Tag Archives: applicationtime

Oil Services Firms: Hardest Hit; Deepest Value?

By John Gabriel One of the hardest-hit groups in the oil patch may also represent the deepest value for intrepid investors with the stomach to withstand continued volatility during the next year or so. According to the aggregated fair value estimates of Morningstar equity analysts, Market Vectors Oil Services ETF (NYSEARCA: OIH ) is currently trading at an 18% discount. While oil services firms represent attractive long-term values, they could still be in for more rough sledding during the next 12 to 18 months as the oil markets have yet to settle into equilibrium. Given the current state of excess supply and slowing demand from key consuming markets like Europe and China, a snapback recovery in oil prices doesn’t seem very likely. Drillers and exploration firms have reacted to the sharp drop in crude-oil prices with aggressive cuts to capital expenditure budgets in 2015. But U.S. production is still poised to increase this year thanks to efficiency gains and many wells continuing to operate because of contractual obligations. The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s latest weekly petroleum status report (which can be found here ) revealed higher-than-expected inventory levels. Unfortunately, it is not as simple as turning the oil spigot on or off. Hence, the potential 12- to 18-month timeline for energy markets to stabilize. Of course, there are still many uncertainties on both sides of the equation. Saudi Arabia is adamant in maintaining its current production levels in the interest of protecting its market share. Production cuts from the region in the future would likely bolster oil prices as excess supply is removed from the market. The demand side hinges largely on the economic growth prospects from key consuming regions. Investors who have a positive outlook on energy prices and the expansion of drilling operations might consider OIH as a tactical satellite holding. This exchange-traded fund tracks firms that provide the rigs and crews needed to drill some of the world’s deepest and most challenging offshore wells. Investors should bear in mind that the drilling and oil-services industry can be cyclical, as rig demand is based on customer expectations around commodity prices. Given its extremely narrow focus, this ETF should be limited to a small complementary position in a diversified portfolio. Unlike large vertically integrated oil companies Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM ) and Chevron (NYSE: CVX ) , the companies held by this fund are highly subject to the capital-spending cycle of the industry, because the bulk of their revenue is generated while companies drill new wells. The investment thesis for taking a stake in OIH is likely motivated by the fact that the incremental barrel of oil being produced is increasingly coming from areas (deep water, oil shale, the Arctic) that demand more services expertise and technology. Such a dynamic supports healthy long-term industry trends and pricing power. However, prospective investors should also keep in mind that oil-services firms do tend to move in a somewhat outsized fashion depending on which way the economic winds are blowing. That said, conviction in a longer-term fundamental thesis should help investors hold on through what is likely to be a bumpy ride. To illustrate how volatile the fund can be, consider that during the trailing five-year period, the Dow Jones U.S. Oil Equipment & Services Index (an industry benchmark) experienced a standard deviation of returns of 28%, compared with the S&P 500’s standard deviation of 13%. During the same period, the standard deviation of returns for the broader energy sector (represented by Energy Select Sector SPDR (NYSEARCA: XLE ) ) and the price of oil itself (represented by United States Oil (NYSEARCA: USO ) , an ETF that tracks rolling front-month crude-oil futures contracts, an admittedly basic but investable proxy) were 20% and 26%, respectively. Finally, in terms of potential diversification benefits, we’d highlight that OIH has been moderately correlated (55%) with the S&P 500 during the past two years. Fundamental View The oil-services business can be unforgiving at times, thanks to the cyclicality of commodity markets. Energy behemoths like Exxon Mobil and Chevron gauge their exploration and production needs based on the price of crude-oil. As crude prices rise, these oil majors expand drilling operations, spurring demand for rigs and related services, and vice versa. Thus, crude prices and related expectations, rather than secular factors, act as the fulcrum for oil-services demand. The widespread adoption of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in North America has proved to be a game changer for global energy markets, and “peak oil” concerns have been consigned to the history books. But inexorable growth in domestic oil production has a downside. Lethargic global demand growth is no longer keeping pace with supply, and OPEC is no longer willing to sacrifice production to maintain higher prices. The takeaway for independent E&P companies in North America is that the recent slump in crude prices may not be fleeting. As a result, capital expenditures could be meaningfully reduced across the sector in 2015. Several exploration and production firms have already cut their budgets, and the rest of the companies in the industry are likely to follow suit. Although only a handful of companies have disclosed their capital expenditure plans so far, U.S. companies expect to spend around 20% less than 2014 on average, with multiple companies planning to slash spending by around 50%. Such cuts could be a significant drag on exploration and production companies, as reduced spending defers cash flows and weighs on valuation. The impact would be exacerbated for the oil equipment and services stocks that make up the fund’s portfolio. Looking back to the 2009 crash as a proxy indicates that a 20% drop in capital expenditures by exploration and production companies would reduce operating income for the equipment and services companies by more than 30%. As a cap-weighted portfolio, OIH is more heavily skewed toward the large firms that dominate the industry, such as Schlumberger (NYSE: SLB ) and Halliburton (NYSE: HAL ) . But OIH’s concentration isn’t necessarily a bad thing. A two-decade-long bust has consolidated services and equipment expertise within very few companies–the same firms that make up the bulk of OIH’s assets. These are the firms that operate with sustainable competitive advantages, or economic moats. The behemoths that sit atop OIH enjoy bargaining power thanks to their huge research and development budgets and technology-acquisition strategies. Producers have little leverage over equipment and services firms that have built low-cost and dominant positions through decades and hundreds of acquisitions. Still, the recent collapse in oil prices will challenge the fund’s constituents in the near to intermediate term. Even if all exploration and production companies announce significant reductions in their capital expenditures, there is not likely to be an immediate production rollover that would help oil prices recover. For instance, the firms that have already announced lower budgets for 2015 are still anticipating 20% production growth on average for the year. Driving production growth is ever-increasing drilling efficiency and existing rig-contract obligations. Portfolio Construction The fund invests no less than 80% of its assets in the constituents of the Market Vectors US Listed Oil Services 25 Index. The index identifies the largest 50 firms in the oil-services sector by full market capitalization and includes the top 25, as measured by free-float market cap and three-month average daily trading volume. Because it weights its holdings by market cap, the fund has a relatively concentrated portfolio. Top holding Schlumberger alone makes up about 20% of assets, and the top 10 holdings represent roughly 71%. Firms domiciled in the U.S. make up the lion’s share of the fund at about 82% of the portfolio, with the remainder of the portfolio composed of European companies. Large-, mid-, and small-cap companies represent 49%, 43%, and 8% of total assets, respectively. The portfolio’s holdings-weighted average market cap is about $16.5 billion. Fees OIH levies a 0.35% annual fee, which is reasonable considering its narrowly focused theme-based approach. Alternatives The closest alternative to OIH is iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services (NYSEARCA: IEZ ) , which charges a 0.45% annual fee. It holds roughly 50 stocks and weights its holdings by market cap. The fund is also top-heavy, as its top 10 names comprise about 64% of assets. We believe the three largest firms within the industry do maintain competitive advantages over the rest of the lot, so we view IEZ’s concentration as a benefit. That said, OIH, which is also very concentrated, is cheaper and far more liquid. In terms of market cap, OIH and IEZ have about 80% of their portfolios in common. Another option is SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Equipment & Services (NYSEARCA: XES ) , which charges an expense ratio of 0.35%. XES is an equal-weight portfolio of about 50 oil-services firms, so each holding makes up around 2% of the portfolio at each quarterly rebalance. That means the industry leaders are shoulder to shoulder with the second- and third-tier players. While equally weighting holdings helps avoid heavy concentration in a few firms, it also means that the industry’s best names hold significantly less sway. The prominence of the space’s smaller marginal players could result in even higher volatility. For broader exposure to the entire energy patch, investors could also consider Energy Select Sector SPDR, Vanguard Energy ETF (NYSEARCA: VDE ) , and Fidelity MSCI Energy (NYSEARCA: FENY ) , which charge 0.15%, 0.12%, and 0.12% per annum, respectively. Along with holding the vertically integrated supermajors, these funds also maintain sizable exposure to oil services and refining, as well as exploration and production companies. Disclosure: Morningstar, Inc. licenses its indexes to institutions for a variety of reasons, including the creation of investment products and the benchmarking of existing products. When licensing indexes for the creation or benchmarking of investment products, Morningstar receives fees that are mainly based on fund assets under management. As of Sept. 30, 2012, AlphaPro Management, BlackRock Asset Management, First Asset, First Trust, Invesco, Merrill Lynch, Northern Trust, Nuveen, and Van Eck license one or more Morningstar indexes for this purpose. These investment products are not sponsored, issued, marketed, or sold by Morningstar. Morningstar does not make any representation regarding the advisability of investing in any investment product based on or benchmarked against a Morningstar index.

GLD – Getting On The Record With The Gold ETF

I altered my outlook for gold on Christmas Day, moving from a short view held from September 5 to a long view at what turned out to be perfect inflection. Since marking highs in January, gold and the GLD have again given way. The catalyst working against gold has been a strengthening relative dollar value, I believe greatly on concerns about the euro and Greece’s disruption to it. I see the Greece issue being resolved favorably near-term, and I believe the relative weakness that will follow for the dollar will again lift gold and the GLD. While some risks exist against my view, I see most of those either balanced or priced into the value of gold and the GLD at current levels. On Christmas Day 2014, I ended my short opinion on gold and gold relative securities with the publication of this report, Gold Outlook for 2015 – Buy & Hold Here . I also suggested the best way to play a reversal in gold was through the Market Vectors Gold Miners (NYSE: GDX ). But I never got on the record with my SPDR Gold Trust (NYSE: GLD ) followers, some of whom may not be aware of my positive turn. At this point, after a pull-back from a high price point of above $125 in January, and currently trading at roughly $115, I see current value marking a near-term bottom in the SPDR Gold Trust , and can suggest purchase of the gold security again. I believe gold prices should stabilize and rise from here, as the value of the dollar gives way against major foreign currencies. Though I see some risk that capital could flow heavily into U.S. equities, and potentially draw from gold investments over the short-term, I see gold and the GLD security good to go long-term. Even as the Fed raises interest rates this year, I still anticipate the dollar will give way and allow gold to go higher long-term, as Fed transparency has greatly priced this fact into the dollar already. 3-Month GLD Chart at Seeking Alpha The chart here shows the early year run up of gold from lows marked at the end of 2014, before giving way again more recently this year. I ended my negative outlook for gold initiated on September 5, 2014, and turned to a positive perspective for the commodity on Christmas Day. I just about perfectly captured the inflection point you see in the chart above in doing so, similar to how I did at the start of 2014 and in September of 2014. But since marking highs in January, gold and the SPDR Gold Trust have backed off a bit. This report marks my first published article on gold and relative securities since my early calls to buy and serves as an important reassurance to metals investors about my long-term view from this level. Today, trading near $115, the SPDR Gold Trust suffers from the recent strength of the dollar gained on the euro and yen. Against the yen, a recession in Japan and extraordinary central bank steps in that nation allowed the dollar some room to grow. Against the euro, the economic deceleration of Europe and the extraordinary actions of the European Central Bank (ECB) did the same. But the question raised about Europe more recently, due to the disruptive elections in Greece and its new government’s push for alterations to its bailout agreement, have given an extra lift to the dollar this year. Fear of a Greece exit from the eurozone has been overblown, in my opinion, and has been the thesis for a slew of investment recommendations I’ve made recently for and against other securities. For instance, I see the PowerShares DB US Dollar Bullish ETF (NYSE: UUP ) dropping to $24 soon. That move would come on relative dollar weakness, which would also lift gold up again. Relative Securities YTD TTM SPDR S&P 500 (NYSE: SPY ) +2.2% +16.3% PowerShares DB US Dollar Bullish +3.2% +16.0% SPDR Gold Trust +1.6% -9.1% iShares Silver Trust (NYSE: SLV ) +3.9% -25.2% Market Vectors Gold Miners +8.4% -22.5% As it pertains to the SPDR Gold Trust and gold prices, I believe that when the Greece question is answered favorably, possibly as early as today (Friday February 20th) and surely by February 28th, the dollar will start to give way to the euro. The dollar has already shown signs of wanting to do so and U.S. interest rates have likewise risen from recent lows. However, the saga has continued and the catalyst for a move is still chained, with pent-up energy waiting for a true and definite resolution. The dollar has had other reasons to give way recently. Japan just reported that it has formally exited recession, though the Bank of Japan remains likely to stick to its extraordinary easing strategy near-term. Europe is seeing signs of economic improvement as well, and many of its markets have already enjoyed a rally, with only Greece and Spain lagging due to political uproar. The recent peace accord in Ukraine offers hope that some geopolitical stability may be in the offing. All these developments support my thesis along with the catalyst I see in a Greece resolution. Risks exist against my thesis as well. The U.S. Federal Reserve remains on a path toward raising interest rates, but I believe much if not all of this probability is priced into the dollar and thus gold prices. The Fed has so well telegraphed its moves, thanks to its efforts toward transparency, that few will be surprised when the Fed finally does start to raise rates. And let me remind the reader that interest rates are at historic lows and abnormally low considering the strength of the U.S. economy. At this point, some argue, it is irresponsible not to raise interest rates and that the Fed flirts with future risk of inflation. Secondarily, terrorism in Europe has become a reality and could drive another flight to quality to the U.S. dollar, and thus is a threat against this thesis. However, one might argue that the same risk is likely intensified now for the United States, which is stepping up its own efforts against the Islamic State. Finally, if a Greece resolution occurs, it should also drive a rally in U.S. equities in my opinion. There is risk that gold could serve as a source of capital to fund it. I would argue that U.S. treasuries and other near cash assets are more likely to serve that purpose, especially given gold’s benefit from a weaker dollar. As a result, I see the risks here priced in and/or balanced. I feel comfortable recommending the SPDR Gold Trust at this value, after showing signs of stabilization here at an important technical support which likewise exists for gold here. The world is not a united utopia today, and humans will continue to reach for gold as a default currency against the risk of imperfectly government backed and risky fiat currencies. Gold has increased in use as a reserve currency, increasingly replacing the dollar in many central bank stores, offering indication of what I suggest. The dollar has become overextended in my opinion, due to the Greek scare and the previous weakness of Europe and Japan. However, those factors are now giving way, and the dollar should as well, allowing gold and the SPDR Gold Trust to gain. I follow gold closely and so investors in the sector may find value in following my column . Disclosure: The author is short UUP. (More…) The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Fund Investors Look For Comfort In Bond Funds

By Tom Roseen Despite U.S. stocks pushing to record highs for the first time in 2015 during the flows week ended February 18, investors continued to pad the coffers of fixed income funds. At the end of the week the minutes of the Federal Reserve’s latest policy meeting indicated officials were not in any hurry to raise interest rates, with many Fed members opining that a premature hike in rates could harm the economy. And, while the stock market showed a muted reaction to the minutes, the benchmark ten-year Treasury yield declined 6 basis points to close the flows week down to 2.07%-but still considerably higher than the lows seen at the beginning of February. During the flows week fund investors injected net new money into three of Lipper’s four broad-based fund macro-groups (including conventional funds and exchange-traded funds [ETFs]). Bond funds (+$5.9 billion) took in the largest haul, followed by equity funds (+$3.7 billion) and municipal bond funds (+$0.1 billion), while money market funds handed back some $14.1 billion-for their largest weekly net redemption since the week ended October 17, 2014. (click to enlarge) Source: Lipper, a Thomson Reuters company For the seventh consecutive week corporate investment-grade debt funds attracted the largest sum of net new money of the fixed income macro-group, taking in a net $3.0 billion for the week, while corporate high-yield funds took in some $1.6 billion-for their fourth week of net inflows in a row. Despite investors’ embracing the thought that the Fed will not be raising interest rates anytime soon, a subset of the corporate investment-grade debt funds group – bank loan funds – witnessed net inflows (+$130 million) for the first week in thirty-two. Share this article with a colleague