Tag Archives: consumer

Portland General: Utility With Some Promise

Summary Short-term, headwinds exist related to heavy capital expenditures and poor weather forecasts. Long-term, spending should be down and income up, freeing up cash flow for shareholder returns. Two natural gas-fired plant openings, one in 2016 and one in 2020, will be key to company success. Portland General Electric Company (NYSE: POR ) is an electric utility that operates wholly within the state of Oregon, providing power to nearly 50% of Oregonians with over 3,400MW of available energy generation. Primarily serving residential customers, the company’s bottom line has been bolstered by domestic migration to the Northwest. From 2010-2014, the Portland metropolitan area added over one hundred thousand new residents – an annual growth rate of 5.2%. This strong local population growth has helped bolster earnings results and shareholder returns, with investors reaping 100% in total return over the past five years, roughly double the return of utilities indexes. Does Portland General have more room to run or has the utility run its course? Future Is Natural Gas, Profit Is With Hydro * Portland General September 2015 Investor Presentation Portland General has a diverse portfolio of power generation. Including purchased power, 36% of power was created from renewable sources and an additional 25% generated from cleaner-burning natural gas. This is going to change drastically over the next few years, however. Given Oregon’s progressive nature, it wasn’t a surprise to see Oregon residents campaign for clean power. Management quickly bowed to customer and political pressure, leading to plans for the elimination of all coal-fired generation in Oregon. Under the Boardman 2020 plan, Portland General will close its 518MW Boardman coal asset by 2020, instead building a natural gas facility on the site. This will be a costly project, but doing so will save the company $470M in required upgrades to meet emissions guidelines had the plant remained open until 2040 as previously guided. The risk here is that the new plant is delayed and is not completed by the time Boardman is scheduled to be mothballed. Portland General relies heavily on the Boardman plant to produce electricity as coal-fired generation is in many cases the cheapest and most reliable asset the company has. Coal represents 16.5% of available resource capacity but generated 28% of the load in 2015 and is run at capacity nearly constantly. The company’s peak power load in 2014 was 3866MW which was already above currently available company-owned power generation and the shortfall from the Boardman plant closure could force Portland General to increase purchased power during peak times. While these costs will inevitably be passed along to the consumer because of Portland General’s clauses with the Public Utility Commission of Oregon, higher prices could still cause a slack in energy demand and bad press is never good for the bottom line. The company’s Carty Generating Station, slated to be completed in 2017, will help cover future shortfalls built is imperative for investors to track how the new Boardman facility’s construction is proceeding over the coming years. This risk is noted in the company’s 10-K: “Beyond 2018, PGE may need additional resources in order to meet the 2020 and 2025 RPS requirements and to replace energy from Boardman, which is scheduled to cease coal-fired operations in 2020. Additional post-2018 actions may also be needed to offset expiring power purchase agreements and to back-up variable energy resources, such as wind generation facilities. These actions are expected to be identified in a future IRP. PGE expects to file its next IRP with the OPUC in 2016.” – Portland General, 2014 Form 10-K From a profitability standpoint, the key to the company’s energy costs however is hydroelectricity. Hydroelectric generation can be the lowest cost source of generation for Portland General if conditions are right. The state of the Deschutes and Clackamas Rivers (tributaries of the Columbia River) is key. Both of these rivers’ headwaters are fed by the Cascades, a mountain range spanning from Canada to Northern California. In general, the greater the snowfall, the better the power generation is for hydroelectric when the spring thaw comes. Unfortunately for Portland General shareholders and highlighted in a recent prior SeekingAlpha article by Tristan Brown , weather models show lower than average snowfall likely for Oregon, along with a more mild winter in regards to temperature. This presents a double whammy for Portland General in the form of higher energy costs and lower revenue in the winter months during which customers typically draw around 10-15% more electricity than in the summer months. Past Operating Results (click to enlarge) Operating results have been steady and rather uneventful over the past five years (my own estimates used for the back half of 2015). Of note however is depreciation/amortization costs have been increasing dramatically due to the large capital investments the company has been making over the past five years, developing relatively more expensive wind/solar farms and the costs associated with the Carty Generating Station. Overall, this is steady-as-she-goes results that utility investors like to see. (click to enlarge) Frequent readers of my utilities research know that I look for solid coverage of capital expenditures and dividends from operating cash flow for mature utilities. Starting in 2013, Portland General reversed course and begun stepping up the leverage as capital expenditures rose for the natural gas plants at the Carty Generation Station and the old Boardman location. To fund this, Portland General issued $865M in long-term debt in 2013/2014 and also issued $67M worth of common stock in 2013 to cover the cash flow gaps. While this picture looks currently worrisome, it should moderate over time. Capital expenditures are expected to fall from the $600-650M range in 2015 to $289M in 2019, back to levels we saw in 2011/2012 when cash flow was positive. Unfortunately, Portland General won’t see much recovery in the form of increased rates because of offsetting factors, based on the overall breakdown of the 2016 rate case filing: (click to enlarge) Conclusion Portland General saw a little bit more renewed interest after the 7% dividend increase in 2015, well in excess of 2% annual growth from 2009-2014. In regards to operating income, however, 2016 looks unclear given the poor weather outlook. Earnings per share are likely to be flat to down in 2015/2016, so I would not expect a repeat of that hefty 2014 dividend increase. Before entering a position, I would like to see the valuation come down along with more visibility on completion of the two big natural gas facilities (early 2016 should give excellent insight into schedule on Carty Generation Station). Overall, however, shares are quite fairly valued given the long-term prospects of the region. Being long won’t hurt you.

Risk Adjusted Sector ETF Performance: 3rd Quarter Update

Analysts often compare sectors for clues about the economy’s performance and future investments. The performance of these sectors must be adjusted for beta, or risk. What does this 2rd quarter adjusted performance tell us? Seeking Alpha readers know that I periodically analyze the performance of the nine S&P 500 sector ETFs to obtain clues about where the economy is going. Last years’ underperformance by the Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLB ) was only the beginning of a very bad year (so far!) for those stocks. In contrast, after adjusting for risk, Consumer Discretionary (NYSEARCA: XLY ) stocks performed well late last year: and that outperformance has continued. (You can see the article on which this analysis is based here .) The most recent quarter was unpleasant for common stocks: so while all nine sectors fell, we must adjust this poor performance for the varying risk profiles of each sector before we compare it to the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ). An illustration of how this is done will help, and point out a major red flag for the market going forward. Investors know that the healthcare sector has been one of the leaders in this bull market since it began in 2009. In the last three months the Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLV ) fell 12%, two and a half percentage points more than the 9.5% for SPY. So yes, the market has lost some of its leadership: always a source of worry for bulls. But after adjusting for risk, the situation is even worse than it looks! According to yahoo finance XLV has a beta of .59; in a down market we should expect it to fall less than the broad indices. Not more! Specifically we should expect it to fall only 5.6%: (S&P 500 change) x (Sector ETF beta) = (expected risk adjusted ETF return) so (-9.5%) x (.59) = (-5.6%) So the healthcare sector underperformed, not by 2.5%, but by 5.6%! The full results are shown below. You can see that along with healthcare, energy (NYSEARCA: XLE ) and basic materials performed much worse than the market in the last few months. Risk Adjusted ETF Performance 3rd Quarter 2015 Select Sector SPDR ETF beta Actual Return Expected Return +/- Discretionary .91 -3.0 -8.7 +5.7 Technology (NYSEARCA: XLK ) 1.35 -9.1 -12.8 +3.7 Industrials (NYSEARCA: XLI ) 1.00 -11.0 -9.5 -1.5 Basic Materials 1.13 -21.0 -10.7 -10.3 Energy 1.02 -22.0 -9.7 -12.3 Staples (NYSEARCA: XLP ) .49 -3.5 -4.7 +1.2 Health Care .59 -12.0 -5.6 -6.4 Utilities (NYSEARCA: XLU ) .44 -3.0 -4.2 +1.2 Finance (NYSEARCA: XLF ) 1.19 -8.0 -11.3 +3.3 S&P 500 Index 1.00 -9.5 -9.5 zero All three underperformers can turn to special situations as an explanation: Healthcare? Hillary Clinton’s drug company bashing . Energy? The continued weakness in oil and natural gas prices. Basic materials? Continued weakness in Asia , especially China. Even given the dour economic news in these sectors, investors should remember their underperformance signals that this bad news has signaled the market has still not completely discounted this poor outlook. Focusing on healthcare in particular, the failure of this sector’s leadership has ominous signals for the market going forward. While some market indexes have signaled a bear market is now in progress–an issue I shall address in an article tomorrow– I am willing to give the market a bit of slack here. Why? Notice the strength in consumer discretionary stocks. This suggests families are benefiting from lower energy prices: a case of one good cancels out the bad, perhaps? The strength in tech is encouraging. Surprisingly the best indication might be the belated showing of the financial stocks. Remember: this whole debacle began years ago in the financial sector! For them to perform well in a weak market which still may face an interest rate increase from the FED , is encouraging. Keep your long and short powder dry until the market gives us clearer signals. More on this in my next article.

PLW Is A Nicely Designed Treasury ETF

Summary PLW has a diversified ladder of maturities. The fund does a solid job of providing negative beta to reduce the volatility of the portfolio. Using longer maturity treasury securities offers better yields and a stronger negative beta because price movements are larger. The PowerShares 1-30 Laddered Treasury Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: PLW ) is an ETF with a fairly even distribution of maturities across the yield curve. It is an interesting ETF because most treasury ETFs are focused on a single duration range. As a treasury ETF that includes long maturities it shows a fiercely negative correlation with major equity indexes, but the individual volatility of the ETF is reduced compared to longer treasury ETFs because there is also a substantial allocation to the shorter parts of the yield curve. Expense Ratio The expense ratio on PLW is .25%. That isn’t too bad, but there are quite a few cheaper options out there if investors don’t mind having their holdings concentrated across certain maturities. For investors that want diversification across maturities, it may still be worth considering simply buying short, medium, and long term ETFs with lower expense ratios. There isn’t a great deal of “expertise” that goes into picking which bonds to hold in a treasury ETF. Most funds have a guideline establishing which part of the yield curve they will buy and it is really easy to decide which issuer to buy. There is no assessment of the credit rating of different companies or the impacts of the industries, this is simply buying up treasury ETFs and forwarding interest payments to shareholders. Maturity The diversification across the yield curve is clearly demonstrated here. This is far more diversified than most treasury ETFs, but I would favor replicating the portfolio with lower expense ratio funds. Characteristics The fund is showing an effective duration of 10.73 years, so investors should expect to see some material volatility when interest rates are shifting. The nice thing about that is the volatility tends to be headed in the opposite direction of the equity indexes. Perhaps I’m being a little strange, but I actually prefer longer durations on treasury ETFs because of the negative correlation with the market. When correlations are substantially negative, an increase in volatility for the individual ETF will often result in a decrease in volatility for the portfolio. That is, of course, assuming that the individual ETF is a fairly small portion of the total portfolio. For investors that want to go heavy on treasury securities and light on equity, the logic of going for longer duration and higher volatility falls apart. Building a Sample Portfolio This hypothetical portfolio has a moderately aggressive allocation for the middle aged investor. Only 25% of the total portfolio value is placed in bonds and a fifth of that bond allocation is given to high yield bonds. If the investor wants to treat an investment in an mREIT index as an investment in the underlying bonds that the individual mREITs hold, then the total bond allocation would be 35%. Given how substantially mREITs can deviate from book value, I’d rather consider the allocation as an equity position designed to create a very high yield. This portfolio is probably taking on more risk than would be appropriate for many retiring investors since a major recession could still hit this pretty hard. If the investor wanted to modify the portfolio to be more appropriate for retirement, the first place to start would be increasing the bond exposure at the cost of equity. However, the diversification within the portfolio is fairly solid. Long term treasuries work nicely with major market indexes and I’ve designed this hypothetical portfolio without putting in the allocation I normally would for equity REITs. An allocation is created for the mortgage REITs, which can offer some fairly nice diversification relative to the rest of the portfolio and they are a major source of yield in this hypothetical portfolio. The portfolio assumes frequent rebalancing which would be a problem for short term trading outside of tax advantaged accounts unless the investor was going to rebalance by adding to their positions on a regular basis and allocating the majority of the capital towards whichever portions of the portfolio had been underperforming recently. Because a substantial portion of the yield from this portfolio comes from REITs and interest, I would favor this portfolio as a tax exempt strategy even if the investor was frequently rebalancing by adding new capital. The portfolio allocations can be seen below along with the dividend yields from each investment. Name Ticker Portfolio Weight Yield SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY 35.00% 2.06% Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF XLY 10.00% 1.36% First Trust Consumer Staples AlphaDEX ETF FXG 10.00% 1.60% Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF VWO 5.00% 3.17% First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX ETF FXU 5.00% 3.77% SPDR Barclays Capital Short Term High Yield Bond ETF SJNK 5.00% 5.45% PowerShares 1-30 Laddered Treasury Portfolio ETF PLW 20.00% 2.22% iShares Mortgage Real Estate Capped ETF REM 10.00% 14.45% Portfolio 100.00% 3.53% The next chart shows the annualized volatility and beta of the portfolio since April of 2012. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio Using SJNK offers investors better yields from using short term exposure to credit sensitive debt. The yield on this is fairly nice and due to the short duration of the securities the volatility isn’t too bad. PLW on the other hand does have some material volatility, but a negative correlation to other investments allows it to reduce the total risk of the portfolio. FXG is used to make the portfolio overweight on consumer staples with a goal of providing more stability to the equity portion of the portfolio. FXU is used to create a small utility allocation for the portfolio to give it a higher dividend yield and help it produce more income. I find the utility sector often has some desirable risk characteristics that make it worth at least considering for an overweight representation in a portfolio. VWO is simply there to provide more diversification from being an international equity portfolio. While giving investors exposure to emerging markets, it is also offering a very solid dividend yield that enhances the overall income level from the portfolio. XLY offers investors higher expected returns in a solid economy at the cost of higher risk. Using it as more than a small weighting would result in too much risk for the portfolio, but as a small weighting the diversification it offers relative to the core holding of SPY is eliminating most of the additional risk. REM is primarily there to offer a substantial increase in the dividend yield which is otherwise not very strong. The mREIT sector can be subject to some pretty harsh movements and dividends from mREITs should not be the core source of income for an investor. However, they can be used to enhance the level of dividend income while investors wait for their other equity investments to increase dividends over the coming decades. If you want a really quick version to refer back to, I put together the following chart that really simplifies the role of each investment: Name Ticker Role in Portfolio SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY Core of Portfolio Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF XLY Enhance Expected Returned First Trust Consumer Staples AlphaDEX ETF FXG Reduce Beta of Portfolio Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF VWO Exposure to Foreign Markets First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX ETF FXU Enhance Dividends, Lower Portfolio Risk SPDR Barclays Capital Short Term High Yield Bond ETF SJNK Low Volatility with over 5% Yield PowerShares 1-30 Laddered Treasury Portfolio ETF PLW Negative Beta Reduces Portfolio Risk iShares Mortgage Real Estate Capped ETF REM Enhance Current Income Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. Despite TLT being fairly volatile and tying SPY for the second highest volatility in the portfolio, it actually produces a negative risk contribution because it has a negative correlation with most of the portfolio. It is important to recognize that the “risk” on an investment needs to be considered in the context of the entire portfolio. To make it easier to analyze how risky each holding would be in the context of the portfolio, I have most of these holdings weighted at a simple 10%. Because of TLT’s heavy negative correlation, it receives a weighting of 20% and as the core of the portfolio SPY was weighted as 50%. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio. Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. (click to enlarge) Conclusion PLW offers investors a fairly solid exposure to the treasury securities across the yield curve and will help equity heavy portfolios reach a substantially lower level of volatility. If an investor is willing to do the work, they may be able to replicate PLW at a lower cost by simply buying a few treasury ETFs that each offer exposure to a particular sector of the yield curve. Exposure to the shorter parts of the yield curve reduces the total volatility of PLW which makes sense for investors that are going heavy on bonds and light on equity, however the reduction in volatility can be counterproductive for investors that are going heavy on equity securities. Strong price movements on treasury ETFs can be desirable because of the negative correlation with the equity market.