Tag Archives: demographics

SCZ: Do You Need Some International Small-Cap Companies For Your Portfolio?

Summary SCZ has over 1500 holdings across the globe which appear to give it great internal diversification. The term “across the globe” might be overly optimistic since over 50% of the holdings are in two locations. The weakness for SCZ is that SCHC and VSS both offer materially lower expense ratios and more holdings for enhanced diversification. Since SCZ has a beta higher than 1, it has to be expected to generate fairly substantial returns. On top of the high beta raising required returns, SCZ also needs to be able to beat out SCHC and VSS to justify the high expense ratio. One of the funds I analyzed for exposure to international markets is the iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: SCZ ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. By reducing risk at the portfolio level investors can get their best shot at producing alpha. Expense Ratio The expense ratio for SCZ is .40% for both gross and net expense ratio. That may not seem bad for international small-cap equity and an ETF with 1555 holdings. However, investors should be aware that they also have options in the Schwab International Small-Cap Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHC ) and the Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US Small-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: VSS ). SCHC has an expense ratio of .18% and 1645 holdings. VSS has an expense ratio of .19% and 3352 holdings. It should be no surprise that I see SCHC and VSS as the strong front runners for this kind of portfolio exposure. In the interest of full disclosure, while I don’t have a position in any of these ETFs yet, I do have a pending limit-buy order on SCHC. That order is quite a ways under the current share prices and is only intended to activate if share prices start falling hard again. Geography The geography of the exposure is important in considering international equity options. The chart below demonstrates the exposure for SCZ. Japan and the United Kingdom only represent over 50% of the market capitalization of the holdings in SCZ. I’d like to see more exposure around the globe. This is international and I’m okay with excluding China since I’ve been bearish on their market for months, but I’d like to see a few more continents included. Aside from the concentration being so heavily focused on the top two options, I don’t see any other problems there. Sector Exposures The following chart has the sector exposures within the ETF: I’m not seeing this as a huge problem, but it seems interesting that the exposure is so heavily focused on a few categories again. If it were reasonably possible, I’d like to see better diversification across the industries as well as across the globe. International ETFs are usually plagued by having fairly high levels of volatility and more diversification within the sectors might reduce that volatility some. On the other hand, when financial markets exhibit significant stress factors, it is common for correlation levels to increase throughout international markets so even more diversification in the holdings might not make a material difference in the volatility. Building the Portfolio This hypothetical portfolio has a moderately aggressive allocation for the middle aged investor. Only 30% of the total portfolio value is placed in bonds and a third of that bond allocation is given to high yield bonds. This portfolio is probably taking on more risk than would be appropriate for many retiring investors since the volatility on equity can be so high. 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 REITs on the assumption that the hypothetical portfolio is not going to be tax exempt. Hopefully investors will be keeping at least a material portion of their investment portfolio in tax advantaged accounts. 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. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio The two bond funds in the portfolio are the PIMCO 0-5 Year High Yield Corporate Bond Index ETF (NYSEARCA: HYS ) for high yield shorter term debt and the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: TLT ) for longer term treasury debt. TLT should be useful for the highly negative correlation it provides relative to the equity positions. HYS on the other hand is attempting to produce more current income with less duration risk by taking on some credit risk. The Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLP ) is used to make the portfolio overweight on consumer staples with a goal of providing more stability to the equity portion of the portfolio. The iShares U.S. Utilities ETF (NYSEARCA: IDU ) is used to create a significant 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. The core of the portfolio comes from simple exposure to the S&P 500 via the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ), though I would suggest that investors creating a new portfolio and not tied into an ETF for that large domestic position should consider the alternative by Vanguard’s Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: VOO ) which offers similar holdings and a lower expense ratio. I have yet to see any good argument for not using or another very similar fund as the core of a portfolio. In this piece I’m using SPY because some investors with a very long history of selling SPY may not want to trigger the capital gains tax on selling the position and thus choose to continue holding SPY rather than the alternatives with lower expense ratios. 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 and with the S&P 500 . 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. Conclusion SCZ is the most volatile investment in the portfolio when viewed in isolation as it has a volatility level of 18.7%. That problem is compounded by the high correlation between SCZ and the S&P 500. The combination leads SCZ to having a beta of 1.06% which is unfavorable. Under modern portfolio theory the only way to get risk adjusted returns on SCZ is for it to be outperforming the S&P 500 over the long run since it is increasing portfolio volatility. Will it outperform the S&P 500? I have no idea. The better question would probably be: “Will it outperform SCHC and VSS?” In that regard, I’m skeptical. It certainly could happen but SCHC and VSS have an advantage from having materially lower expense ratios which allow more of the returns to reach shareholders. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.

XLP Has Numbers For Volatility And Correlation, But It Could Be Better

Summary The portfolio used by XLP isn’t optimized for the best possible performance. I love that the portfolio isn’t afraid to hold producers of addictive substances, but where is the BUD? The expense ratio is fairly solid at .15% and the yield isn’t too bad for an ETF used as a small allocation to overweight the sector. I’d like to see XLP increase the number of holdings within the ETF to reduce the concentrated risk of individual holdings. The low beta reflects a combination of mediocre correlation and low volatility which makes the fund a reasonable fit for a small allocation. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk-adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk-adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. I’m working on building a new portfolio, and I’m going to be analyzing several of the ETFs that I am considering for my personal portfolio. One of the funds that I’m considering is the Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLP ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. Expense Ratio The expense ratio on XLP is .15%. I’d like to see a little lower on domestic equity but for a sector-specific ETF, this is still within reason. Yield The ETF is yielding 2.58%. That isn’t enough for a large position in a dividend growth investor’s portfolio, but it is not low enough to really damage the dividend performance of an investor’s portfolio if it is simply being used to create a slight overweight on the sector due to the lower volatility of this sector. Allocations by Industry The following chart breaks down the allocations by each sector: The heaviest exposures are to food and retailing of staples with beverages also coming in as a “very heavy weight”. All around, it should be clear that the goal of this portfolio is to focus on companies that sell products that will maintain strong demand even if the economy is not performing very well. Accordingly, these companies as a group are less volatile than the broader market. Top Holdings The following chart breaks down the top 10 holdings in the fund: After seeing the beverage sector coming at over 18% of the portfolio, I was expecting PepsiCo (NYSE: PEP ) to have a slightly higher weighting. There are a few other things that surprised me as well though. For instance, CVS Health Corporation (NYSE: CVS ) has a higher weighting than Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT ). I would have expected Wal-Mart to get a slightly higher allocation. I also would have expected Target (NYSE: TGT ) to get at least a small exposure in the portfolio, but when I downloaded the entire list of holdings it was not present. For tobacco being just over 15% of the portfolio, how about some alcohol exposure? I would have expected Anheuser-Busch (NYSE: BUD ) to merit a place somewhere in the list since the goal is to have companies that can continue to make sales even if the market turns down. Perhaps I’m being cynical to think I’d like to own a large company that sells low-cost alcohol as part of a strategy for hedging against a weak economy which can often include high levels of unemployment. It may be cynical, but it is also prudent financial planning. Despite my rationale for including BUD, it is not listed in the portfolio either. The portfolio has a total of only 38 holdings which is also lower than I would expect for an ETF whose primary purpose is to lower the volatility of the portfolio. Building the Portfolio This hypothetical portfolio has a moderately aggressive allocation for the middle-aged investor. Only 30% of the total portfolio value is placed in bonds and a third of that bond allocation is given to high-yield bonds. This portfolio is probably taking on more risk than would be appropriate for many retiring investors since the volatility on equity can be so high. 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 REITs on the assumption that the hypothetical portfolio is not going to be tax exempt. Hopefully, investors will be keeping at least a material portion of their investment portfolio in tax-advantaged accounts. 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. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio The two bond funds in the portfolio are PIMCO 0-5 Year High Yield Corporate Bond Index ETF (NYSEARCA: HYS ) for high yield shorter-term debt and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: TLT ) for longer-term treasury debt. TLT should be useful for the highly negative correlation it provides relative to the equity positions. HYS on the other hand is attempting to produce more current income with less duration risk by taking on some credit risk. XLP is used to make the portfolio overweight on consumer staples with a goal of providing more stability to the equity portion of the portfolio. iShares U.S. Utilities ETF (NYSEARCA: IDU ) is used to create a significant 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. iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: SCZ ) is used to provide some international diversification to the portfolio by giving it holdings in the foreign small-cap space. The core of the portfolio comes from simple exposure to the S&P 500 via SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ), though I would suggest that investors creating a new portfolio and not tied into an ETF for that large domestic position should consider the alternative by Vanguard – Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: VOO ) – which offers similar holdings and a lower expense ratio. I have yet to see any good argument for not using or another very similar fund as the core of a portfolio. In this piece I’m using SPY, because some investors with a very long history of selling SPY may not want to trigger the capital gains tax on selling the position and thus choose to continue holding SPY rather than the alternatives with lower expense ratios. 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 and with the S&P 500. 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. Conclusion The nice thing about XLP is that has a correlation of only .84 with the S&P 500 and .47 with high yield bonds. For an aggressive portfolio, a small allocation to XLP can provide a nice reduction in risk. The beta on the fund is only .65 which reflects the combination of moderate correlation to the market and lower total volatility as demonstrated by 12% annualized volatility when SPY had 15.5% annualized volatility. When it comes to the expense ratio and the statistical factors, I think XLP is doing a fairly good job. However, I can’t get past thinking that a portfolio that adds some exposure to other addictive substances like alcohol would be creating a more resilient base for the portfolio. At the same time, I’d like to see a slightly larger volume of holdings (perhaps around 70 rather than 38) to reduce the idiosyncratic risk from holding larger positions in individual companies. XLP is a decent ETF and it performs well in a portfolio. However, I think it could be optimized a little better. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.

SCHH: A Little Too Much SPG, But I’m Still Using It

Summary SCHH is a great REIT ETF with a very low expense ratio. The holdings are little too heavy on SPG and the retail REIT sector in general. When considered within a portfolio the diversification benefits of SCHH are less important when the portfolio already has a large bond holding. Investors should treat SCHH as an optional replacement for a combination of equity and bonds. If I could make a modification to the SCHH portfolio, it would be to decrease retail REITs and increase residential REITs in lower income markets with higher capitalization rates. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. I’m working on building a new portfolio and I’m going to be analyzing several of the ETFs that I am considering for my personal portfolio. One of the funds that I’m considering is the Schwab U.S. REIT ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHH ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. Expense Ratio SCHH has an expense ratio of .07%. The expense ratio is great for equity REIT ETF options. This is one of the holdings I’ve been adding to whenever I saw it dip. Largest Holdings I love what a REIT index does for diversifying a portfolio. However, when I look at the internal holdings of the ETF, I wish there was a little more diversification. Namely, I would like to see a cap on exposure to any individual REIT at about 5% to 6% of holdings. The holdings are shown below: (click to enlarge) Nothing against Simon Property Group, Inc. (NYSE: SPG ), I just don’t want to see 10% of my index fund invested in a single company. Types of REITs (click to enlarge) When we look at the type of REIT holdings by sector, I get the feeling that I would prefer to see retail REITs with a lower weights and residential REITs with a higher weight. I suppose that comes back to my issue with having over 10% of the portfolio in SPG. Drop that down and put the capital into a heavier weight on residential REITs and I’d be very happy with the overall portfolio composition. Building the Portfolio I put together a hypothetical portfolio using only ETFs that fall under the “free to trade” category for Charles Schwab accounts. My bias towards these ETFs is simple, I have my solo 401k there and recently moved my IRA accounts there as well. When I’m building a list of ETFs to consider I want to focus on things I can trade freely so that I can keep making small transactions to buy more when the market falls. Within the hypothetical portfolio there are no expense ratios higher than .18%. Just like trading costs, I want to be frugal with expense ratios. The portfolio is fairly aggressive. Only 30% of the total is allocated to bonds and I would consider that the weakest area in the portfolio. I’d like to see more bond options (with very low expense ratios) show up on the “One Source” list for free trading. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio The Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHD ) is a dividend index. The Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHB ) is a broad market index. The Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHX ) is focused on blended large cap exposure. The Schwab International Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHF ) is developed international equity. The Schwab Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHE ) is emerging market equity. The Schwab International Small-Cap Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHC ) is developed small capitalization equity. is domestic equity REITs. The Schwab U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHZ ) is a remarkably complete bond fund. The SPDR Barclays Long Term Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: TLO ) is a long term treasury ETF. The PIMCO 25+ Year Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury Index ETF (NYSEARCA: ZROZ ) is an extremely long term treasury ETF. Notice that the 3 international equity ETFs have only been weighted at 5% while the broad market index has been weighted at 25%. I find heavy exposure to international equity to bring more risk than expected returns so I try to keep my international exposure low. I prefer no more than 20% in international equity. Plenty of domestic companies already have enormous international operations so the benefit of international diversification is not as strong as it would be if the markets were isolated from each other. Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. When TLO and ZROZ post negative risk contribution it is because the negative correlation to most of the equity holdings results in the long term treasury ETFs reducing the total portfolio risk. In my opinion, this is the best argument for including them in the portfolio. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio and with the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ). 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) The Role of SCHH REIT ETFs can perform a couple roles within a portfolio. One major use of REITs is to boost the income yield from the portfolio, but SCHH doesn’t pay out as high of a dividend yield as some of the other equity REIT index funds. In my book, that makes it more useful for investors that are not concerned about distributions for decades. Since I’m holding the ETF in a tax advantaged account, I won’t have to worry about capital gains taxes either. Since SCHH is not offering a high current yield for investors, it is useful to look at the diversification benefits because SCHH runs between .70 and .60 on correlation with all of the other equity ETFs in the portfolio. The only real weakness for holding a large allocation in equity REITs is the correlation with bonds is not as favorable as it is for the other equity ETFs. If an investor wants to completely avoid using bond exposure in their portfolio, as I’ve been doing, then equity REIT indexes are absolutely critical in reducing the risk level. When the portfolio is including a substantial allocation to bonds it will reduce the optimal allocation for equity REITs. Conclusion SCHH may not offer a high dividend yield, but for long term investors looking to build an optimal portfolio it makes sense as a solid index fund with a very low expense ratio. When investors increase their allocation to equity REIT indexes it may be appropriate to fund the portfolio by selling both domestic equity and bond ETFs. If the investor sells out of their position in REITs, the most intelligent allocation strategy would be to split the proceeds between bonds and equity. With the domestic equity REIT space, SCHH is a very attractive ETF for having a very low expense ratio. The biggest thing I would like to see changed is moving some the retail REIT exposure to residential REIT exposure. If I were to get even more specific, I would love to see the residential REIT exposure focused on markets with higher capitalization rates and lower value properties that would be expected to do better in a recession. If I were adding individual equity REITs to my portfolio to compliment SCHH, I’d start with looking for ones that operated low income properties. Disclosure: I am/we are long SCHB, SCHD, SCHF, SCHH. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.