Tag Archives: article

The Fundamental Difference: Through A Lens Of Net Buybacks

By Jeremy Schwartz At WisdomTree, we believe that screening and weighting equity markets based on fundamentals such as dividends or earnings can potentially help produce higher total and risk-adjusted returns over a complete market cycle. One of the most important elements of a fundamental index is the annual rebalance process, where the index screens the eligible universe and then weights those securities based on their fundamentals. In essence, the process takes a detailed look at the relationship between the underlying fundamentals and price performance and tilts weight to lower-priced segments of the market. One way to illustrate the benefits of this approach for our earnings-weighted family is to compare the net buyback yield of the WisdomTree Earnings Index to a market cap-weighted peer universe. Below we look at how the net buyback yield changes when you screen and weight U.S. equity markets by firms’ profitability instead of market cap. Earnings Weighting vs. Market Cap Weighting Click to enlarge The WisdomTree Earnings Index consistently had a higher net buyback ratio than did a market cap-weighted universe consisting of the 3,000 largest securities by market cap. The WisdomTree Earnings Index averaged a net buyback yield of 2.2% over the period, compared to just 1.1% for the market cap peer universe. We believe that having an annual profitability screen for inclusion in the WisdomTree Earnings Index helps avoid speculative and unprofitable smaller-capitalization firms that have a tendency to raise capital by periodically issuing new shares. The earnings-weighted approach that tilts weight to more profitable firms can also be a reason the weighted average net buyback yield is higher. The chart below looks at the net buyback yield on a universe of the lowest price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio stocks within the 3,000 largest stocks by market cap and contrasts that with the net buyback yield on the highest P/E ratio stocks. Net Buyback Yield by P/E Ratio Click to enlarge If corporate America responds well to incentives, the higher-priced basket would issue more shares (given that their stocks are high priced and issuing more of them would be an effective way to raise growth capital) and the lower-priced basket would issue fewer shares or actually buy back shares to reduce their shares outstanding and thus power their earnings-per-share growth. What we see in the data is the higher-priced universe buys back fewer share, and instead issues more shares (having more companies with negative net buyback yields). Why Earnings Weight Going back to the WisdomTree Earnings Index in the first chart-weighting by Earnings Stream is essentially tilting weight from a market cap-weighted scheme to over-weight those companies with below average P/E ratios and to under-weight those companies with high P/E ratios. The Earnings Stream can be defined as earnings per share times shares outstanding or market cap x earnings yield (which is equivalent to 1/PE ratio). Tilting weight to the higher-earnings-yield stocks by earnings weighting thus is one effective way to tilt the net buyback yield balance in one’s favor. Companies reducing shares outstanding are essentially locking in earnings-per-share growth by reducing their share count, while companies that are issuing more shares are creating a higher hurdle to overcome to achieve earnings-per-share growth. There is a philosophical debate about the motivations for all the buybacks we are seeing today as well as fears that companies are failing to reinvest for future growth (or that they just see no growth opportunities, hence all the dividends and buybacks). One thing is clear to us from the data: the lower-priced stocks issue fewer shares, and the more expensive stocks issue more shares (and have lower net buyback yields). This can be especially true in the small-cap space, as we will discuss in a future blog post. The consistently greater-than 2% net buyback yields seen on the WisdomTree Earnings Index over the last five years, combined with 2% dividend yields on this basket today, provides critical valuation support and also helps explain why we think the earnings-weighted approach can add value over time. Jeremy Schwartz, Director of Research As WisdomTree’s Director of Research, Jeremy Schwartz offers timely ideas and timeless wisdom on a bi-monthly basis. Prior to joining WisdomTree, Jeremy was Professor Jeremy Siegel’s head research assistant and helped with the research and writing of Stocks for the Long Run and The Future for Investors. He is also the co-author of the Financial Analysts Journal paper “What Happened to the Original Stocks in the S&P 500?” and the Wall Street Journal article “The Great American Bond Bubble.”

The Great Temptation, Greatest Danger

“If we survive danger it steels our courage more than anything else.” – Reinhold Niebuhr I am often bewildered that what passes for analysis is really a focus on recent performance, rather than process. Yet, so little attention is given to the investor return/behavior gap, a well-documented phenomenon that proves that “on, average, investors sacrifice a substantial portion of their returns by incorrectly timing when to enter or exit investments”. In correct timing tends to come from chasing performance, getting in after a major up move has already taken place, and then, of course, exiting when the drawdown is likely near its end. The below chart sums up some of the research on this which, in my opinion, is a “must know” when considering where to put money to work. Click to enlarge The best returns in the future come from those parts of the marketplace that have not done well in the past. Yet despite the overwhelming evidence which supports this, strong recent performance is often the core catalyst to make an investment. In reality, it should be the exact opposite. High past performance and continuous visibility of that performance is a temptation too strong for many to ignore, and that temptation unequivocally results in sub-optimal returns going forward on average. Take that truism on mutual funds, and magnify it by a billion when it comes to Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs). Yes folks – I would argue to you that ETFs are the greatest danger to investors. Why? Because ETFs provide an even greater temptation to chase recent performance, day by day, hour by hour, and minute by minute. Overtrading is the ultimate source of the investor return gap, and the temptation to get “in and out” of the market has never been higher thanks to these investment vehicles. Now, don’t get me wrong here. We ourselves use ETFs to execute across our quantitative strategies in mutual funds and sub-advised separate account strategies we run. However, following a systematic, backtested, and quantitative approach using ETFs as the vehicle of choice for execution is NOT what the vast majority of ETFs “investors” do. The pattern of behavior remains the same. Assets for ETFs grow when the ETF has strong recent performance, and collapse after, with a lag, when losses have already occurred. In our case, we rotate based on leading indicators of volatility (click here to learn more). The majority rotate based on old leaders that have had continuously low volatility. The greatest danger is in using past strong performance to make an investment decision. ETFs like the S&P 500 SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) may be the greatest temptation of all that results in exactly that. *Join us this week for our live webcast on the 2016 Dow Award paper, hosted by the Market Technicians Association. Registration available by clicking here . This writing is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell, a solicitation to buy, or a recommendation regarding any securities transaction, or as an offer to provide advisory or other services by Pension Partners, LLC in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation, purchase or sale would be unlawful under the securities laws of such jurisdiction. The information contained in this writing should not be construed as financial or investment advice on any subject matter. Pension Partners, LLC expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken based on any or all of the information on this writing. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

ETF Deathwatch For May 2016: List Jumps To 450

The quantity of exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) and exchange-traded noted (“ETNs”) continues to zoom higher. There are now 450 products on the list, and the growth trajectory is on a path to surpass 500 by the end of the year. For May, there are 26 new names joining the list and 11 coming off. Only seven of the removals were the result of improved health – the other four died and lost their listings. The current membership consists of 342 ETFs and 108 ETNs. Further segmentation of the ETF population reveals that 41 are actively managed funds, 151 have smart-beta labels, and the remaining 150 are traditional capitalization-weighted ETFs. The surge of currency-hedged ETF introductions of the past two years continues to be problematic for the industry. The brief nine-month surge of the U.S. dollar in late 2014 and early 2015 generated a slew of currency-hedged ETF launches that continues to this day. However, with the dollar’s decline over the past 14 months, these funds have been at a performance disadvantage. As a result, they are failing to attract new assets, losing some of the assets they had, and ending up here on ETF Deathwatch. This month, six of the additions are currency-hedged ETFs. Twenty-six funds went the entire month of April without a trade, and 269 did not trade on the last day of the month. Additionally, six products have yet to record their first trade of 2016. It remains a mystery why some of these products exist and why the exchanges allow them to have a listing. The NYSE did take action against one ETN issued by Deutsche Bank (NYSE: DB ) in April. As outlined in ETF Stats for April , the NYSE suspended trading and delisted DB Commodity Long ETN (former ticker DPU) because its assets fell below $400,000. However, DB left shareholders holding the bag because it has no intention of automatically liquidating the ETNs and returning money to shareholders. Adding insult to injury, the notes do not mature for another 22 years. If owners are not willing to wait that long, then they will have to pursue the monthly round-lot redemption process or a sale in the over-the-counter markets. Keep this in mind before buying one of the 39 other DB-sponsored products that are currently on Deathwatch. The average asset level of products on ETF Deathwatch increased from $6.6 million to $6.8 million, and the quantity of products with less than $2 million fell from 98 to 96. The average age increased from 46.4 to 46.8 months, and the number of products more than five years of age surged from 148 to 177. The driving force behind the huge jump in five-year-old products on the list is that unloved family of iPath “Pure Beta” ETFs have now been on the market that long. Despite the lack of investor interest in these ETNs, Barclays continues to sponsor them, and the NYSE continues to collect a listing fee. Here is the Complete List of 450 ETFs and ETNs on ETF Deathwatch for May 2016 compiled using the objective ETF Deathwatch Criteria . The 26 ETFs and ETNs added to ETF Deathwatch for May: AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap (NASDAQ: SMCP ) CSOP China CSI 300 A-H Dynamic (NYSEARCA: HAHA ) CSOP MSCI China A International Hedged (NYSEARCA: CNHX ) Deutsche X-trackers CSI 300 China A-Shares Hedged Equity (NYSEARCA: ASHX ) ELEMENTS Rogers ICI Energy ETN (NYSEARCA: RJN ) ETRACS 2x Leveraged Long Wells Fargo BDC Series B ETN (NYSEMKT: LBDC ) ETRACS Monthly Pay 2x Leveraged Mortgage REIT ETN Series B (NYSEARCA: MRRL ) ETRACS UBS Bloomberg CMCI Series B ETN (NYSEARCA: UCIB ) Guggenheim MSCI Emerging Market Equal Country Wtd (NYSEARCA: EWEM ) iShares Currency Hedged MSCI South Korea (NYSEARCA: HEWY ) John Hancock Multifactor Healthcare (NYSEARCA: JHMH ) Morgan Stanley Cushing MLP High Income ETN (NYSEARCA: MLPY ) PowerShares Developed EuroPacific Hedged Low Volatility (NYSEARCA: FXEP ) PowerShares Dynamic Networking (NYSEARCA: PXQ ) PowerShares Japan Currency Hedged Low Volatility (NYSEARCA: FXJP ) PowerShares S&P 500 Momentum (NYSEARCA: SPMO ) PowerShares S&P 500 Value (NYSEARCA: SPVU ) PowerShares Zacks Micro Cap (NYSEARCA: PZI ) RBC Yorkville MLP Distribution Growth Leaders Liquid PR ETN (NYSEARCA: YGRO ) Reaves Utilities (NASDAQ: UTES ) SPDR MSCI China A Shares IMI (NYSEARCA: XINA ) The Restaurant ETF (NASDAQ: BITE ) VanEck Vectors Solar Energy (NYSEARCA: KWT ) WisdomTree BofA ML HY Bond Zero Duration (NASDAQ: HYZD ) WisdomTree Europe Local Recovery (BATS: EZR ) WisdomTree Global ex-U.S. Hedged Real Estate (BATS: HDRW ) The 7 ETPs removed from ETF Deathwatch due to improved health: Barclays Return on Disability ETN (NYSEARCA: RODI ) Global X Permanent (NYSEARCA: PERM ) Global X Scientific Beta US (NYSEARCA: SCIU ) IQ 50 Percent Hedged FTSE Japan (NYSEARCA: HFXJ ) iShares Global Inflation-Linked Bond (NYSEARCA: GTIP ) O’Shares FTSE Europe Quality Dividend (NYSEARCA: OEUR ) PureFunds ISE Junior Silver (NYSEARCA: SILJ ) The 4 ETFs removed from ETF Deathwatch due to delisting: Highland HFR Equity Hedge (NYSEARCA: HHDG ) Highland HFR Event-Driven (NYSEARCA: DRVN ) Highland HFR Global (NYSEARCA: HHFR ) DB Commodity Long ETN (NYSEARCA: DPU ) ETF Deathwatch Archives Disclosure: Author has no positions in any of the securities mentioned and no positions in any of the companies or ETF sponsors mentioned. No income, revenue, or other compensation (either directly or indirectly) is received from, or on behalf of, any of the companies or ETF sponsors mentioned.