Tag Archives: cash

TerraForm Will Survive, But Needs To Slow Down

Summary TerraForm Power’s stock has plunged 70% year to date. The market value was high due to its aggressive expansion plan. The company will survive, but needs to slow down. If you’ve believed in SunEdison (NYSE: SUNE ) and TerraForm Power Inc.’s (NASDAQ: TERP ) growth story and have been a shareholder of either company, you’ve probably had a hard time falling asleep at night. It’s been devastating for TerraForm’s shareholders, as the shares have plunged over 70% year to date. So, what makes investors worried even when the company has been able to grow its CAFD (cash available for distribution) and raise dividends consistently since it went public in July 2014? (click to enlarge) (Source: TerraForm Power Investor Presentation) TerraForm only had 808 MW in projects generating $107 million in CAFD initially. After only one year, the company now has over 1900 MW in assets, with a projected $225 CAFD in 2015. The project pipeline and cash flow distribution growth are impressive, but not the stock price. Expansion comes at a price. Clearly, the market now focuses on TerraForm’s liquidity and balance sheet, believing the company’s rapid expansion is sustainable. First of all, I would like to estimate how much money the company is obligated to pay (up to December 2016), based on its scheduled debt repayment, projected dividend distribution and committed funds for acquisitions. Current portion of long-term debt and lease obligation: $115 million (to be paid by September 2016) Invenergy acquisition: $2.05 billion Vivint Solar (NYSE: VSLR ) deal: $962 million Payments (2016) on maturities of long-term debt as of September 30: $58 million Dividend payment: $112 million (based on 80 million class A common stock outstanding) Interest payment and some other payments, based on its agreement with SunEdison (IDRs) In total, TerraForm needs to come up with approximately $ 3.3 billion for its acquisitions, debt repayment, lease obligations, dividend payment and other payments in the next 12 months. To put it in perspective, the company generated $105 million cash from operating activities in the first nine months, and it expects to generate $225 million of CAFD for 2015. So, the question is: Has TerraForm addressed funding shortfalls, if there are any? Let’s take a look at the company’s current financing plan: Unrestricted cash: $821 million (including $160 million in UK refinancing proceeds) Revolver: $725 million Project debt (CA Ridge): $174 million TERP Holdco Capital: $388 million Assumed project debt: $358 million (subject to lender consent) Project debt/Term loan/Holdco bonds/Warehouse facilities: $1.27 billion (in progress) Including the $1.27 million financing options in progress, TerraForm has about $3.6 billion available to fund its commitments and fulfill other obligations, if needed. The management is quite confident that all financing will be made available by Q1 2016. This seems quite desperate, as the company plans to deplete all its cash and most likely its revolver for acquisition and debt repayment. TERP’s unrestricted cash on-hand is approximately $800 million and our liquidity available is approximately $1.5 billion. We have earmarked this cash and liquidity to fund our existing commitments, including the pending Invenergy and Vivint acquisitions. – TerraForm Power Q3 Earnings Call Transcript While TerraForm is capable of funding its obligations and acquisitions given listed options, this will further bury the company in heavy debt. Let’s not forget, the company still has about $2.4 billion long-term debt outstanding as of September 30, 2015. Senior debt 2023 – $950 million (Issued for First Wind and previous revolver repayment) Senior debt 2025 – $300 million (issued for Invenergy) Other project debt and construction financing – $1.28 billion After its acquisition of Vivint and Invenergy assets, TerraForm will have over $4 billion in debt, with little cash on hand. It will be difficult for the company to further grow its pipeline given its highly leveraged balance sheet and the current market sentiment. Even if TerraForm can obtain the needed capital in the near future, it will likely pay a much higher interest rate. Debt is usually cheaper than equity, but only to a certain point. Investors may argue that TerraForm will add another 1.4GW to its pipeline once the acquisition is completed. However, for companies like TerraForm, the payback does not happen overnight. If the company grows its CAFD 70% in 2016 (management refuses to provide a guidance for 2016, saying it will focus on closing deals first), it should generate approximately $95 million CAFD each quarter to pay dividend, interest expense and other obligations. Conclusion Financially and strategically, TerraForm Power went too far, too fast (following SunEdison’s path), and it needs to slow down. Corporate governance is another issue given its connection with SunEdison. As I am writing this, David Tepper, the founder of Appaloosa Management, just sent a letter raising concerns regarding conflict of interests between TerraForm and SunEdison. This is another important issue that investors need to pay attention to. TerraForm had financing lined up for its committed acquisitions, and should not have problems paying liabilities in the next few years. But it will have little room to grow in the short term given its highly leveraged balance sheet and depressed stock price. Clearly, investors now focuses more on the company’s financial strength rather than how fast it can grow its dividend and pipeline. Going forward, TerraForm should focus on the profitability of projects rather than blindly expanding by acquiring assets regardless of project quality. Sometimes we need to take a break and slow down, and I hope TerraForm has learnt this lesson.

December Update – ETFReplay.com Portfolio

The ETFReplay.com Portfolio holdings have been updated for December 2015. I previously detailed here and here how an investor can use ETFReplay.com to screen for best performing ETFs based on momentum and volatility. The portfolio begins with a static basket of 14 ETFs. These 14 ETFs are ranked by 6-month total returns (weighted 40%), 3-month total returns (weighted 30%), and 3-month price volatility (weighted 30%). The top 4 are purchased at the beginning of each month. When a holding drops out of the top 5 ETFs, it will be sold and replaced with the next highest ranked ETF. The 14 ETFs are listed below: Symbol Name RWX SPDR DJ International Real Estate PCY PowerShares Emerging Mkts Bond WIP SPDR Int’l Govt Infl-Protect Bond EFA iShares MSCI EAFE HYG iShares iBoxx High-Yield Corp Bond EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets LQD iShares iBoxx Invest Grade Bond VNQ Vanguard MSCI U.S. REIT TIP iShares Barclays TIPS VTI Vanguard MSCI Total U.S. Stock Market DBC PowerShares DB Commodity Index GLD SPDR Gold Shares TLT iShares Barclays Long-Term Trsry SHY iShares Barclays 1-3 Year Treasry Bnd Fd In addition, ETFs must be ranked above the cash-like ETF (NYSEARCA: SHY ) in order to be included in the portfolio, similar to the absolute momentum strategy I profiled here . This modification could help reduce drawdowns during periods of high volatility and/or negative market conditions (see 2008-2009), but it could also reduce total returns by allocating to cash in lieu of an asset class. The cash filter had been in effect since July 2015, but this month four new positions will be added. The top 5 ranked ETFs based on the 6/3/3 system as of 11/30/15 are below: 6mo/3mo/3mo PCY PowerShares Emerging Mkts Bond VNQ Vanguard MSCI U.S. REIT LQD iShares iBoxx Invest Grade Bond TLT iShares Barclays Long-Term Trsry SHY Barclays Low Duration Treasury (2-yr) Thus, the portfolio will purchase PCY, VNQ, LQD, and TLT. In 2014, I introduced a pure momentum system, which ranks the same basket of 14 ETFs based solely on 6-month price momentum. There is no cash filter in the pure momentum system, volatility ranking, or requirement to limit turnover – the top 4 ETFs based on price momentum are purchased each month. The portfolio and rankings are posted on the same spreadsheet as the 6/3/3 strategy. The top 4 six-month momentum ETFs are below: 6-month Momentum TLT iShares Barclays Long-Term Trsry VNQ Vanguard MSCI U.S. REIT PCY PowerShares Emerging Mkts Bond LQD iShares iBoxx Invest Grade Bond This month SHY will be sold and the proceeds used to purchase LQD. The updated holdings for the pure momentum portfolio is below: Position Purchase Price Purchase Date Percentage Gain/Loss Excluding Dividends PCY 27.65 8/31/2015 0.94% LQD 115.91 11/30/2015 0.00% VNQ 79.89 10/30/2015 -0.63% TLT 122.74 10/30/2015 -1.05% Disclosure: None

This New Alternative Energy ETF Continues To Bleed

Renewable energy YieldCos continue to feel the pain. This investment vehicle was once conceptualized and launched for the sake of helping energy companies raise cheaper project financing while benefiting investors through higher distributions and yield. But now they continue to bear the brunt due to several reasons. First, the recent crash in crude oil prices to the $40 level is taking its toll on YieldCo stocks. Low oil prices reduce the demand for renewable energy and therefore YieldCos. Second, the slowdown in China, the world’s biggest producer of solar panels, doesn’t bode well for them. China is projected to grow by 6.8% in 2015, which would be the lowest in 25 years. Third, the brightened prospect of an interest rate hike by the Fed in December makes the high-yielding YieldCo stocks less appealing to investors. Further, a rising interest rate scenario is never desirable for them, as it raises their cost of project financing on which they are highly dependent. Finally, YieldCos need to issue shares (generally at higher prices than their IPOs) from time to time to raise capital for new investments as most of their cash flow gets wiped out by paying dividends. However, they are facing difficulties on this front due to depressed renewable energy stocks and an oversupply of YieldCos in the market, making investors reluctant to pay higher prices. Let us consider the performance of three new YieldCos, TerraForm Power, Inc. (NASDAQ: TERP ), TerraForm Global, Inc. (NASDAQ: GLBL ) and 8point3 Energy Partners LP (NASDAQ: CAFD ). Shares of TerraForm Power lost a significant 73.8% since its IPO was launched by SunEdison, Inc. (NYSE: SUNE ) last year. On the other hand, shares of TerraForm Global, also launched by SunEdison, cooled off 59.3% since its IPO this August. Meanwhile, shares of 8point3 Energy Partners shed 42.1% since its IPO launched by FirstSolar Inc. (NASDAQ: FSLR ) and SunPower Corp. (NASDAQ: SPWR ) in June this year. Notably, SunEdison YieldCos – TerraForm Power and TerraForm Global – posted dismal quarterly results at the beginning of this month. TerraForm Power reported a loss of 3 cents per share for the 2015 third quarter in sharp contrast to the Zacks Consensus Estimate of earnings of 28 cents. On the other hand, TerraForm Global reported a considerably wider-than-expected loss of 33 cents per share for the quarter compared with the Zacks Consensus Estimate of a loss of 14 cents. The oldest surviving YieldCo, Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners LP (NYSE: BEP ), formed by Brookfield Asset Management (NYSE: BAM ), also posted a wider-than-expected loss of 7 cents per share compared with the Zacks Consensus Estimate of a loss of 5 cents at the beginning of this month. The YieldCo had generated earnings in the three preceding quarters. These adverse developments have led Global X YieldCo ETF (NASDAQ: YLCO ) to tumble 32.2% since its launch in May this year by Global X (as of November 23, 2015). YLCO intends to diversify the risk of owning YieldCo stocks by tracking the Indxx Global YieldCo index. The ETF holds 20 securities with Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners, NextEra Energy Partners, LP (NYSE: NEP ) – a NextEra Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NEE ) YieldCo – and NRG Yield, Inc. (NYSE: NYLD ) – a NRG Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NRG ) YieldCo – taking up the first, second and third spots with 12.13%, 9.02% and 8.36% shares, respectively. The fund is highly concentrated in its top 10 holdings, which account for 68.74% of total assets. It has a global footprint with the U.S. occupying the top spot at 37%, followed by Canada (31%), U.K. (20%) and Spain (12%). YLCO has gathered a meager $3.5 million in assets and trades in a paltry volume of 4,000 shares. It charges 65 bps in annual fees from investors and has a dividend yield of 2.8% (as of November 23, 2015). Original Post