Tag Archives: lightbox

Is The Value Style Outperformance Sustainable?

Until the market’s (S&P 500 Index) recent rebound from the February 11, 2016 low, investors have essentially gone two years with flat returns in stocks. Certainly it has not been a market that has just traded sideways, but one with significant volatility, both up and down. The most recent recovery has pushed the S&P 500 Index back into the trading range in place since late 2014. Technically, this recent rally into the higher range opens up the potential for the Dow to move to the top of this higher range, 18,300 and the S&P 500, 2,130. Contributing to the improved equity market since the February bottom has been the strength in value and cyclically oriented sectors: energy, financials and industrials. As the below chart shows, energy is up 15.8%, financials are up 14.4% and industrials are up 11%. These three sectors are more heavily weighted in the value oriented indices like the iShares S&P 500 Value Index (NYSEARCA: IVE ). Financials account for over 25% of the value index versus an 8% weighting in the growth index (NYSEARCA: IVW ). Energy represents 12% of the value index versus only 1% in the growth index. The improvement in the value segments of the market has led to the large value index outperforming its large growth counterpart since the February bottom and so far in all of 2016. One reason investors should consider maintaining a written record of their thoughts around their market decisions is the ability to go back and review the outcome of those decisions. With respect to this value/growth phenomenon taking place in 2016, the market went through a similar adjustment in early 2014. I wrote a post on March 26, 2014, almost exactly two years ago, Why It Matters That Value Stocks Are Outperforming Growth Stocks . Subsequent to that post, and for the following two years, growth actually outperformed value. Click to enlarge One factor I noted in the 2014 post was value would outperform if economic activity was strengthening. What actually occurred though was a peak in GDP growth at 4.6% in Q2 2014 which declined to 2.1% in Q4 2014 and .6 in Q1 2015. In fact, economic growth weakened and growth resumed leadership until the beginning of this year. One economic variable discussed in the post from two years ago was the strength in industrial production. Until January’s data was reported in February, the monthly change in industrial had been negative for three consecutive months. As the below chart shows, industrial production exhibited strength in January. Additionally, manufacturing was positive on a year over year basis with Econoday noting, “Total year-on-year industrial production also remains in the negative column, at minus 0.7 percent, a disappointment but a contrast to manufacturing where the year-on-year rate is modest but accelerating, at plus 1.2 percent.” “A negative in the report is a downward revision to December, to minus 0.7 percent from minus 0.4 percent. But the revision doesn’t take much away from the January surprise where strength, based in manufacturing and underscoring January’s rise in retail auto sales, should help ease concern over the economy’s first-quarter performance.” As seen in the sector chart earlier in this post, energy and financials have been strong performers in this value rebound. Energy related stocks have seen an improvement due to the increase in oil prices into the high $38/BBL area from the mid $20/BBL reached on February 11th. I am not convinced this rally in oil is sustainable given the continued oversupply in the oil market. Lastly, both large and small value have outperformed the S&P 500 Index on a long term basis going back to 1927. Of late though, value has lagged its blended index counterparts over the last 10-year time period as can be seen in the below chart. Click to enlarge Source: The BAM Alliance The takeaway for investors is the risk of going all in or all out of any one style. One can invest in the blended index of course, or simply tilting one’s allocation between growth or value may be a better approach. With that said, maybe a tilt towards value is an opportunity at this point in time. The one caution is the much higher weighting in energy within the value index and the anticipated volatility in energy prices.

The Difference Between Beta And Delta And Why We Care

Beta is one of the classic measurements within the financial industry. It is one of the first measurements shown on Yahoo Finance, right under the bid-ask and earnings estimate. Participants use it as a general gauge of market-related risk associated with an investment. As a reminder, an investment with a Beta of 0.8 is generally supposed to participate in 80% of a market move. So if the market increases 10% the investment should move up 8% and in a down 10% environment it should move down 8%. If only it was so simple… Beta is so well known that most people have not reviewed the basics of its calculation in a while, nor do they remember its drawbacks – let’s do some Beta 101! Beta is essentially the slope of the best fit line between the investment being studied (one axis of the graph) and the market (the other axis of the graph). The Beta for both examples above are 1, suggesting that each security very closely follows the market. However, in practice these two Betas are very different. The graph on the left demonstrates that the investment and the market have historically moved in tandem, as the best fit line approaches each plotted point very closely (i.e., very high correlation). Thus, the Beta of 1 is meaningful and appears to be predictive of the future. The graph on the right demonstrates a relatively random relationship between the investment and the market (i.e., low correlation); by some coincidence, the “best fit line” happens to lead to a perfect Beta of 1, which of course is meaningless – there is no reason to expect the investment and the market to move in tandem in the future. This illustration demonstrates one of the major drawbacks with Beta. If correlation is low, Beta is not useful and can even be misleading. Another drawback of Beta is related to the traditional compliance disclosure that past results are no guarantee of future results – Beta is a formulaic calculation based on historical measurements, and thus not necessarily a great predictor of what is to come. Take a look at Chipotle’s (NYSE: CMG ) 1 year rolling Beta below for a factual yet comical illustration of this – over a 5 year period, Beta ranged from 0 to 1.4. This drawback is exacerbated by yet another, which is the need to decide the correct historical time period – how far back is “meaningful”? Chipotle’s Beta on Yahoo Finance is .45, while Google lists Beta at .6 for Chipotle. Which one is right? These drawbacks collectively create a conundrum for investors looking to shape a portfolio by relying upon Beta. Let’s now discuss Delta. Delta is a lesser known term that is related to options. Like Beta, it is a measurement of the expected exposure to a referenced security. This is however where the similarities end. Beta, as mentioned, is a best fit line calculation between a given investment and a reference security; the reference security is typically the market (e.g., S&P 500 index), though it doesn’t have to be. Delta measures the expected exposure of an option to its reference security (e.g., the Delta of Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL ) options compared with Apple stock). It is calculated based on a few widely known variables, including the price of the reference security, the time to expiration of the option, and the implied volatility (future expected volatility as priced by the marketplace) of the option. Based on the way Delta is calculated, the value is current . Meaning that if the delta for an option is .8, then there is a very high likelihood that the option value will increase by approximately .8 for a $1 movement in the referenced security. For a call option, which provides the clients the right to purchase a stock, delta is bounded between 0 and 1 (i.e., if a security changes price, a call option following that security will change in the same direction somewhere between 0% and 100% – since a call option’s Delta can’t be negative, it won’t change in the opposite direction, and since Delta can’t exceed 1, it won’t change more than the security did). For a put option, which provides the clients the right to sell a stock, delta is bounded between 0 and -1. As a measurement, Delta cannot be used as broadly as Beta, since it can only be used with an option and the security the option follows. However, where it can be used, Delta is highly predictive of future relative exposure. Let’s look at Delta in practice. A visual illustration of Call Delta vs. price of the reference security follows – y axis is delta, x axis is how far the reference stock is trading from the strike price. For this option, when strike [1] = current market price (0% on the chart), Delta is about 0.5. As can be seen from the chart, Delta for an option changes as the reference security moves away from the strike price in either direction – Delta approaches 1 when the option is sufficiently in the money (e.g., stock is up about 30% vs. strike price), and Delta approaches 0 when the option is sufficiently out of the money (e.g., stock is down about 30% vs. strike). The implied volatility of the reference stock will affect how quickly Delta of an option changes as will the amount of time left to expiration – both conversations for another time. Let’s see how Delta works in action, starting with a simple example of a call option and then graduating to an options portfolio: Chart #1 is the classic shape of a call with time still left to maturity [2] . If the reference security declines below the strike, the loss is limited to the price paid for the option while if the reference security increases the call participates with the gains. Chart #2 shows the previous graph of Delta based on the relative value of the referenced stock vs. strike price. Using the data in Chart #2, one can predict relatively accurately how much the price of the call will increase and decrease based on an increase or decrease in the price of the reference security. Between the two charts, understanding ultimate exposure as well as relative exposure on a daily basis is very straightforward. For example, if the reference stock increased from 0% to 2%, the option should increase about 1% (Delta is about 0.5 for that range). However, if the reference stock increases from 30% to 32% (a 2% increase in total), the option value should increase about 2% (Delta is about 1 for that range). Now that we have the basics, let’s explore what happens when we combine options. Selling a “put spread” means we sell a put at a given strike and limit our downside by buying a put at a lower strike price – the lower the second strike price, the wider the spread, and the greater our risk (though the more premium we collect for taking that risk). Let’s discuss the maximum exposure of the spread. If we covered ourselves 12.5% below where we sold the first put, our maximum exposure can at most be 12.5%. If the market declines -25% by expiration, then the put we sold would be worth -25% and the put we bought would be worth +12.5%, for a net loss of 12.5%. On the other hand, if the market finishes flat or positive, our value is 0, since both the put we sold and the put we bought are worth 0. Can we figure out the Delta of the combined two option positions? Of course we can! A put spread is simply one long put and one short put so we can calculate the Delta of each and subtract. Below is a chart of the combined Deltas: Because we have two offsetting options, the Delta never goes to 1. Why? When the market is down significantly, the Delta for both puts is -1, so our long put and our short put result in a net Delta of -1 – (-1) = 0. This intuitively makes sense, because we know that once the market is down significantly more than -12.5%, it doesn’t matter if it’s down -30% or -40%, both puts are gaining value equally. If the market is up significantly, Delta for both puts is 0, bringing us back to a combined delta of 0. The above chart shows the combined Deltas with 4 months to go prior to the options expiring. As we mentioned earlier, both time to expiration and volatility have an effect on delta – following is an example of how time affects Delta. The following chart is an illustration of the same 12.5% put spread with 2 weeks left to maturity. As can be seen, a large Delta exposure is concentrated around the center of the spread with almost no delta once either put is surpassed. At any given point in time, the overall Delta can be calculated to give an accurate expectation of the price movement relative to the reference security. Now that we all have a deeper understanding of Beta and Delta, I would like to bring this all back to crafting investment strategies. A large component of the investing public looks to Beta as a guide in making investment decisions. However, for the reasons we’ve mentioned, Beta can be an ineffectual tool in portfolio planning. A product with a low historical Beta may exhibit a future decline far greater than the market for any number of reasons. As I’ve written about before, Funds and investment products often show a murky future, leaving a public averse to ambiguity unsatisfied with their investment options. So-called defensive strategies and tactical plays often seem to work for a period of time and abruptly stop working, leaving investors holding the bag (Contact me for many such examples). In the hands of an experienced user, option strategies are uniquely able to provide a strong level of transparency along with tangible levels of risk and reward. There are a growing number of strategies in the market that look to take advantage of options. For example, our Exceed Investments products are engineered to take advantage of the unique qualities of options in providing a more defined and controlled exposure to the market. In the same way that Delta provides a more mathematically true approximation of the future than Beta does, defined outcome investing can offer a level of predictability unattainable in traditional equity investing. [1] Strike is the value where the owner of a call has the contractual right to buy the stock and where the owner of the put would have the contractual right to sell the stock. For example, if Apple was trading $200 and the strike of the call was $195, the owner could exercise and buy at $195. If the strike of the call was $205, the owner would not exercise because they can simply buy it on the open market. (For reasons beyond the scope of this article, owners typically wait to expiration to exercise) [2] Options are term based, with a specific maturity date. In that sense, they are similar to bonds. As such, there is a level of premium attributable to the value prior to maturity. Again a topic for another time.

Defensive ETFs Outperforming The Market

2016 has been a year filled with plenty of volatility and large scale moves. Markets have recovered well off their lows and investors are now reviewing stocks and ETFs that have outperformed the overall market. This examination better prepares investors for any storm that may hit the markets in the future. If the market pulls back, the ETFs that did well earlier in the year will more than likely continue to outperform the S&P 500. Investors will look to hide in these ETFs until they feel like the weather is clear and economic certainty is better known. I wanted to examine a couple ETFs that have outperformed the S&P and will continue to do so if the market has another setback. These ETFs won’t be fully immune to a market pullback, but they will do better than most if the lows of the year are tested once again. In addition to the sector ETFs, I wanted to examine some top ranked stocks that might move with the ETF. The individual stock provides an opportunity for an investor who would want a bit more risk/reward. The Utilities Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLU ) seeks to provide investment results that, before expenses, correspond generally to the price and yield performance of publicly traded equity securities of companies in the Utilities Select Sector Index. Utilities are considered a safe place in times of uncertainty. The water, lights and the heat will be the last cuts a consumer makes if a recession hits. This certainty of cash flow makes utilities an attractive play. The dividend also makes utility stocks attractive because of the current atmosphere of low interest rates. The ETF has an expense ratio of .14% and is up almost 7% on the year. It sports a 3.4% dividend and has a P/E of 16. The biggest holding in XLU, with an 8.90% weighting, is NextEra Energy (NYSE: NEE ), a Zacks Ranked #3(Hold). Those looking for individual names might hold off on NextEra and instead look to RWE AG ( OTCPK:RWEOY ), a Zacks Ranked #1(Strong Buy). RWE is active in the generation and transmission of electricity and gas. The company is also active in the water business and is one of Europe’s five largest utilities. The company sports Zacks Style Scores of “A” in Value and Momentum and pays a dividend of 6.71%. The company has a $7 billion market cap and is seeing estimates being taken higher for fiscal year 2016. Over the last 90 days, estimates have been revised 8% higher, from $.091 to $0.99. The Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLP ) seeks to provide investment results that, before expenses, correspond generally to the price and yield performance of publicly traded equity securities of companies in the Consumer Staples Select Sector Index. Consumer staples are companies that make products that people will buy no matter what. Think toothpaste, food, drugs, beverages and other household items. Stocks in this sector will typically outperform in weak markets due to the constant strength of demand of their products. The biggest holding in XLP is Proctor and Gamble (NYSE: PG ) with a 12% weighting. The stock has a Zacks Rank #4(Sell) so if looking for an individual name, it might be best to look at Clorox (NYSE: CLX ), which has a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy). Clorox has a $16 billion market cap with a forward P/E of 25. The company pays a 2.45% dividend and expects EPS growth of 7.34%. Over the last two months, estimates for the current year are rising up 1.1% from $4.85 to $4.91. The SPDR Gold Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: GLD ) seeks to reflect the performance of the price of gold bullion. The Trust holds gold bars and from time to time, issues baskets in exchange for deposits of gold and distributes gold in connection with redemptions of baskets. Gold has had a nice run over the last three months and has held up as the market has rallied. GLD reflected that with an 18% move higher. Gold and gold ETFs are looked at as safe havens for uncertainty, and the fact that they have held up tells investors that 2016 might see some rough waters ahead. There are no individual holdings of stocks in GLD. If investors are interested in gold stocks, they should look to the miners as a way to benefit from rising gold prices. Looking at the chart below, we see how gold has performed against the S&P 500 over the past three months. The iPath S&P 500 VIX ST Futures ETN (NYSEARCA: VXX ) is an ETN that is designed to provide investors with exposure to the VIX. The VIX is commonly referred to as the fear gauge and will shoot higher when the market sells off. Just like GLD there are no individual stocks held within the ETN, but rather it offers exposure to a daily rolling long position in the first and second month VIX futures contracts and reflects the implied volatility of the S&P 500. In Summary Investors should be positioning themselves for another pullback at some point this year. The defensive sector ETFs offer a way to stay invested and outperform the market. The fear ETF plays of gold and the VIX offer investors a way to play offense in a defensive market. Original Post Editor’s Note: This article discusses one or more securities that do not trade on a major U.S. exchange. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.