Tag Archives: australia

Resilient Consumer? Not During The Manufacturing Retreat And Corporate Revenue Recession

Is the 70% consumer so resilient that he/she can overcome a global slowdown, a stagnant domestic manufacturing segment and a domestic revenue recession. Six of the regional Fed surveys – New York (Empire), Philadelphia, Kansas City, Dallas, Chicago and Philly – show economic contraction in manufacturing. The expected revenue for the S&P 500 for the third quarter is headed for a third straight quarterly decline at 3.3%; the 4th quarter should show a 1.4% decline to make it four in a row. Concerned investors started punishing foreign stocks and emerging market equities in May. The primary reason? Many feared the adverse effects of declining economic growth around the globe as well as the related declines in world trade. By June, risk-averse investors began selling U.S. high yield bonds as well as U.S. small cap assets. A significant shift away from lower quality debt issuers troubled yield seekers, particularly in the energy arena. Meanwhile, the overvaluation of smaller companies in the iShares Russell 2000 ETF (NYSEARCA: IWM ) prompted tactical asset allocators to lower their risk exposure. All four of the canaries (i.e., commodities, high yield bonds, small cap U.S. stocks, foreign equities) in the investment mines had stopped singing by the time the financial markets reached July and early August. I discussed the risk-off phenomenon in August 13th’s ” The Four Canaries Have Stopped Serenading.” What had largely gone unnoticed by market watchers, however? The declines were accelerating. And in some cases, such as commodities in the PowerShares DB Commodity Index Tracking ETF (NYSEARCA: DBC ), investors were witnessing an across-the-board collapse. The cut vocal chords for the canaries notwithstanding, there have been scores of warning signs for the present downtrend in popular U.S benchmarks like the S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrials. Key credit spreads were widening, such as those between intermediate-term treasury bonds and riskier corporate bonds in funds like the iShares Baa-Ba Rated Corporate Bond ETF (BATS: QLTB ) or the SPDR Barclays Capital High Yield Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: JNK ). Stock market internals were weakening considerably. In fact, the percentage of S&P 500 stocks in a technical uptrend had fallen below 50% and the NYSE Advance-Decline Line (A/D) had dropped below a 200-day moving average for the first time since the euro-zone’s July 2011 crisis. (See Remember July 2011? The Stock Market’s Advance-Decline Line (A/D) Remembers. ) Equally compelling, any reasonable consideration of fundamental valuation pointed to an eventual reversion to the mean; that is, when earnings or sales at corporations are rising, one might be willing to pay an extraordinary premium for growth. On the other hand, when revenue is drying up and profits per share fall flat – or when a global economy is stagnating or trending toward contraction – investors should anticipate prices to fall back toward historical norms. Indeed, this is why 10-year projections for total returns on benchmarks like the S&P 500 have been noticeably grim. Anticipating the August-September volatility – initial freefall, “dead feline bounce” and present retest of the correction lows – has been the easy part. When fundamental valuations are hitting extremes, technicals are deteriorating, sales are contracting and economic hardships are mounting, sensible risk managers reduce some of their vulnerability to loss. It is the reason for my compilation of warning indicators (prior to the downturn) in Market Top? 15 Warning Signs . Anticipating what the Federal Reserve will do next is a different story entirely. The remarkably low cost of capital as provided by central banks worldwide is what caused the investing community to dismiss ridiculous valuations and dismal market internals up until the recent correction. Now Fed chairwoman Yellen has explicitly acknowledged that the U.S. is not an island unto itself. The fact that half of the developed world in Europe, Asia, Canada, Australia are staring down recessions – the reality that many important emerging market nations are already there – has not slipped by members of the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC). Unfortunately, the Fed’s problem with respect to raising or not raising borrowing costs does not end with economic weakness abroad. With 0.3% year-over-year inflation in July, the Fed’s 2% inflation target has been pushed off until 2018. With 0.2% year over year wage growth (or lack thereof), the Fed’s hope that consumer spending can save the day looks like wishful thinking. For that matter, as I demonstrated in 13 Economic Charts That Wall Street Doesn’t Want You To See , consumer spending has dropped on a year-over-year basis for 4 consecutive months as well as six of the last eight. Perhaps ironically, I continue to receive messages and notes from those who insist that the U.S. consumer is in fine shape. Even if he/she is stumbling around at the moment, he/she is consistently resilient, they’ve argued. I would counter that three-and-a-half decades of U.S. consumer resilience is directly related to lower and lower borrowing costs. Without the almighty 10-year yield moving lower and lower, families that have been hampered by declining median household income depend entirely on lower interest rates for their future well-being. Even with lower rates, perma-bulls and economic apologists will tell you that housing is in great shape. With homeownership rates now back to 1967? They’ll tell you that autos are in great shape. On the back of subprime auto loans with auto assemblies at a four-and-a-half year low? Wealthy people and foreign buyers have bought second properties, which have priced out first-time homebuyers. More renters than ever have seen their discretionary income slide alongside rocketing rents. And the only thing we’re going to hang our U.S. hat on is unqualified borrowers who cannot get into a house, but can get into a Jetta? (Yes, I intended the Volkswagen reference.) I am little stunned when I see people ignoring year-over-year declines in retail sales as well as the lowest consumer confidence readings in a year to proclaim that “everything is awesome.” If everything were great, the U.S. economy would not have required $3.75 trillion in QE or $7.5 trillion in deficit spending since the end of the recession. The Fed would not have needed 6-months to prepare investors for tapering of QE3 and another 10 months to end it; they would not have needed yet another year to get to the point where they’re still not comfortable with a token quarter point hike. The U.S. consumer requires ultra-low rates to get by, and that’s a sad reality with multi-faceted consequences. In my mind, it gets worse. Those who commonly fall back on the notion that 70% of the economy is driven by consumer activity seem to ignore the other 30% entirely. Manufacturing is falling apart. Year-over-year durable goods new orders? Down for seven consecutive months. Worse yet, six of the regional Fed surveys – New York (Empire), Philadelphia, Kansas City, Dallas, Chicago and Philly – show economic contraction in manufacturing. Does the 30% of our economy that represents the beleaguered manufacturing segment no longer matter? Is the 70% consumer so resilient that he/she can overcome a global slowdown, a stagnant domestic manufacturing segment and a domestic revenue recession? Investors who do not want to pay attention to the technical, fundamental or macro-economic warning signs may wish to pay attention the micro-economic, corporate sales erosion. As Peter Griffin of the Family Guy Sitcom might say, “Oh, did you not hear the word?” Simply stated, the expected revenue for the S&P 500 for the third quarter is headed for a third straight quarterly decline at 3.3%; the 4th quarter should show a 1.4% decline to make it four in a row. The Dow Industrials? They’ve experienced lower sales for even more consecutive quarters. Beware, perma-bulls would like to blame this all on the energy sector. Should we then ignore the ongoing declines in industrials, materials, utilities, info tech ex Apple? If we strip out energy, do we get to strip out the over-sized contribution of revenue gains by the health care sector? There’s an old saying that goes, “You can’t making chicken salad out of chicken caca.” Here’s the bottom line. Moderate growth/income investors who have been emulating my tactical asset allocation at Pacific Park Financial, Inc., understand why we will continue to maintain our lower risk profile of 50% equity (mostly large-cap domestic), 25% bond (mostly investment grade) and 25% cash/cash equivalents. We are leaving in place the lower-than-typical profile for moderates that we put in place during the June-July period. When market internals improve alongside fundamentals, we would look to return to the target allocation for moderate growth/income of 65%-70% stock (e.g., large, small, foreign, domestic) and 30% income (e.g., investment grade, high yield, short, long, etc.). For now, though, we are comfortable with lower risk equity holdings. Some of those holdings include the Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLP ), the iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility ETF (NYSEARCA: USMV ) , the iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF (NYSEARCA: IWS ) and the Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (NYSEARCA: VYM ).

ETF Deathwatch For September 2015: 13 Members Recently Died

Seventeen new names joined ETF Deathwatch this month, but the overall membership roll dropped by five as 13 members died and nine left due to improved health. The current count stands at 325 (233 ETFs and 92 ETNs). The number of actively-managed funds on the list declined from 41 to 39. All newly-launched products are granted an exclusion from ETF Deathwatch for the first six months of their life. This gives them an opportunity to attract investor interest either in the form of sufficient assets to achieve profitability or enough trading activity to spur asset growth in future months. For September, the 149 new products launched between March 1 and August 31 are excluded. This leaves 1,619 eligible ETFs and ETNs. From a percentage viewpoint, ETFs have lower representation on Deathwatch than ETNs. Within the ETF classification, passively-managed funds are currently faring better than actively-managed ones. The overall ETF representation comes in at 16.3% of the eligible funds, with 14.8% of the 1,307 eligible passively-managed funds and 32.0% of the 122 eligible actively managed ETFs on the list. Even though the quantity of listed ETNs has shrunk by more than 10% this year, nearly half of their remaining population is on Deathwatch. For September, 48.4% of the 190 eligible ETNs are on the list. Day traders have been migrating from 2X to 3X leveraged ETFs to get the biggest bang for their buck. As a result, 2X funds are falling out of favor, and four more of them were added to ETF Deathwatch this month. Six of the other September additions are from sponsors with little or no name recognition among retail ETF investors. ETFs from Arrow, EGShares, GreenHaven, KraneShares, Lattice, and Sit are new members. BlackRock closed 18 of its iShares ETFs in August. Twelve of these closed ETFs make up the bulk of the ETFs that came off of Deathwatch this month. Perhaps what is more interesting is the fact that six of the iShares ETF closures were not on Deathwatch. For example, iShares FTSE China (NASDAQ: FCHI ) had more than $37 million in assets and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Eastern Europe (NYSEARCA: ESR ) had nearly $31 million, keeping them both off the list. The current criteria for ETF Deathwatch states that funds with more than $25 million in assets are automatically removed from the list. So far this year, eleven products with more than $25 million in assets have closed. It may be time to raise that threshold. The average asset level of products on ETF Deathwatch held steady at $6.8 million, and the quantity of products with less than $2 million also remained constant at 62. The average age increased from 49.7 to 50.1 months, and the number of products more than five years old was unchanged at 110. Here is the Complete List of 325 Products on ETF Deathwatch for September 2015 compiled using the objective ETF Deathwatch Criteria. The 17 ETPs added to ETF Deathwatch for September: Arrow QVM Equity Factor (NYSEARCA: QVM ) Direxion Daily Basic Materials Bull 3x (NYSEARCA: MATL ) EGShares Brazil Infrastructure (NYSEARCA: BRXX ) ETRACS CMCI Silver TR ETN (NYSEARCA: USV ) GreenHaven Coal Fund (NYSEARCA: TONS ) Guggenheim S&P High Income Infrastructure (NYSEARCA: GHII ) iPath US Treasury Flattener ETN (NASDAQ: FLAT ) KraneShares FTSE Emerging Markets Plus (BATS: KEMP ) Lattice Emerging Markets Strategy (NYSEARCA: ROAM ) ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers (NYSEARCA: SMDV ) ProShares S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats (NYSEARCA: REGL ) ProShares Ultra Gold Miners (NYSEARCA: GDXX ) ProShares Ultra Junior Miners (NYSEARCA: GDJJ ) ProShares UltraShort Gold Miners (NYSEARCA: GDXS ) ProShares UltraShort Junior Miners (NYSEARCA: GDJS ) RevenueShares Global Growth Fund (NYSEARCA: RGRO ) Sit Rising Rate ETF (NYSEARCA: RISE ) The 9 ETPs removed from ETF Deathwatch due to improved health: Columbia Large Cap Growth (NYSEARCA: RPX ) PowerShares KBW Capital Markets (NYSEARCA: KBWC ) PowerShares KBW Insurance (NYSEARCA: KBWI ) ProShares Short FTSE China 50 (NYSEARCA: YXI ) ProShares Ultra S&P Regional Banking (NYSEARCA: KRU ) ProShares UltraShort Technology (NYSEARCA: REW ) QuantShares U.S. Market Neutral Anti-Beta (NYSEARCA: BTAL ) SPDR BofA Merrill Lynch Emerging Markets Corp Bond (NYSEARCA: EMCD ) SPDR S&P International Consumer Discretionary (NYSEARCA: IPD ) The 13 ETPs removed from ETF Deathwatch due to delisting: AdvisorShares Accuvest Global Long Short (NYSEARCA: AGLS ) iShares Asia Developed Real Estate (NASDAQ: IFAS ) iShares Financials Bond (NYSEARCA: MONY ) iShares Industrials Bond (NYSEARCA: ENGN ) iShares MSCI All Country Asia Information Technology (NASDAQ: AAIT ) iShares MSCI All Country Asia x-Japan SmallCap (NASDAQ: AXJS ) iShares MSCI Australia Small-Cap (BATS: EWAS ) iShares MSCI Canada Small-Cap (BATS: EWCS ) iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Growth (NASDAQ: EGRW ) iShares MSCI Emerging Markets EMEA (NASDAQ: EEME ) iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Discretionary (NASDAQ: EMDI ) iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Energy Sector (NASDAQ: EMEY ) iShares MSCI Singapore Small-Cap (NYSEARCA: EWSS ) ETF Deathwatch Archives Disclosure covering writer: No positions in any of the securities mentioned. No positions in any of the companies or ETF sponsors mentioned. No income, revenue, or other compensation (either directly or indirectly) received from, or on behalf of, any of the companies or ETF sponsors mentioned.

Paladin Energy Is Trying To Survive

Summary Paladin could be breaking even this year, as it will be able to reduce its production costs per pound of uranium at Langer Heinrich. However, the main unknowns here are the overhead costs and the expenses to keep its Kaleyekera mine on care and maintenance. Paladin bought more time with its debt restructuring, but the clock is ticking and a higher uranium price would be very welcome. Introduction As the current glut in the uranium market will have to end sooner rather than later, I am keeping my fingers on the pulse of some uranium companies to make sure I’m making an informed decision when I’m ready to sharply increase my exposure to this commodity. Paladin Energy (OTCPK: PALAF ) has released its full-year financial results and has updated its outlook for the current financial year, so it could be a very interesting moment to check up on how the company is doing. Source: annual report Paladin Energy has more liquid listings on both the Toronto Stock Exchange and the Australian Stock Exchange, and I’d recommend to trade on the ASX. The ticker symbol there is PDN and the average daily volume is a pretty decent 9 million shares. The current market capitalization is approximately $230M, so its market cap is almost twice as high as the information page on Seeking Alpha would want to make you believe. The full-year financial results are showing the impact of selling uranium at the spot price Paladin has produced 5.04 million pounds of uranium and has sold almost 5.4 million pounds as it had some uranium in inventory which it sold during the financial year. Unfortunately, Paladin has not entered into any long-term contracts and it was definitely feeling the pain of the low uranium price on the spot market as the average received price was just $37/lbs for a total revenue of $199M . Source: financial statements This resulted in a gross profit of just $1.8M as Paladin also had to record an $8M impairment charge on the value of its inventory as the uranium price continued to decrease. The after-tax net loss was a stunning $300M and this was predominantly caused by a $240M impairment charge (of which $1M was attributed to an aircraft). I’m a little bit relieved the net loss was mainly caused by an impairment charge as that’s a non-cash charge and shouldn’t have an impact on the cash flow numbers. Source: financial statements So, let’s have a look at those cash flow statements; unfortunately, the situation doesn’t look much better here as the operating cash flow was negative, resulting in a total negative free cash flow of $40M. Keep in mind the cash flow statements exclude the impact of an impairment charge so there are no excuses at all here. What will Paladin do different this year? The company has now just one mine which is still in production, Langer Heinrich in Namibia. The mine will produce approximately 5-5.4 million pounds of uranium in the current financial year so there might be a small production increase, but the impact will be minimal. However, there will be an impact on the total production rate attributable to Paladin Energy, as the company sold a 25% stake in Langer Heinrich to a Chinese consortium for $190M last year. This cash infusion was be very welcome, but it also means Paladin is giving up on a lot of future potential cash flow. Langer Heinrich has a total resource estimate of 150 million pounds, so the company has sold 37.5 million pounds for $190M, or just $5 per pound. This decision is understandable, as it needed to improve the balance sheet, but should the received price per pound of uranium increase to $50+ again, Paladin might regret the sale. Paladin expects the production cost per pound to decrease by 7-14% to $26/lbs, but despite an uranium price of $35/lbs, this doesn’t mean the company will be free cash flow positive. There still is an ongoing cost of approximately $12-15M per year, which equals approximately $4 per attributable pound of uranium produced at Langer Heinrich. Throw in an additional $20M for exploration and administration (another $5/lbs) and you clearly see Paladin needs an uranium price of approximately $35-38/lbs to be able to even start thinking about breaking even. And that will be a difficult task in FY2016. Don’t get me wrong, it is possible as Paladin expects to receive a premium of $4/lbs over the spot price, but you surely shouldn’t expect any miracles from Paladin this year. Investment thesis Paladin’s re-financing activities in the past financial year have reduced the pressure on the balance sheet, but Paladin has just bought some more time, as it doesn’t look like the company will be able to generate a substantial amount of free cash flow in the current financial year, which could have been used to reduce the net debt. Paladin is a leveraged play on the uranium price and there will be a huge difference between a uranium price of $35/lbs and $50/lbs as, at the latter price, Paladin should be generating a pretty decent amount of free cash flow. Editor’s Note: This article covers one or more stocks trading at less than $1 per share and/or with less than a $100 million market cap. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks. 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.