Tag Archives: conservative

Sticking With Your Asset Allocation

By Seth J. Masters Careful analysis can help investors pre-experience the outcomes they’re likely to see with various allocation decisions. But an investment plan will work only if an investor has the emotional fortitude to stick with it. That’s easier said than done, particularly with a more aggressive portfolio, when market conditions are rough. Let’s look at the growth of $1 million in three portfolios from January 2005 through June 2015, assuming a withdrawal of $50,000 per year. In one case, the investor maintains a portfolio allocation with 80% in global stocks and 20% in municipal bonds. In the second, the investor stays in a much more conservative 30/70 portfolio. And in the third, the investor begins with 80/20, but panics after a 30% loss and switches out of stocks and into cash on November 1, 2008. He remains in cash through March 31, 2012, and returns to 80/20 thereafter. The Display below shows how each of these investors would have fared. With only 30% in stocks, the conservative investor wouldn’t have lost a great deal in the 2008 stock market slump, but neither would he have picked up much in the roaring bull market that followed. Altogether, after spending $50,000 a year, he would have ended up with $940,000 at midyear 2015 – not too bad considering his regular portfolio withdrawals. The steady 80/20 investor would have suffered a wrenching loss of 46% in the stock market slump, but she would have still wound up with the highest final portfolio value: $1,150,000, after spending outlays. The market timer who jumped into cash as the stock market was going south and returned to stocks somewhat late would have been left with only $670,000, far less than both the steady 30/70 investor and the steady 80/20 investor. Indeed, his portfolio’s ending value would have been more than 40% less than the ending value of the 80/20 investor who stuck with her allocation, although his worst drawdown was nearly as large. This illustrative case is – unfortunately – similar to what many investors actually did after 2008. Lots of investors who had flocked to global stocks in the years before the bubble burst stampeded out in 2009, 2010, and 2011, to the tune of $309 billion in outflows. It took until 2013 – by which time the global stock market had already rallied 55% – for fund flows to flip back into stocks. In market cycle after market cycle, most investors sell low and buy high. At Bernstein, we advised clients after the market slump to stick with their long-term strategic asset allocations, including their exposure to equities. One measure of the value of good investment advice, in our view, is the money saved by avoiding big mistakes. The value of that advice can be significant and quantifiable, as this example shows. Even so, there’s a deeper dimension to good investment advice that goes beyond such numbers. Planning carefully and thoroughly can create greater understanding of investment trade-offs, which leads to better life decisions. These benefits are hard to measure precisely, but nonetheless hugely valuable. The views expressed herein do not constitute research, investment advice, or trade recommendations and do not necessarily represent the views of all AB portfolio-management teams.

Is The Argentina ETF A Good Buy Ahead Of The Runoff Election?

Argentina has been on investors’ radar lately for the much-awaited election results that can make or break its fate for the coming four years. The country’s economy is in dire straits, with cooling growth, higher inflation, declining currency and debt default issues. Naturally, a probable change in political power, which might bring about a shift in economy policies, has drawn investors’ attention. In such a backdrop, a poll was held on October 25. But the election did not led to a clear winner, and thus led to a runoff. Notably, Argentina’s outgoing leftist president, Cristina Fernandez, was constitutionally debarred from fighting for the third successive term , and her party’s candidate shocked with a feeble performance. And Conservative opposition’s pro-business candidate Mauricio Macri’s unexpected strength in the poll box set the stage for a runoff on November 22 . Marci will rival FPV candidate Daniel Scioli, who is, in fact, backed by Cristina Fernandez. The first round of elections was a neck-to-neck competition, with Daniel Scioli getting 36.86% and Macri receiving 34.33% votes. Sergio Massa, a past partner of Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner who shifted allegiance to the opposition, could be the wire-puller after capturing 21.34% of the votes, with analysts suspecting that he might tie up with Macri to form the government, as per NY Times . Since Mauricio Macri is viewed as a proponent of free markets, a runoff lifted the Argentine equities. However, citizens are receiving online warnings that they might lose out on social welfare if Macri wins. Basically, Scioli has a leftist approach. He is, thus, repeatedly referring to the free-market policies of the 1990s that led to the 2002 economic crisis, per Reuters . However, Macri’s political pledge is to revamp investment and curb inflation, while simultaneously maintaining the required social programs. Market Impact As the first round of election went against the opinion poll and Mauricio Macri emerged as a dark horse to capture the close second position, investors started to look for growth prospects in Argentina. Several analysts went long on these stocks. The only ETF targeting the nation – the Global X MSCI Argentina ETF (NYSEARCA: ARGT ) – added about 22.9% in the last one month (as of November 2, 2015), of which 11.7% returns came in the last 10 days. Can it Run Further? The second round of elections will take place on November 22. And with Scioli still maintaining the lead, hopes are still alive for him to win. Sergio Massa’s 21% voters will matter the most now, as they could swing the balance. If Macri wins, the Argentina ETF is sure to see a nice rally. If not, then too the stocks will likely enjoy a decent run on hopes of a political change ahead of the runoff election. Investors should also note that Scioli is apparently more market-friendly than Fernandez, under whose governance the country’s growth slackened. So no matter who wins, the Argentina ETF might see a rebound in the near term. ARGT is still 13.7% down from the 52-week high (as of November 2, 2015), and thus, has room for further advancement if speculations over Macri’s win persist. So, investors with a stomach for risks can take a look at the ETF. The fund presently has a Zacks ETF Rank #5 (Strong Sell), with a High risk outlook. Let’s wait for November 22 to see what lies ahead for ARGT in this uncertain time. ARGT in Focus The ETF tracks the MSCI All Argentina 25/50 Index, which measures the performance of the 30 largest and most liquid companies that are listed in Argentina or perform most of their operations in the country. Holding 30 stocks in its basket, the fund is highly concentrated on the top four firms at 60%, while other firms do not hold more than 5.68% share. The fund has amassed $15.2 million in its asset base, and trades at an average daily trading volume of nearly 12,000 shares. The product charges 74 bps in fees and expenses. Original Post

TransAlta: Environmental Regulations And Cheap Crude Make For A Perfect Storm

Summary TransAlta’s share price has fallen sharply over the last six months in response to the return of cheap petroleum and the election of pro-environment governments in Alberta and Canada. Planned and unplanned downtime in Q2 prevented the company from taking full advantage of hot temperatures in Canada, resulting in a large earnings miss for the quarter. Looking ahead, the company is faced with the prospect of either converting its existing coal facilities to natural gas or writing off a large amount of relatively young assets. While a large forward yield could catch the eye of dividend investors, the company’s outlook is too negative to be an attractive long investment opportunity at this time. Author’s note: This article refers to a Canadian company and all dollar figures represent Canadian dollars unless otherwise stated. The share price of Canadian electricity generator TransAlta Corporation (NYSE: TAC ) has plummeted in 2015 to date as the prices of natural gas and petroleum have halved and regulatory concerns have mounted in its primary markets. This volatility has only increased over the last week in the wake of Canadian voters bringing the country’s pro-environment Liberal party to power in national elections and a rumored buyout attempt, although the company’s shares have rebounded by 27% over the last four weeks. This article evaluates TransAlta as a potential long investment opportunity in light of this uncertainty. TransAlta at a glance TransAlta owns and operates power plants in Canada, the United States, and Australia. Owning more than $9 million in assets, including more than 5,200 MW of generating capacity in the Canadian province of Alberta alone, the company utilizes a diverse mix of coal, natural gas, wind, and hydro to generate electricity that is then sold to nearby electric utilities via power purchase agreements. TransAlta is heavily reliant on coal despite this diversity, however, owning 4,931 MW of coal-fired capacity, 88% of which is contracted out for an average period of 5.5 years. This capacity has an average age of 17 years, making it relatively young given that coal-fired capacity can remain operational for up to 50 years. Another 1,447 MW of TransAlta’s capacity relies on natural gas, of which 95% is contracted out for an average period of 10.9 years. The company also utilizes 1,271 MW of wind power, 65% of which is contracted for an average of 10 years; and 914 MW of hydro, 96% of which is contracted for an average of 5.3 years. While electricity generation operations provide the majority of the company’s earnings, it also operates an energy trading division that has historically generated roughly $50 million in annual EBITDA. TransAlta has reported steady annual EBITDA growth since FY 2009, including 6% annually since FY 2012. This growth has been made possible primarily due to its heavy exposure to Alberta, which has been home to rapid economic and construction growth in recent years due to its large reserves of unconventional petroleum in the form of oil shale and tar sands. In addition to being substantially more energy intensive than conventional petroleum extraction, Alberta’s unconventional reserves became the subject of heavy demand in the early years of the current decade as rising energy prices made their extraction commercially attractive. This set off a resource boom in the province that in turn led to population growth, demand for new housing, and ultimately higher electricity demand. Unfortunately for TransAlta’s shareholders, electricity generators responded to this demand with a sharp increase in supply. Oversupply in Alberta was the ultimate result, leading to lower electricity prices. FY 2010 and FY 2011 proved to be the high points for the company’s annual revenue and EBITDA results, respectively, although both have also rebounded from their FY 2012 lows. It was on the verge of returning to its pre-glut earnings level in FY 2014 when petroleum prices swooned, making the extraction of Alberta’s unconventional petroleum reserves unattractive. The province’s economy has reversed course and the construction industry has faltered, further increasing its electricity glut and hurting electricity prices. TransAlta has responded to the poor situation in Alberta by diversifying its operations in terms of both geography and fuel mix. It has expanded its capacity in Australia, building 1,000 MW of new natural gas-fired generating capacity and acquiring 136 MW of existing renewable capacity. Recognizing its heavy exposure to the North American coal market, however, with North American coal generating capacity contributing 45% of its Q2 2015 consolidated EBITDA and Canadian coal contributing 39%, the company is also moving forward with an effort to expand its share of Alberta’s generation market from 11% currently to 30% by 2021. Perhaps the most important development, however, is TransAlta’s 2013 decision to form a subsidiary focused on renewable generation, the aptly-named TransAlta Renewables (OTC: TRSWF ). In May, TransAlta dropped down $1 billion in Australian assets to its subsidiary in exchange for $217 million in proceeds, which it used to reduce its debt load, and a post-transaction ownership interest of 76%. The subsidiary’s focus on renewable generation assets provides it with a number of advantages over TransAlta, including attractive financing rates and lengthy contracts as Canada’s government incentivizes the move away from fossil fuels to renewable energy. TransAlta, in turn, intends to use TransAlta Renewable’s distributions (it has a forward yield of 9.3% at the time of writing) to provide it with the cash flow necessary to finance its own debt and future capex. TransAlta Renewable will play an important role in TransAlta’s ability to meet its target of $50 million annual EBITDA growth and 8-10% annual shareholder return moving forward, the latter being something that it hasn’t achieved since FY 2011. Q2 earnings report TransAlta reported Q2 earnings that demonstrated the negative effects of its exposure to the North American coal markets and Alberta’s unconventional petroleum market. Revenue came in at $438 million (see figure), down by 10.8% YoY, as availability at its generating facilities declined from 85.4% to 80.9% over the same period (8,820 GWh generated versus 9,283 GWh YoY). The revenue decline came despite an increase in Alberta’s average electricity price from $42/MWh to $57/MWh due to abnormally hot weather during the quarter and was primarily due to one of its coal facilities experiencing damage-induced unplanned downtime that lasted most of the quarter and another facility undergoing planned downtime at the same time. TransAlta financials (non-adjusted) Q2 2015 Q1 2015 Q4 2014 Q3 2014 Q2 2014 Revenue ($MM) 438.0 593.0 718.0 639.0 491.0 Gross income ($MM) 238.0 356.0 450.0 362.0 279.0 Net income ($MM) -131.0 7.0 148.0 -6.0 -50.0 Diluted EPS ($) -0.47 0.03 0.54 -0.03 -0.18 EBITDA ($MM) 133.0 231.0 359.0 238.0 158.0 Source: Morningstar (2015). Gross profit came in at $238 million, down from $279 million YoY. Surprisingly, given the earnings reports of other North American electricity generators, TransAlta’s cost of revenue fell only slightly over the same period from $212 million to $200 million despite the presence of much lower energy prices in the most recent quarter. As a result, net income fell to -$131 million from -$40 million in the previous year. Some of the decline was attributable to a non-cash adjustment to the fair value of the company’s energy hedges as well as the presence of a higher base tax rate in Alberta. Accounting for these factors resulted in an adjusted net income of -$44 milllion compared with -$12 million YoY. Adjusted EPS fell to -$0.16 from -$0.04, missing the analyst consensus by $0.14. EBITDA also fell, declining from $213 million to $183 million YoY. The company’s emphasis on coal-fired generation hurt, with its coal segment reporting the only YoY decline to EBITDA; the wind segment was flat and the natural gas and hydro segments reported gains, albeit insufficient to offset coal’s performance. Beyond its generation segments, however, TransAlta’s trading segment reported a $22 million YoY decrease due to volatility in the energy markets. Free cash flow increased slightly by $3 million to $23 million over the same period, although the company’s operating cash flow fell from $51 million to -$39 million. Outlook TransAlta took steps to reduce the uncertainty in its outlook during Q2, although several new headwinds have developed that will likely offset the positive impact of these steps. First, the company agreed to pay $56 million to settle market manipulation allegations in Alberta, bringing a multi-year saga to a close. Furthermore, the company’s aforementioned drop-down to TransAlta Renewables was the first stage of a process to reduce its debt load via further drop-downs. Moody’s recently announced that it is reviewing the company’s bond rating for a downgrade to junk status in light of its high debt load. In July, TransAlta agreed to purchase 71 MW of renewable capacity in the U.S., and this, too, could become part of a second drop-down to TransAlta Renewables that the company intends to use the proceeds from to further reduce its debt. The presence of very warm temperatures in Canada caused the company’s number of cooling degree-days to increase in Q3, allowing management to reaffirm its previous FY 2015 EBITDA guidance during the earnings call , albeit at the lower end of the given range, despite the Q2 earning miss. The current year’s guidance is likely to receive further support by the development of a historically strong El Nino event, which is expected to keep temperatures higher than normal through September, potentially boosting air conditioner use and supporting electricity prices. These positive impacts could become negative in FY 2016, however. Past El Nino events have been associated with below-average winter precipitation levels, especially in Canada’s western half. Many regions of Canada are already suffering from drought and, given the large number of hydroelectric facilities that TransAlta operates in many of those same regions, it is feasible that an especially strong El Nino could ultimately result in lower availability starting in Q2 2016. TransAlta’s outlook worsens still further beyond 2016. May saw the election of a left-of-center provincial government in the historically conservative Alberta. More recently the centrist Liberal party, which favors restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions, won Canada’s national election and will replace the outgoing pro-business Conservative party. The new governing party is expected to support clean energy initiatives, in part by placing national restrictions on coal-fired generation facilities. Given an average contract term of 5.5 years, TransAlta’s coal segment will need to establish new power purchase agreements relatively soon after any new environmental policies become entrenched. Two of its alternatives, the use of carbon capture and sequestration at its coal-fired facilities and conversion to natural gas from coal, offer ways around this hurdle while incurring additional costs. Carbon capture and sequestration, in particular, is unlikely given the high costs that it incurs despite years of industrial R&D. Conversion to natural gas is more important and while this will incur conversion costs, it is preferable to simply shutting down coal-fired assets that have up to 30 years of effective productivity remaining. A more pressing matter is the continued presence of low petroleum prices in North America. The health of Alberta’s economy has long been linked to petroleum prices, with the province experiencing lower growth and falling construction rates during previous petroleum bear markets in the early 1980s and again in 2009. Likewise, TransAlta’s share price lost most of its value in late 2008 and early 2009 as petroleum prices fell, although crude’s rapid rebound prevented this from being reflected by a steep drop to its annual earnings in either year. The duration of the current low price environment is very important to TransAlta’s outlook due to its current debt situation. The company has $1.1 billion (mostly denominated in U.S. dollars) of debt that matures in FY 2017 and FY 2018, with another $400 million maturing in FY 2019. Its ability to repay these loans while also financing its planned capex and potential acquisitions will be very dependent on the economic health of Alberta, especially given the company’s plans to increase its share of the province’s generation market. While I do not expect petroleum prices to remain at their current levels for such an extended period of time, potential investors should be aware of the potentially severe financial repercussions to the company that would result from such a situation. Valuation The consensus analyst estimates for TransAlta’s FY 2015 and FY 2016 earnings have been revised significantly lower over the last 90 days in response to its missed Q2 earnings report and mounting headwinds, management’s reaffirmed guidance notwithstanding. The FY 2015 diluted EPS estimate has fallen from $0.23 to $0.12 while the FY 2016 estimate has fallen from $$0.29 to $0.23. Both of these results would be well below the company’s 5-year highs. Based on a share price at the time of writing of $5.25, the company’s shares are trading at an adjusted trailing P/E ratio of 105x and forward ratios of 43.8x and 22.8x, respectively. Even the FY 2016 ratio is well above the company’s respective historical range, suggesting that the company’s shares remain very overvalued despite their poor performance in FY 2015 to date. While a recent anonymous report suggested that TransAlta had been very close to selling itself , buying at the current price level would require the presence of very optimistic assumptions regarding future operating conditions for the company. Conclusion Shares of Canadian electric generator TransAlta have lost nearly half of their value over the last six months and are currently trading at only a fraction of their historical high price. While such a negative market reaction often indicates the presence of a value investment opportunity, potential investors in the company should be wary of the numerous pitfalls that sit in its path over the next several years. Low petroleum prices are already causing Alberta’s economy and construction market to slow, hindering the company’s plans to further increase its share of its largest market. Likewise, the removal of the Conservatives from both Alberta’s government as well as Canada’s national government since May make it likely that the company’s heavy exposure to the coal-fired power segment will hamper its overall earnings in the coming years as existing restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions are strengthened and future ones are enacted. With a share valuation that is much larger than its foreseeable earnings potential, a large debt load, and free cash flow per share that has been less than half of the company’s dividend per share in recent quarters, TransAlta is a very risky prospect for investors. There is a chance that a buyout could occur on favorable terms, resulting in a modest gain for new investors. I consider the probability of this occurring to be quite small compared to the potential for further losses in light of how overvalued the company’s shares are at the time of writing, however. Yield-seeking investors are encouraged to look elsewhere.