Tag Archives: author

Monday Morning Memo: Passive – Smart – Smarter – Active

By Detlef Glow Click to enlarge The Evolution of the European ETF Industry When the first exchange-traded fund (ETF) was introduced to the markets, it was clear that the aim of the portfolio manager was to track the returns of the underlying index of the fund as closely as possible. But since a fund faces some restrictions, such as transaction costs or limits on the maximum weighting of a single security in the portfolio, that are not applicable for the underlying index, the difference between the returns of the index and the ETF are in some cases quite significant. Since the investment industry (and therefore also the ETF industry) is always trying to optimize its processes, ETF promoters started to develop portfolio management techniques to minimize tracking error and the tracking differences of the ETFs. The Generation 2.0 ETFs not only aimed to track the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible, the managers also attempted to optimize the returns with modern portfolio management techniques to achieve additional income that contributed to their outperformance over the index. Looking at ETFs that try to generate outperformance the “old fashioned way,” the additional income must be seen as tracking error and therefore as a negative fact. These returns were, firstly, non regular returns. Secondly, modern portfolio management techniques such as securities lending or dividend optimization strategies added an additional layer of risk to the portfolio, for which the ETF investor might have not been compensated properly. Even though the quality of ETF returns has evolved significantly, there are still a number of critics around, since it seems in some cases to be easy to beat market-capitalization-weighted benchmarks. In other cases, such as with bond indices, critics say that market capitalization is the wrong way to build an index. These criticisms have led to the development of alternative weighted indices, ranging from simple equally weighted indices to highly complex methodologies that might employ quantitative and qualitative factors to determine the weighting of the securities in the index. But, even though some promoters offer ETFs that track an alternative weighted index, these kinds of products have not found their way into the portfolios of mainstream investors. But there was and still is scientific evidence that there are some factors in the markets-such as momentum, quality, size, and value-that investors can exploit to generate higher returns than those from a market-cap-weighted index. The introduction of these factors into the mainstream ETF industry started after the financial crisis of 2008 with the first minimum variance ETFs that suited the needs of investors looking for equity portfolios that don’t show as much volatility as their underlying markets. To make these products more appealing for investors, the ETF industry called these kinds of funds “smart beta funds.” The popularity of these products led to a race in the search for new factors that can be exploited by investors, since the index and ETF promoters wanted to offer new products to their clients. But the “new factors” found by the researchers were mainly market abnormalities that disappeared shortly after they were found, or the additional returns were too small to exploit in a profitable way, since transaction costs were eating away the premium. One of the major concerns of investors with regard to smart beta ETFs is that all the factors employed do not deliver consistent outperformance. In other words, smart beta ETFs show longer periods of underperformance that make it necessary for the investor to switch at the right time between different factors to avoid the longer periods of underperformance in their portfolio. But since the right timing is the hardest call in the portfolio management process, especially for retail investors, it seems likely that a number of investors shy away from these products. In the next product generation, the index and ETF industry are attempting to make the smart beta products even smarter by combining different factors. The products improve the common smart beta ETFs. In other words, they make the smart beta concept even smarter, since the factors described above do not deliver outperformance at any particular time. One of the aims of this approach is to build a portfolio that is either in different factors at the same time or that tries to switch between factors at the right time, i.e., to unburden the investor from the timing decision in order to capture as much premium from a single factor as possible. From these semi-actively managed portfolios it is only a small step to a fully active managed portfolio wrapped in an ETF structure. Even though some market observers would label this a scandal, the introduction of actively managed ETFs will be the next logical step for the industry. Even though the first ETF following an actively managed index in Europe wasn’t a success at all, a view to the other side of the Atlantic shows that actively managed ETFs can be successful. PIMCO was able to generate very high inflows when it launched its first actively managed ETF in the U.S. The success of PIMCO might be the reason more and more promoters of actively managed funds are preparing to enter the ETF market. From my point of view this makes a lot of sense, since the ETF wrapper is a very efficient structure that opens up new distribution methods for active managers. And, I don’t see a valid reason why promoters should not try to distribute their funds through all possible channels. But to be successful active ETF managers must not only have good products, they also must build the right infrastructure for trading their funds. To be successful in the ETF industry there needs to be more than a well-known name and the listing of products on an exchange. I strongly believe this introduction will work; we already see a number of active managed funds listed by market participants on the “Deutsche Börse” in Frankfurt. At the beginning the fund promoters did not support trading their funds on exchanges and in some cases tried to close down the trading, since they felt this distribution channel would offend their established distribution channels. Those times are over, but it is still not common to buy or sell a mutual fund on an exchange unless the fund has been closed for some reason. From my point of view the trading of actively managed ETFs will become a very common way to buy mutual funds for all kinds of investors, once fund promoters officially start to use this market as a distribution channel. It is not a question of if we will see actively managed funds traded as ETFs, it is only a question of when we will see this happen. The views expressed are the views of the author, not necessarily those of Thomson Reuters Lipper.

Exits: Know When To Hold ’em, Know When To Fold ’em

Originally published March 29, 2016 We all focus a lot of attention, perhaps too much attention, on where to buy and sell a market, on where to enter trades. Today, let’s spend some time looking at the other side: where are you getting out? Some categories are useful here, and they are not complicated. First, we have exiting at a loss, or at a profit. (This is not necessarily the same as saying exiting on a stop or at a profit, because a (trailing) stop can often be a profit-taking technique.) Both of these can then be divided into two more categories: Exiting at the initial loss or a reduced loss, and profit taking against a stop or at a limit. Let’s spend a few moments thinking about each of these. Initial stops The most important think about initial stops is that you have one. Though so many trading axioms and sayings do not apply universally, one that does is “know where you’re getting out before you get in.” For every trade, you should have a clearly defined maximum loss, and you should work hard to make sure that loss is never exceeded. In practice, bad things will happen. You will have the (hopefully rare) experience of a nasty gap beyond your stop, and sometimes will see losses that are whole number multiples of your initial trade risk. (I remember one lovely -4.5x loss in Yahoo (NASDAQ: YHOO ) years ago. Though these events are rare, they are also a good reminder of we do not, for instance, risk 10% of our accounts on a trade. A 45% loss on a single trade would be a disaster, but 4.5x a reasonable risk (1%-2%) is merely annoying.) Initial stop placement is an art in itself, but, in general, I think too much of the material on the internet probably uses stops that are too tight. I’ve never seen anyone trade successfully with stops that are a few ticks wide. For me, initial stops usually end up somewhere around 3-4 ATRs from the entry. These stops are wide enough that many traders find them uncomfortable, but simply reducing position size to manage the nominal loss is an obvious solution. Taking losses is perhaps the most important thing you will do as a trader, so do it well and do it properly. Click to enlarge Reduced stops We have defined that initial “never to be exceeded” (ideally) stop at trade entry, but many traders find it effective to move that stop rather quickly. Another possibility to consider is the time stop, in which we take steps to limit the position risk if the trade does not move in some defined time. There are many possibilities here, ranging from tightening the stop, to reducing the position, to exiting completely. I have made a good case for not reducing the position at a loss because it effectively “deleverages” your P&L in the “loss space.” (See the chart above, which is drawn from pages 242 and 243 of my book.) Personally, I’ve found that simply taking whole, but smaller than initial, losses is more effective, but your experience may be different. A key point here is that all of this – entry, exit, position size, moving stops, taking targets, re-entries, adding to positions, partial exits, etc. – all of this must work together. You change one piece, and the whole system will change. This is why some techniques may be effective in some settings but not in others. To simplify, think of reduced stops as being moved when the trade does not immediately go far enough in your favor, and consider the use of time stops. Profit targets Profit targets are usually limit orders, as opposed to stops (which, not surprisingly, are usually stop orders). In general, I find that it makes sense to have profit taking limit orders working in 24-hour markets, though we may not wish to work stops in the same after-hours environments. People sometimes make mistakes or do silly things in after-hours, and I’m always happy to provide liquidity at the right prices. There is a school of thought that says that all trades should simply be exited at profit targets, while there is a conflicting school that says we must let our winners run. How to reconcile these two approaches? I think the answer lies in trading style. For trend traders, we must let our profits run. As countertrend traders, we must take quick profits, usually at pre-defined areas. I have not found chart patterns or points to be any more effective than simply setting a target 1x my initial risk on the “other side” of the entry. Many people like to use pivots or trendlines, but I’ve executed well tens of thousands of trades (one of the advantages of spending years as short-term trader) and have simply not found these to be that effective. (For intraday traders, highs and lows of the day do deserve respect.) Consider the tradeoffs in simplifying your approach. Trailing stops Trailing stops can be managed in many ways, and I have found these to be very effective in many types of trading. We can trail at some volatility-adjusted measure, and there are even times we trail a very tight stop, effectively hoping to be taken out of the trade. This is a good problem to have: sometimes you may trail a stop at yesterday’s low, and be shocked as the trade grinds in your favor week after week – there’s nothing to be done in these cases but be forced to stay in the trade and make more money, but guard against hubris: many of the times this has happened to me; I have been properly positioned into a climax move. When these moves end, they often end dramatically, so simply ring the register and step away from the market. Putting it all together This is certainly not an exhaustive list of all the possible ways to exit trades, but it will get you started in the right direction. I find that combining these techniques, using a pre-defined target for part of the trade, trailing the stop on the rest, and moving quickly to reduce initial risk on my rather wide initial stops, this works very well for swing trading the markets I follow. Consistency certainly matters, but consistently doing something that works will, not surprisingly, lead to consistently losing money. Make sure you have a well-designed system with an edge, and that the system is one you can follow in actual trading. Make sure you trade with appropriate size and risk, and that you monitor your performance accordingly. With these guidelines, you can be a few steps closer to developing your own system and approach to trading.

The V20 Portfolio: Week #31

The V20 portfolio is an actively managed portfolio that seeks to achieve an annualized return of 20% over the long term. If you are a long-term investor, then this portfolio may be for you. You can read more about how the portfolio works and the associated risks here . Always do your own research before making an investment. Read the last update here . Note: Current allocation and planned transactions are only available to premium subscribers . Over the past week, the V20 Portfolio declined by 5% while the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) dipped by 0.3%. Portfolio Update It would appear that the saga of Dex Media (NASDAQ: DXM ) (OTCMKT: OTCPK:DXMM ) will soon come to an end. It was my hope that the management could come to an amicable agreement with lenders given the company’s massive cash flow. Unfortunately, we cannot control the outcome of the negotiation and according to the most recent press release from company, an agreement has been reached with lenders, the outcome being that equity holders will be completely wiped out. Evidently the thesis has failed to play out, but the risk of total loss was something that we accepted all along. For myself, what’s troubling is that the management voluntarily defaulted for reasons that are still unclear to me. When the company defaulted in 2015 by withholding an interest payment, the company still had plenty of cash and was on track to generate more. What really boggles my mind is that the management was somehow able to gain support from both senior and junior debt holders. To put things into perspective, the management withheld $8.9 million of cash interest back in September from junior debt holders and pushed the company into default. Now that negotiations are finished, junior debt holders will get wiped out save a $5 million payment and warrants on the new equity. Clearly it was absolutely not in their interest to consent, yet the improbable has occurred. In any case, Dex Media will likely be a write-off unless a miracle happens in court. While this investment has been a failure, the impact on the overall results of the V20 Portfolio has been minimal, which is one of the reasons why the investment was attractive in the first place, as the downside was limited when the position was viewed in the context of the whole portfolio. The V20 Portfolio began the year with just 0.5% of assets being allocated to Dex Media. On to better news. Our sole insurance company reported Q1 earnings and as expected, the company continued to demonstrate strong growth and profitability. The market reacted favorable as well, boosting the stock by roughly 10% since earnings as of close on Friday. Turning our attention to Conn’s (NASDAQ: CONN ), the company recently reported April sales data, meaning that now we have all the sales numbers for Q1. Overall, sales grew 8% year over year from $296 million to $319 million. While growth will continue to add value in the long-run, the company must show some improvement in the credit segment in the near term to get rid of the negative sentiment surrounding the stock. Spirit Airlines’ (NASDAQ: SAVE ) performance mirrored the sustained pessimism in the airline industry, shedding 6.5%. In comparison, AMEX Airline Index declined 3.9%. This has occurred despite Spirit Airline’s leading profitability and growth potential. Due to our earlier trim, the position has declined to less than 10% of the overall portfolio, hence more capital will be allocated to Spirit Airlines. Click to enlarge Disclosure: I am/we are long CONN, SAVE, DXMM. 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. 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.