Tag Archives: ibb

Cutting Through The Rhetoric In Pharmaceutical Stocks

By Mustafa Sagun, Chief Investment Officer, Principal Global Equities It’s easy to get wrapped up in the headlines when it comes to investing. But for long-term investors, it’s important to separate rhetoric from reality. This was demonstrated most recently in the public outrage over Turing Pharmaceutical’s decision to raise the price virtually overnight on Daraprim, a drug that treats the parasite infection tonoplasmosis, from $13.50 a pill to $750 a pill – an increase of 5,000%. According to industry estimates, drugs such as Daraprim usually see a 3% to 20% annual increase. The decision made on September 21 by the firm was pounced on by presidential candidates, such as Hillary Clinton who proclaimed, “Price gouging like this in the specialty drug market is outrageous. Tomorrow I’ll lay out a plan to take it on.” It wasn’t long before the company reversed course on its product price increase, but nevertheless, the damage had been done as the firm’s decision to increase the price of its product had worked its way into financial markets, particularly impacting healthcare stocks. Since then (September 21 to October 6), the S&P 500 healthcare stocks underperformed the S&P 500 index by about 5%, giving back its year-to-date outperformance. This was mainly driven by ETF selling, as evident from high transaction volumes in key healthcare ETFs (see portfolio insight for more on why ETF selling is an opportunity for fundamental stock pickers). Political rhetoric aside, let’s take a closer look at the reality in this situation to determine if there’s any real negative impact to the fundamentals of healthcare company stocks. The Reality: The reality is that there’s no regulation without legislation. More specifically, there’s no legal way for a sitting president, or any political candidate for that matter, to regulate drug pricing in the United States. Only a change in current laws could do that! And bipartisan legislative action is highly unlikely for at least the next two years or for that matter, perhaps even longer. The other reality is that financial fundamentals are better than ever for biopharmaceutical companies. Business models, product offerings, pipelines, and management quality are considerably better now than they were 10 years ago, resulting in sustainable earnings growth for these companies that is superior to most other sectors of the S&P 500. Another key point is that earnings are stable, as are earnings estimates and guidance. While some stock prices are down more than 20% since mid-summer highs, valuations are attractive and, in fact, quite compelling on a PEG (price earnings per unit of earnings growth) basis. So, the relative underperformance experience cannot be explained by earnings and fundamentals. Rather, the fact of the matter is that short-term concerns, without earnings support, create opportunities for long-term investors. Granted, the healthcare sector has been a long-term winner within the S&P providing a 21% annualized return versus 15% for the S&P 500 since 2012; thus, a pullback is normal. However, we should still recognize that the healthcare sector trades at a lower multiple than the market as a whole while providing higher earnings – two sought out characteristics for fundamental investors. Our healthcare analysts acknowledge that the cloud of uncertainty over drug prices may persist for some time. However, we believe this is an opportunity to take advantage of cheap valuations in companies with improving earnings and fundamentals, as fundamentally nothing has really changed for these companies. They just got cheaper! Portfolio Insight: Focusing on Company Fundamentals As long-term, research-driven fundamental investors, we try to cut through all the rhetoric to focus on the company-specific information that affects earnings and valuations. We believe that it’s important for long-term investors not to paint an entire sector, and every company within that sector, with the same brush. After all, ETF selling by thematic investors is an opportunity for fundamental stock pickers. In other words, a healthcare ETF sells all stocks based on their association to the sector, whereas fundamental investors may buy back a select few due to their superior fundamentals. That’s the essential nature of a bottom-up stock picker; remain calm, stay the course, and focus on sustainable earnings growth that has valuation support. At the end of the day, we seek out opportunities to exploit the behavioral biases that hype and rhetoric create. (click to enlarge) While there are near-term headwinds stemming for the drug price control rhetoric from democratic candidates, fundamentals and earnings have not changed and the recent price weakness has provided further valuation opportunities.

ETF Issues: What You Don’t Know Might Hurt You

ETFs can be great options for investors. But you have to know what you are buying. iShares, for example, isn’t making that easy, though it’s doing the best it can. Exchange traded funds, or ETFs, are an incredible work of human ingenuity. They are pooled investment vehicles that trade close to net asset value while being traded all day long. And while there are good reasons to like these hot products, there are also reasons to dislike them. And a single data point provided by iShares shows one of those reasons. I don’t hate ETFs To start, I don’t hate ETFs. I just don’t like them as much as most investors seem to. And certainly not as much as Wall Street does, based on how many ETFs have been brought to market in recent years. Yes, they are cheap to own and provide quick and easy diversification. But it’s so easy to buy an ETF that people aren’t looking closely enough at what they are buying. That may not matter much if you pick up the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ), a clone of the S&P 500 Index. But with more and more esoteric ETF product being created by rabid Wall Street salesmen, taking the time to get to know what you own is starting to matter more and more. For example, I recently wrote about the fine print in the prospectus of the Global X Yieldco Index ETF (NASDAQ: YLCO ). Essentially, this ETF is focused on buying 20 stocks in a new and niche sector that doesn’t really have 20 stocks to buy. YLCO is all about the story, not so much about the substance, in my eyes. Maybe YLCO will be a great ETF at some point, but right now it’s a risky proposition that all but the most aggressive investors should avoid. So, yes ETFs can be good. But Wall Street has been perverting this goodness in an attempt to make a buck. iShares isn’t evil But don’t think it’s only exotic fare about which you need to be concerned. Even more “normal” stuff can lead you astray. For example, the iShares NASDAQ Biotechnology ETF (NASDAQ: IBB ) has some problems of its own. Now iShares is the ETF arm of giant asset manager BlackRock (NYSE: BLK ). And, for the most part, BlackRock is a stand up company. But that doesn’t mean every product it sells is a good investment option. For example, a quick look at IBB’s overview page shows a P/E ratio of 25. That might not be too surprising given that biotech companies are high growth. You wouldn’t expect a P/E of 10 for this group. In fact, you might even say it’s on the low side for the sector, which is known for housing money losing companies looking for a big score via the creation of new drugs. Which is why you should click the little information icon next to that P/E stat. That’s where you’ll learn that the P/E ratio doesn’t include companies that don’t have earnings. So, essentially, the P/E really tells you less about the ETF’s portfolio than you might at first believe. Interestingly, the same issue pops up throughout iShare’s data on P/E. For example, the iShares U.S. Oil & Gas Exploration & Production ETF (NYSEARCA: IEO ) has a P/E that’s listed at a little over 8. With 70% of its assets in the oil and gas exploration sector, where companies are bleeding red ink, you have to step back and wonder what’s going on. A low P/E makes sense for an out of favor sector, but does that average really tell you the whole story? The thing is the warning about P/E is a standard disclosure on the iShares site and holds true for everything from a niche biotech fund to the company’s S&P 500 Index clone. And iShares really isn’t doing anything malicious. It’s a database issue. You can’t calculate a meaningful P/E if a company doesn’t have any E to work with. So in order to get the job done, in this case calculating an average P/E, you toss the garbage numbers. And, thus, you create a P/E by using only those companies with earnings. Which, unfortunately, biases the number you have just created so that it may offer a misleading picture of the portfolio. So I’m not hating on iShares, there’s not much else it could do to provide site-wide data. And at least it goes the extra step of disclosing this little problem. But it should make you step back and take pause. If you own that biotech fund or the oil and gas fund, the stats you are using to validate your purchase may, in fact, not be reliable. This issue can be found at open-end mutual funds, too, so don’t think ETFs are the only problem child. The best example comes from Morningstar. This research and data house is very open about the way it calculates most of its data, you just have to look. And when it comes to average P/E, they have a workbook available that explains, “If a stock has a negative value for the financial variable (EPS, CPS), the stock will be excluded from the calculation.” EPS is earnings per share and CPS is cash flow per share. So any site that uses Morningstar data will be impacted by this issue… like Fidelity (read the fine print at the bottom of the data page). The question is to what degree is there a problem. In some cases it’s a minor issue. In the case of IBB, roughly half of the ETF’s holding don’t make any money and are excluded from the P/E calculation, according to The Wall Street Journal . That makes the P/E figure provided by iShares pretty much useless in my eyes. And it points out yet another problem that ETF investors may not realize when they buy what is currently a hot Wall Street product. Know what you own For many investors ETFs are seen as a short cut. A punt option that doesn’t require much thinking. In many cases that’s true, but in many others it isn’t. Which is why knowing what you own is so important. Can you accept the average P/E for an S&P 500 Index fund at face value? Yeah, probably. But what about an ETF honed in on an industry that’s filled with money-losing companies, like biotech? I don’t think that passes the sniff test. You’d be better off doing a little more digging into the portfolio to get a good understanding of what’s in there. Again, I don’t hate ETFs. But they are so popular and have been pushed so hard by Wall Street that I fear investors don’t have any clue what they own. Too many people have been lulled into complacency by slick marketing and an avalanche of new products. I don’t think that’s a story that ends well. If you own an ETF, I recommend taking a deeper dive just to make sure you really own what you think you own.

Biotech Returns Outstanding Even Given Recent Weakness

“Beating the market” is fun. Beating the market while taking less risk is even more fun. Biotech investors have had a lot of fun in recent years. Just over two years ago I examined the performance of 3 popular biotechnology ETFs and concluded they provided “outstanding risk adjusted returns.” In finance our traditional measure of risk is beta , a measure of how sensitive a portfolio’s return is to the returns of the overall market. The latter is obtained by looking at the S&P 500 or its eponymous ETF, the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF ( SPY). There are several biotech ETFs, but I chose the iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (NASDAQ: IBB ) back then for several reasons: It is by far the largest fund, by portfolio dollar value; It is the most diversified, having a the large number of holdings; and It is the very liquid, trading millions of shares daily and weekly. Source: etfdb.com In addition, IBB has traded the longest and has ten years of data on the portfolio risk profile. Surprisingly, while most investors think of biotech as very risky and volatile, this long term measure of the IBB’s beta shows it to be .67, significantly less than that of the overall market. ( Source: yahoo finance ). Remember one of your first lessons in finance: a portfolio may be quite volatile, but if its zigs and zags are not correlated with the broad market swings, the portfolio is not as risky as it first looks! IBB is a classic example of this. Furthermore, unlike the betas of individual stocks, the betas of portfolios are far more stable over time. Long term risk adjusted comparisons are therefore valuable and reasonable. I will continue to focus on IBB in this article as a result. What does this mean for long term biotech investors? As is clear from the chart below, IBB has walloped the market’s overall return in recent quarters. (click to enlarge) Source: bigcharts.com How great is this performance? Since April 15th of 2014, when the last big correction in stock prices ended, the broad market has gained about 7% in value. Since IBB has a beta of .67, we would expect this portfolio to gain: (beta) x (S&P 500) = expected return, so (.67) x (7%) = 4.2% What was the actual return over this period? Close to 40%, even after the sharp selloff in Biotech shares in the most recent correction! By the way, I could easily have shown a very short term graph of IBB since this past August and it would show that IBB has fallen much more than you would expect. But remember, as SA readers we should be long term investors–not short term traders. Especially in a sector such as biotech, where it takes patience while new medical innovations break out of the laboratory. In addition, over very short periods of time—such as the last 2 months—any portfolio may see a surge in risk. That is precisely why I used the ten year data: to filter out such noise. A technician would say IBB is “oversold.” A fundamental analyst would continue his due diligence and see if the recent shakeout was due to some change in this industry’s long term prospects. Five of IBB’s top ten holdings have seen downward earnings revisions in recent weeks; on the other hand, three–including giants like Amgen (NASDAQ: AMGN ) and Gilead (NASDAQ: GILD ) have seen substantial upward revisions. In summary, while recent wobbles have given biotech fans some scares, the industry retains most of its low risk profile and long term potential. In financial statistical analysis, high returns at low risk are the alpha that investors crave, and for which this site is named. Keep biotech on your radar for a long time to come.