Tag Archives: lightbox

3 Top-Ranked Utility Mutual Funds For Steady Returns

Utility funds are an excellent choice for investors seeking a steady income flow. They are also used as defensive instruments, which protect investments during a market downturn. This is because the demand for essential services such as those provided by utilities remains unchanged even during difficult times. In recent years, many funds in this category have increased their exposure to emerging markets and unregulated companies. This has increased the risk involved, but has also generated higher returns. Below, we will share with you three top-rated utility mutual funds. Each has earned a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 (Strong Buy) as we expect these mutual funds to outperform their peers in the future. To view the Zacks Rank and past performance of all utilities mutual funds, investors can click here to see the complete list of funds . Kinetics Alternative Income Advisor A (MUTF: KWIAX ) seeks to provide current income. KWIAX invests the majority of its assets in the Alternative Income Portfolio, a series of Kinetics Portfolios Trust that holds a portfolio of primarily fixed income securities. The Kinetics Alternative Income Advisor A fund has a three-year annualized return of 2.4%. As of December 2015, KWIAX held 244 issues, with 10.12% of its total assets invested in iShares 1-3 Year Credit Bond. Putnam Global Telecommunication A (MUTF: PGBZX ) invests a major portion of its assets in common stocks of both large and mid-sized companies across the world. PGBZX invests in companies involved in the manufacturing or selling of communication services or communication equipment. PGBZX uses derivative instruments for both hedging and non-hedging purposes. The Putnam Global Telecommunication A fund has a three-year annualized return of 9.3%. PGBZX has an expense ratio of 1.26% as compared to a category average of 1.44%. AllianzGI Global Water C (MUTF: AWTCX ) seeks long-term capital growth. AWTCX invests a major portion of its assets in common stocks of companies that are represented in the S&P Global Water Index, the NASDAQ OMX US Water or Global Water Indices or the S-Network Global Water Index, or are involved in water-related activities. AllianzGI Global Water C is a non-diversified fund and has a three-year annualized return of 4.2%. Andreas Fruschki is the fund manager since 2008. To view the Zacks Rank and past performance of all utilities mutual funds, investors can click here to see the complete list of funds . About Zacks Mutual Fund Rank By applying the Zacks Rank to mutual funds, investors can find funds that not only outpaced the market in the past, but are also expected to outperform going forward. Pick the best mutual funds with the Zacks Rank. Original Post

Floating Rate ETFs In Flux

This article originally appeared in the April issue of WealthManagement Magazine and online at Floating Rate ETFs in Flux . With fed rate hikes likely coming at a slower pace, investors flee some floating-rate notes. Nearly a year ago, as part of our survey of alternative income funds (” Alternative Alternative Income “), we picked through a number of floating-rate note (FRN) portfolios to find the potential best-of-class performance should interest rates rise. Well, since then rates have risen by 34 basis points in the three-month Libor and 26 basis points in the three-month T-bill yield. Curiosity compels us to revisit the floater funds to see how the asset class has fared. Not all these portfolios are alike, so one shouldn’t expect uniform results. The vast majority of the $9.8 billion held by exchange traded fund (ETF) versions are invested in corporate securities. And, among these, there’s further differentiation by credit ratings. Most investors are attracted to funds holding high-yield securities, though significant assets are committed to investment-grade paper. The junk/quality split is 54/40 with the remaining 6 percent in municipal and Treasury notes as well as a fund devoted to variable-rate preferred stock and hybrid securities. Money Flows Overall money has flowed out of the 12 ETFs plying the floater trade over the last 12 months. Net redemptions of $417 million reduced the category’s asset base by 4 percent. This wasn’t a wholesale dumping; it was more tactical. Some segments lost assets, some gained. And that’s a story in itself. Junk note funds lost nearly 16 percent, or $986 million, while ETFs invested in higher-grade corporate notes saw inflows of nearly 5 percent, or $183 million. At the same time, there was a $5 million, or 45 percent, boost in the newer (and smaller) Treasury segment. The single fund devoted to municipal notes bled assets, losing $27 million, or 28 percent, of its base while the other singleton, the variable preferred stock ETF, tripled in size with $408 million in net creations. Two trends are at work here. Some of the high-yield assets migrated to safer havens, namely bank-grade and Treasury paper. Mainly, that’s been an escape from duration risk. Money’s also being drawn to the equity side in response to more encouraging economic data. The second trend is a mercenary search for yield. Consider the inflow to the preferred stock ETF. Dividend yields for variable preferreds indexed in the Wells Fargo Hybrid and Preferred Securities Floating and Variable Rate Index exceed 5 percent, significantly higher than the rates earned by junk notes. Investors believe that stocks, common or preferred, are okay to buy again. Especially if they produce lip-smackin’ income. The insulation from duration risk is a boon. So, let’s take a closer look at the cash thrown off by these ETFs, along with their return characteristics. High-Yield Corporate Floaters The 600-lb. gorilla among high-yield floater ETFs is the $3.7 billion PowerShares Senior Loan Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: BKLN ) , which owns more than 70 percent of the segment. As BKLN goes, so goes the segment. Buoyed by a market-weighted 4.22 percent dividend yield, high-yield ETFs collectively earned a total return of -2.54 percent over the past 12 months. The segment’s discernible duration is 2.27 percent, making it the most rate-sensitive in the asset class. When benchmarked against the i Shares Core Total U.S. Bond Market ETF (NYSEARCA: AGG ) , a broad market bond index tracker with a duration of 5.53 percent, you can see the bargain made by FRN investors: Aiming for higher dividends and less rate sensitivity, they settled for lower overall returns. Despite its middling dividend yield, assets have flowed to the First Trust Senior Loan ETF (NASDAQ: FTSL ) in the past year. FTSL is actively managed with a mandate that allows the portfolio to be invested in non-U.S. paper and equities. Net creations have boosted the fund’s asset base by 87 percent. Investment-Grade Corporate Floaters Dividends are a lot lower in the bank-grade segment. With a collective “A” credit rating, the segment’s market-weighted yield is just 0.58 percent. Modified duration, at 0.12 percent, is very low as well. Like high-yield corporates, total returns have been negative, though at -0.40 percent, less so. The $3.5 billion iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: FLOT ) sets the segment’s pace, though the fund to beat has been the SPDR Barclays Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (NYSEARCA: FLRN ) . FLRN is the only corporate floater that produced a positive total return over the past year. Treasury Floaters Floating-rate Treasury paper, with its low yield and virtually nonexistent duration is really a cash substitute. Investors, wary of potential Fed rate hikes, have goosed up the segment’s small asset base in the last 12 months. It’s the only segment, too, that’s produced a positive, albeit small, total return. Nearly all the segment’s assets are held in the iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF ( TFLO) . Other Floaters There are a couple of ETFs at the corners of the floating-rate market. The PowerShares Variable Rate Preferred Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: VRP ) , claiming the highest dividend yield in the class, earns the variable moniker in more than one way. It’s been one of the category’s more volatile issues, and ended up losing money overall in the past 12 months. A stablemate, the PowerShares VRDO Tax-Free Weekly Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: PVI ) , owns municipal bonds, rated AA- on average, that can be redeemed weekly. Duration is negligible, which make the fund a cash substitute. With no dividend stream, however, the total return pretty much reflects its holding costs. No wonder the fund lost assets. An Overview The side-by-side comparison in Chart 1 shows how the category’s biggest funds behaved over the past 12 months. Three ETFs-FLOT, PVI and TFLO-varied little from their starting values, but BKLN and VRP wobbled significantly. Such volatility speaks to inherent risk. Floating-rate funds limit duration risk so they’re obliged to take on more credit risk to generate attractive returns. We seem to have reached a risk inflection point, though. By and large, investors are fleeing the risk in the high-yield corporate market. That exodus, in great part, reflects investor perceptions that Fed rate hikes may be coming at a slower pace than originally expected. The advantage of holding variable-rate securities, then, has diminished, making other assets more appealing.

My ‘Wisdom’ On Robo Advisors

Tadas Viskanta has put together a nice collection of opinions regarding the new “Robo Advisor” trend. Here’s my general view: “Robo “advisors” aren’t really advisors. They’re robo asset allocators. The robotic allocations are susceptible to flawed risk profiling and inefficient portfolio management for most people with a sophisticated financial plan. The business of asset allocation is too personal and customized to ever become fully automated so the best solution is some integration between the human and robot sides.” These are great new services, but you have to be careful with them. When there’s no advisor involved, you’re highly susceptible to poor risk profiling and behavioral problems along the way. After all, a robo advisor doesn’t help you stick to an asset allocation or help you manage it along the way. And I’ll be blunt about the risk profiling process for many of these services – it’s dangerously insufficient. While these are fantastic low-cost options for many investors, I do think they carry their own unique risks if they’re not utilized appropriately. In summary, I’d argue: If you have trouble with your own behavioral biases and maintaining an appropriate asset allocation, then you might consider a low-cost advisor to help you implement the appropriate plan and maintain it. Additionally, if you’re in need of more planning services, then it’s worth bundling a low-cost advisor with your portfolio management services. What’s “low-cost” in today’s world? I’d argue it’s anything less than 0.5% per year. If you don’t have trouble with your own behavioral biases and maintaining an appropriate asset allocation through market gyrations, then you should just buy a simple Vanguard or Schwab ETF allocation and perform annual maintenance, thereby cutting out the extra fees the robos or advisors charge for rebalancing and harvesting tax losses. If you don’t have trouble with your own behavioral biases and maintaining an appropriate asset allocation through market gyrations, but you’re too disorganized or busy to rebalance and harvest losses , then you should consider one of the human PLUS robo options, such as the Vanguard or Schwab offering. I wrote much more about this topic a few years back.