many papers embed the idea that liquidity is free, and that large trades can happen where prices closed previously. Hedge funds and other manager databases should reflect that some managers have closed their funds, and put them in a separate category, because new money can’t be applied to those funds. That is to say, there should be “new money allowed” indexes. Max Heine, who started the Mutual Series funds (now part of Franklin), was a genius when he thought of the strategy 20% distressed investing, 20% arbitrage/event-driven investing and 60% value investing. It produced great returns in 9 years out of 10. But once distressed investing and event-driven because heavily done, the idea lost its punch. Michael Price was clever enough to sell the firm to Franklin before that was realized, and thus, capitalizing the past track record that would not do as well in the future. The same applies to a lot of clever managers. They have a very good sense of when their edge is getting dulled by too much competition and where the future will not be as good as the past. If they have the opportunity to sell, they will disproportionately do so then. Corporate management teams are like rock bands. Most of them never have a hit song. (For managements, a period where a strategy improves profitability far more than most would have expected.) The next-most are one-hit wonders. Few have multiple hits, and rare are those that create a culture of hits. Applying this to management teams – the problem is if they get multiple bright ideas or a culture of success, it is often too late to invest, because the valuation multiple adjusts to reflect it. Thus, advantages accrue to those who can spot clever managements before the rest of the market. More often this happens in dull industries, because no one would think to look there. It probably doesn’t make sense to run from hot investment idea to hot investment idea as a result of all of this. You will end up getting there once the period of genius is over and valuations have adjusted. It might be better to buy the burned-out stuff and see if a positive surprise might come. (Watch margin of safety…) Macroeconomics and the effect that it has on investment returns is overanalyzed, though many get the effects wrong anyway. Also, when central bankers and politicians take cues from the prices of risky assets, the feedback loop confuses matters considerably. if you must pay attention to macro in investing, always ask, “Is it priced in or not? How much of it is priced in?” Most asset allocation work that relies on past returns is easy to do and bogus. Good asset allocation is forward-looking and ignores past returns. Finally, remember that some ideas seem right by accident – they aren’t actually right. Many academic papers don’t get published. Many different methods of investing get tried. Many managements try new business ideas. Those that succeed get air time, whether it was due to intelligence or luck. Use your business sense to analyze which it might be, or if it is a combination. There’s more that could be said here. Just be cautious with new investment strategies, whatever form they may take. Make sure that you maintain a margin of safety; you will likely need it. Disclosure: None. Share this article with a colleague

iShares MSCI Philippines ETF

Summary The iShares MSCI Philippines ETF provides convenient exposure to the growth that the Philippines is projected to experience in 2015 and 2016. The particular strengths of this ETF include the real estate, telecommunications, and consumer products industries. Investors who are interested in specific industries or companies can invest in some of this fund’s holdings, as many of them are listed on US exchanges. In a previous article , I mentioned opportunities in the real estate industry in the Philippines. The industry is being driven substantially by business process outsourcing, increased consumer spending, and increased economic growth. Holistically, the Philippines is an attractive destination for investment, and opportunities can be found outside of the real estate industry. An investigation of the country’s economy produces favorable results and makes investment in multiple industries in this country attractive. Real GDP Growth Real GDP growth has averaged at 5.08% from 2001 to 2015, and was 5.2% during the 1st quarter of 2015. Growth for the future looks very favorable, as the IMF has raised its growth projections for 2015 to 6.6% and 6.4% for 2016; GDP growth will be attributed to lower oil prices and increased government spending. (click to enlarge) (Source: Trading Economics ) With consistent growth in GDP and the projected increase for 2015 and 2016, investment in the Philippines provides substantial opportunity for investors. Investors should also consider the following when considering this country: The Philippines peso is becoming more stable , as the exchange rate has averaged between 44 and 45 in 2015; the US dollar increased from 44.42 in May to 44.68 in June. The country had a trade surplus of 264,142 thousand USD surplus in March 2015 and a trade deficit of 300,923.48 thousand USD in April 2015. It had a significantly larger trade deficit during the beginning of 2015. Inflation has been significantly decreasing , and averaged 1.6% in May of 2015. Inflation has been improving in the past year, as it was at 4.9% in August of 2014. Philippines ETF The most convenient for investors to invest in the growth of the Philippines is to invest in the iShares MSCI Philippines ETF (NYSEARCA: EPHE ). The fund is currently trading relatively close to its 52-week low at $39.06. Increased growth in real GDP, as well as substantial growth in the particular industries the fund invests into will provide substantial returns for investors. Although the consumer products and real estate industry demonstrate the most potential, investing in this ETF provides favorable opportunities for investors. The fund invests in the following industries: Real Estate: 25.35% Financial Services: 15.33% Consumer Cyclical: 12.03% Utilities: 14.34% Communication Services: 12.94% Industrials: 11.4% Fund Holdings Company Industry P/E Ratio 2014 Net Income Growth Ayala Land ( OTC:AYAAY ) Real Estate 34.87 26.2% Philippine Long Distance (NYSE: PHI ) Telecommunications 17.9 -3.8% BDO Unibank Inc. ( OTCPK:BDOUY ) Banking 16.8 0.9% Ayala Corporation ( OTCPK:AYALY ) Conglomerate 27.6 45.6% JG Summit Holdings CL B ( OTCPK:JGSMY ) Consumer Products 26 74.9% Universal Robina ( OTCPK:UVRBY ) Consumer Products 35.91 15.1% SM Prime Holdings Inc. ( OTC:SPHXY ) Real Estate 21.03 13.2% SM Investments Corp. ( OTCPK:SMIVY ) Consumer Products/Real Estate 24.56 3.5% Aboitiz Equity Ventures ( OTCPK:ABTZY ) Utilities 18.24 -12.6% Jollibee Foods Corp. ( OTCPK:JBFCY ) Consumer Products 38.37 14.8% Consumer Products Consumer spending has consistently been on the rise in the Philippines, which has greatly contributed to the growth of the economy. Business process outsourcing has meant substantial increases in consumer spending, and this industry is certainly on track for further growth; as of the first half of 2014, household consumption expenditure accounted for 73% of the country’s GDP . (click to enlarge) Although the industry certainly displays potential, and growth is clearly ahead, the valuation and financial performance of the specific companies should be considered. The valuation and growth demonstrated by the holdings of this ETF reflects that although there is potential, the current valuation is not extremely attractive. Growth of the individual companies has been considerable, while the true strength lies in the consumer products industry itself. The average P/E ratio for the holdings is 31.2. The average growth in net income in 2014 was 27.1%. For those wishing to gain exposure to this industry, it is significant to note that all four companies are listed on US exchanges; this provides investors with the opportunity to specifically invest in this industry, and even to cherry-pick an individual company that demonstrates the most potential. Of the four companies, JG Summit Holdings has the lowest P/E ratio of 26, and experienced the most growth, with an increase in net income of 74.9% in 2014. Real Estate The real estate industry demonstrates substantial potential and has been driven by business process outsourcing, increased economic growth, and increased consumer spending. The main forces driving this industry are the higher demand for office buildings, creation of townships outside of Manila, and growing numbers of retail centers. The two holdings for this ETF have an average P/E ratio of 28 and saw an increase in net income of 19.7% in 2014. While these holdings can be considered a strength of the ETF, investors will do well to consider other alternatives in this industry. Megaworld Corp. ( OTCPK:MGAWY ) is an attractive alternative, as it has diverse plans for expansion in this industry and a much more attractive valuation, with a current P/E ratio of 7.32. Utilities The utilities industry poses substantial risk and is not extremely attractive for investment. Although it only represents a small percentage of the fund’s holdings, this should be considered when determining whether or not to invest in the fund. Businesses in the Philippines face the risks of high costs and low reliability of utilities. Aboitiz Equity Ventures, the fund’s holding in this industry, was the worst-performing company, with a 12.6% decrease in net income in 2014. However, the threat of the adverse performance of this industry can be considered somewhat negligent, as only 14.34% of the fund’s assets are invested in this industry. Telecommunications The telecommunications industry is an extremely important component of its economy and contributes approximately 10% of the country’s GDP . Growth of the industry began to slow in 2012 and 2013, although it was still managing to grow slightly less than 10% annually. The telecommunications industry has substantial room for growth, as BMI has projected that mobile growth will average at 3.8% between 2015 and 2018. Although growth is diminishing, there is still potential for this industry to reach an unreached population. For example, as of 2014 there were only 7 million broadband subscribers, which only represents 7% of the population. Philippine Long Distance, one of the ETF holdings, is an option for investors wishing to gain exposure to this industry. Its valuation is relatively attractive, with a current P/E ratio of 17.85 , and it is relatively volatile, with a Beta of 1.28. Areas of concern include the fact that net revenue and net income have been declining since 2012, and that the company most recently saw a 3.8% decrease in net income in 2014. Conclusion The iShares MSCI Philippines ETF provides convenient exposure to the Philippines for investors who wish to profit off of the projected growth in 2015 and 2016. Favorable aspects of this ETF include exposure to the real estate, telecommunications, and consumer products industries. Moreover, the current valuation is somewhat attractive, and 8 of 10 of its top holdings experienced growth in net income in 2014. The main disadvantages of this ETF are the high valuation of the consumer products industry, its exposure to the utilities industry, and holdings in the real estate industry that are not optimal. Further opportunity may be found by investing in individual companies; these include Megaworld, Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co., and JG Summit Holdings. Although ETF exposure may not be the best course of action, the potential for economic growth in a variety of industries is substantial, and it could be a profitable endeavor. 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.

BGH: High Yield, Short Duration – Is This The Place To Be Right Now?

2014 was unkind to Babson Capital Global Short Duration High Yield Fund. It appears to be getting back on its feet. While high yield is risky overall, staying short is a safer way to play the space. Babson Capital Global Short Duration High Yield Fund’s (NYSE: BGH ) net asset value, or NAV, fell nearly 13% last year. However, its started to stabilize this year. Which shows the risks of high yield, but doesn’t tarnish the potential benefit of staying short term. If you are looking for a high yield fund, but are worried about low interest rates, you might consider taking a look here. What’s in a high yield? I recently took a look at a couple of high yield closed-end funds , or CEFs, with broad investment mandates. Essentially, the two finds I compared, BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund (NYSE: HYT ) and Dreyfus High Yield Strategies Fund (NYSE: DHF ), both have notable leeway when it comes to their portfolio selections. That’s not the case at BGH . Sure, it can invest around the world, but its average duration has to come in at three years or less. Why is that relevant? Because shorter duration bonds tend to be less impacted by changes in interest rates. So with interest rates near historic lows, if you are concerned about the impact of a rising yield environment, you’d want to stay toward the shorter end of the duration spectrum. HYT’s “model” duration was around five years at the end of the first quarter. DHF’s average duration was a touch over three years. BGH’s was a little under two years. Looking at this from a big picture perspective , this means that if interest rates were to increase by one percentage point, BGH’s value would be expected to decline by around 2%. DHF would fall by around 3% and HYD 5%. If rates fell, the opposite would happen, with BGH gaining less than the others. So, if you are concerned about interest rates going up but are still looking for a high yield fund, a short-term option like BGH might be worth a quick review. Short history That said, I looked at BGH because a reader requested it. The fund’s IPO was in late 2012, so it’s fairly young and doesn’t have much of a track record to go off of (less than three years). That doesn’t tarnish the value of its short duration focus, but it does mean the fund hasn’t been tested by time. So that’s a grain of salt you’ll need to take if you decide to invest here. However, it’s worth noting that last year was a tough one on the fund largely because of its exposure to oil companies ( recently around 20% of assets). With oil prices declining some 50% in the back half of 2014, it’s not surprising that BGH saw its NAV decline nearly 13% last year. That drop spoiled what was looking like a solid history. The fund IPOed with an NAV of roughly $23.80 per share. That had increased to nearly $25.25 by the start of 2014 only to drop to $22 by the end of the year. It remains around that level today, after having dropped even further at the start of 2015. There’s two takeaways here. First, this is a high yield fund, so even a short duration can’t offset the risk of investing in the debt of financially weak companies. (Note that HYD saw a similar NAV drop.) Two, the downdraft, at this point, appears to be over. So watch the NAV to see if management can get it to start moving higher again. This is, literally, the first time BGH has dealt with notable adversity. What else is worth knowing? Like many competing high yield CEFs, BGH makes use of leverage to enhance returns. Right now leverage stands at nearly 25% of assets. That helps boost yield, since BGH’s borrowing costs are lower than the interest it receives on its investments. And leverage can enhance returns if bond prices go up-but can also augment losses if bond prices decline. So leverage cuts both ways. Keep this in mind as it increases volatility even for a fund with a short duration. Leverage, however, also increases costs since the fund has to pay interest expenses. In fact, BGH is not a cheap fund to own, with an expense ratio of more than 2%. That may be fine with yield-hungry investors, however, since the fund’s yield is around 10%. But if you are looking for a cheap fund to own, this isn’t it. Without a longer history, it’s too soon to tell if 2014’s poor showing was an aberration. But certainly such a high yield gets increasingly hard to justify when the NAV is falling. However, return of capital doesn’t appear to be an issue yet since the fund avoided that type of distribution in 2013 and 2014. So, so far, BGH should probably get the benefit of the doubt here. Just keep in mind that a fund with a 10% yield is likely to be giving you all of your return in the form of distributions. That, in turn, makes it harder to grow NAV. While bonds are all about the income, a long-term trend of a declining NAV will most likely lead to distribution cuts at some point. So it is really important to watch BGH to see what happens on the NAV side of things from here. That remains true even though the fund is trading hands at a 10% discount to NAV. Indeed, that’s only a bargain if net asset value can recover from downdrafts like the one experienced in 2014. Too early for most At this point, I’d say BGH is a little too young for my tastes. I see value in its short duration peg, which might interest investors who want high yield exposure but want to limit interest rate risk. However, without a lot of history to go on (and one good year followed by one bad year in its short life), it’s hard to get a read on the value this fund would have in a portfolio. 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.