Tag Archives: datetime-local

John Deere Q1 Results Drag Down Agribusiness ETFs

Before the opening bell on Friday, the world’s largest agricultural equipment maker, Deere & Co. (NYSE: DE ), reported disappointing fiscal first-quarter 2016 results. Though the company surpassed our earnings estimates, it missed on revenues and provided a bleak outlook for full fiscal 2016, reflecting another year of declining sales and continued pullback in the global agricultural sector. Deere Q1 Results in Focus Earnings per share came in at 80 cents, comfortably beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 71 cents, but deteriorating 28.6% from the year-ago period. Revenues declined 15% year over year to $4.77 billion and lagged our estimate of $4.79 billion. The global agricultural slowdown and weakness in construction equipment markets were the major culprits for the lackluster revenue performance and this trend is likely to continue this year. Additionally, a strong dollar continues to weigh on the company’s profitability (read: Top and Flop Currency ETFs YTD ). As a result, the manufacturer expects 2016 to be another challenging year with overall equipment sales expected to drop 8% for the second quarter and 10% for fiscal 2016. Segment wise, the company expects global construction and forestry equipment sales to decline about 11% in fiscal 2016, including negative currency translation of 2%, and global sales of agriculture and turf equipment to drop 10%, including negative currency translation of 4%. The company also expects net income of about $1.3 billion for fiscal 2016. Market Impact Based on bleak outlook, shares of DE dropped as much as 4.7% on the day while trading volume was also heavy with around 9 million shares exchanged in hand compared with the 3-month average of around 3.6 million shares. Rough trading is expected to continue in the ETF world as well over the next few days, especially among those that have the largest allocation to this big agricultural equipment maker (see: all Materials ETFs here ). However, investors should closely monitor the movement of these funds and the stock, and could tap the beaten down prices with a low risk in the basket form. This is especially true as Deere has a solid Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) with additional flavors of a Value and Momentum Style Score of ‘B’ each. iShares MSCI Global Agriculture Producers ETF (NYSEARCA: VEGI ) This fund follows the MSCI ACWI Select Agriculture Producers Investable Market Index and offers investors global exposure to 128 firms that are primarily engaged in the business of agriculture. Here, Deere occupies the third position with a 7.9% allocation. From a sector look, agricultural chemicals takes the largest share at 47%, closely followed by farming/fishing (20%) and industrial engineering (18%). American firms dominate the fund’s holding with 45.4% of total assets, followed by a double-digit exposure to Switzerland. The ETF is less popular and illiquid with $24.7 million in its asset base and around 10,000 shares in average daily volume. The ETF charges 39 bps in fees per year from investors and has shed 2.2% post Deere results. Market Vectors Agribusiness ETF (NYSEARCA: MOO ) This fund is by far the most popular and liquid choice in the space with AUM of about $758.4 million and average daily volume of nearly 215,000 shares. It tracks the Market Vectors Global Agribusiness Index and charges 57 bps in annual fees. In total, the fund holds 53 securities in its basket with DE occupying the third spot at 6.8% of total assets (read: Market Crashing! ETFs & Stocks That Deserve Love ). The product provides nice diversity across business segments with agricultural chemicals accounting for 37% share while industrial engineering (17%), farming/fishing (14%) and packaged food products (13%) round off the next three spots. In terms of country allocation, half of the portfolio goes to the U.S. firms while Canada, Switzerland and Japan get a decent exposure of around 8% each. The fund lost 1.5% on the day of the earnings release. Original Post

Earnings Review: Drought, Currency Impact On International Business Dents Duke’s Q4 Results

The largest electric utility company in North America, Duke Energy (NYSE: DUK ) reported its fourth quarter and full-year earnings for the fiscal-year 2015 on Thursday, February 18th. The company reported adjusted earnings per share of 87 cents, 7% below consensus estimates of 94 cents . Management attributed the earnings miss on the impact of mild weather conditions and the negative impact of currency translation, as revenue earned from international operations in South America was worth less when translated back into the U.S. dollar. For the full year, revenue stood at $23.46 billion , down 2% from 2014’s $23.93 billion. Operating income rose by 2.1% year over year as operating expenses fell by close to 3% on lower fuel expenses. The decline in operating costs was offset by higher operation and maintenance expenses, as well as higher depreciation and amortization expenses. Segment wise, increased pricing as well higher wholesale net margins led to a 9% increase to $601 million in the reported adjusted income of the Regulated Utilities division. Lower margins for National Methanol and the unfavorable impact of currency translations meant that the adjusted income of the International Business dropped by 5.6% to $68 million for the full year. The company’s commercial power business reported an adjusted income of $41 million for the full year, up 28% from last year’s $32 million, on the back of higher margins in wind and solar generated power. The commercial power business which now includes unregulated renewable assets and commercial electric and gas transmission investments but not the Midwest Commercial Generation business, which the company sold to Dynergy last year. We have a $68 price estimate for Duke Energy , which is about 9% below the current market price. Key Drivers For 2016 Due to a tougher regulatory environment, Duke has had to forego short-term profitability and focus on optimizing its asset base. The company has focused on increasing investments in natural gas and renewables, while getting lowering its exposure to unregulated markets. In 2016, the company expects most of its growth in the regulated utilities business to come from opportunities that will be unlocked by the $5 billion investments in growth that it has made. Management expects retail load to grow by around 0.5% year over year, and that should result in some bottom-line growth for the company. Most of its growth in 2016 is expected to result from the integration of the North Carolina Eastern Municipal Agency’s (NCEMPA) assets that it purchased for $1.25 billion and closed in July of last year. Additionally, the company has been focusing on reducing operational and maintenance costs. On the commercial power front, Duke expects to benefit from a $1.5 billion investment in Renewables and from its stake in the joint venture in the Atlantic Coast pipeline with Piedmont and Dominion. However, there has been a lag in getting regulatory approval for operations in certain jurisdictions. This, coupled with the loss of earnings from the Midwest power generation business, will offset some of the gains from new investments. On the international front, management said that reservoir levels in Brazil increased throughout 2015, which will enable the company to purchase power at a lower cost in 2016, resulting in higher margins. However, lower exchange rates between currencies in South America and the U.S. dollar, and low Brent crude oil prices, will mean lower revenue for the company’s National Methanol business. Additionally, Duke is considering exiting from its international business, but no timeline has been specified on this front, making the performance of the international business in 2016 less important. Most of Duke’s growth will come from its core business, which the company expects to grow between 4% and 6% in 2016. Disclosure: No positions.

The New Definition Of Investment Manager Success: How To Tell Who’s Winning

It’s become self-evident recently that peer groups suffer from “loser bias” because the majority of active managers underperform their benchmark. Beating the losers is not a “win.” Peer group comparisons simply don’t work anymore. Beating the benchmark is a good beginning, especially when combined with a statistical test of significance called a “Success Score.”. If intermediaries continue to use peer groups, as is likely the case, investors will continue to be disappointed because they’ll continue to hire losers. In the “good old days,” investment managers had two shots at winning. They could beat their index or they could beat the median manager in their peer group. That peer group thing doesn’t work anymore. Due to the popularity of passive ETFs and the emergence of Robo Advisors, there is only one pertinent yardstick – beating the benchmark. Unfortunately , less than 20% of active managers achieve this measure of success. This active manager failure renders peer groups worse than useless. It is now well-understood that peer groups suffer from “loser bias,” in addition to survivor and classification biases. Loser bias is the reality that more than 80% of the managers in a peer group are losers since they fail to beat their benchmarks. Beating the losers is like winning the prize for best ballerina in Waco. Investors need to demand better. So the new definition of “success” is beating the benchmark, but there’s more to winning than this simple measure. We want to know that success is not just luck, that it is likely to repeat in the future. That’s where statistics and “Success Scores” come in. We call it a “win” if the outperformance of the benchmark is statistically significant. Success Scores are the statistical significance of benchmark outperformance. A facsimile of a peer groups is created by forming all the portfolios that could be formed from the stocks in the index. A ranking against these Success Scores in the top decile is significant at the 90% confidence level – we can be 90% sure that it wasn’t just luck. Success Scores are bias free and available a day or two after quarter end. It’s not enough to beat the benchmark. An investment manager needs to beat his benchmark by a significant amount to be a true winner. Success Scores are especially worthwhile for hedge fund managers since peer groups of hedge funds are just plain silly. The tradition of disappointment in active managers will continue if clients (investors) allow it to continue. Clients deserve better,but they need to know how to get it. Investors need to understand their advisor’s due diligence process and to be concerned if it includes peer group comparisons. In other words, investors should seek out advisors who employee contemporary due diligence tools if they are relying on their advisor to select good investment managers. Here are some facts every investor should know: Based on Dr. William F. Sharpe’s “Arithmetic of Active Management”, 50% of active managres should beat their benchmark. The fact is only 20% beat their benchmark, far below expectations. The search for “alpha” uses regression analysis. “Alpha” is the Greek letter for the intercept. It is well-documented that it takes at least 50 years for a manager with “average” skill to deliver a statistically significant alpha. By contrast, “Success Scores” can provide significance for very short periods, like one year. 70% of managers are active, not passive. Towers Watson, a prestigious investment consulting firm, says this number should be closer to 30%. There are too many active managers. Approximately 40% of funds in a peer group don’t belong because they’re different. This problem is called Classification bias. For hedge fund peer groups, most funds don’t belong because hedge funds are unique, which by definition means without peers. Knowledge is power. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. 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.