Tag Archives: most-popular

M&A Activity Stokes Inflows To Healthcare Providers ETFs

Summary Increased industry consolidation could help support healthcare provider ETFs. Healthcare services ETFs attracting greater investment demand. The healthcare sector is booming on a wave of new clients as more enroll into the ACA. By Todd Shriber & Tom Lydon Buoyed by rumors that the health insurance industry is poised for consolidation on a grand scale, the iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (NYSEARCA: IHF ) has been steadily rising and raking in new assets. As of June 23, IHF added $247 million in new assets this year, the ETF’s biggest first-half inflows since it came to market in 2006, reports Joseph Ciolli for Bloomberg . Up 19.4% year-to-date, it is now home to $987.4 million in assets under management. For weeks, investors and the financial media have been expecting a wave of consolidation that could see marriages among some of IHF’s largest holdings. Earlier this week, Cigna (NYSE: CI ) rejected a $47 billion takeover offer from Anthem (NYSE: ANTM ). Anthem and Cigna are IHF’s fourth- and fifth-largest holdings, respectively, combining for over 13% of the ETF’s weight. Dow component UnitedHealth (NYSE: UNH ) has made overtures for rival Aetna (NYSE: AET ) while Aetna has been reportedly eying Humana (NYSE: HUM ), according to the Wall Street Journal . UnitedHealth, Aetna and Humana combine for about 23% of IHF’s weight. “Fueling the potential consolidation is the Obama administration’s 2010 health law, which put tougher rules on the industry, demanding more covered services, better care and a ceiling on profits. Companies are racing to capture the more than 20 million customers who will buy coverage under the law,” according to Bloomberg. Inflows to IHF are accelerating, including $138.1 million in the current quarter. In March 2014, the ETF had just $400 million in assets under management. Investors are also taking note of IHF’s equal-weight rival, the SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (NYSEARCA: XHS ) . XHS now has nearly $191 million in assets, $25 million of which have arrived this quarter. The ETF has added $54.1 million in new assets this year. Cigna, Aetna, Anthem, UnitedHealth and Humana combine for 10% of XHS’s weight. The ETF is up 15.8% this year. IHF and XHS are not strangers to healthcare mergers and acquisitions. Earlier this year, UnitedHealth agreed to acquire Catamaran (NASDAQ: CTRX ) for $12.8 billion in cash. In 2009, Express Scripts (NASDAQ: ESRX ) spent $4.7 billion to acquire WellPoint and followed up that deal with the $29 billion acquisition of Medco in 2012. Last month, shares of Quest Diagnostics (NYSE: DGX ), the provider of healthcare diagnostic testing services, after it was rumored that company could be a takeover target as well though chatter to that effect has since ebbed. Quest Diagnostics is 2.6% of IHF and 2% of XHS. iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (click to enlarge) 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. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Evaluating Managers During Market Extremes

Summary Investing is a probability-based exercise; therefore, having a good decision making process is vitally important. Emotions and investing do not play well together and often lead to poor decisions. Investors should ultimately evaluate investments/managers in a way that minimizes emotional corrosion. Capital markets have a rhythm over the long term. They ebb and flow, creating investor sentiment that fluctuates between euphoria and despair. This pattern is one of the key impediments to becoming a successful investor. In order to succeed, one must master not only investment knowledge, but also investor psychology. Deciphering and filtering large amounts of data in order to make a successful investment is not enough. Investors must also control their emotions which often lead them to poor decisions. Looking at the stock markets today, the S&P 500 and the MSCI All Country World (“ACWI”) continue to climb in spite of lukewarm economic data. Through May 31st, the S&P 500 and ACWI are up 3.2% and 5.4%, respectively. This is quite a return when considering the U.S. Gross Domestic Product was reported down 0.2% for the first quarter. The three-year returns for the S&P 500 and ACWI were also very robust as these markets gained 68.0% and 53.9%, respectively. This pattern has been in place since the bottom of the market was established in early 2009. While the stock market recovery has allowed investors to regain losses from the financial crisis, the euphoria caused by accelerating markets can create doubt in one’s investment philosophy. This can overwhelm an investor’s ability to achieve their investment objectives because it can cause them to “chase returns” or “reach for yield” at the exact time in which they should be exhibiting discipline in their investment philosophy/process. At Highland, our overarching investment philosophy is one rooted in risk management. We believe investors should prudently seek return in a manner which protects them during difficult markets (i.e. large market declines). This philosophy leads us to managers which exhibit certain characteristics: Downside protection: losing less than the overall market during large, protracted declines; emphasis on intrinsic value: the price of an investment does matter; lower long-term volatility: a more consistent return pattern than the overall market (i.e. shorter peaks and troughs); and long-term time horizon: longer holding periods allows for an investment thesis to properly play out. By investing in managers which exhibit these characteristics, we believe that our investors can outperform the overall market over longer periods of time. However, in order to properly execute this philosophy, an investor must remain focused on the long term and remain patient. The goal of this approach is to enhance one’s ability to stick with their investment strategies during very difficult markets. Ironically, this investment approach tends to be most difficult to stomach during periods of rapidly appreciating markets as it and these types of managers will tend to underperform. For this reason, we will focus on evaluating managers during euphoric markets and how to determine if your objectives are still being met. Traditional Evaluation Methodology The most commonly used method to evaluate managers is to simply compare their historical performance to that of a benchmark index. While many different methods can be used, the most common method is annualized time-weighted returns. Figure 1 illustrates time-weighted returns of a global equity manager utilized by Highland: Figure 1 (click to enlarge) In order to evaluate the success of a manager, an investor must first define/understand what they mean by success. Many investors simply define success as a manager outperforming their respective benchmark. Using this measure of success, it appears that the global manager has been struggling to achieve success over the past three and five years. Based upon this analysis, an investor might be tempted to terminate the manager in search of a manager that has provided above-benchmark returns. At Highland, we believe that success is defined by an investor’s ability to achieve their long-term investment objectives. Ultimately, it is not only the return, but also how you achieve the return that determines success. We believe success is determined by the following: Outperforming the benchmark over the long term (minimum of 5-year rolling periods). Protecting capital during difficult markets. Exhibiting an overall volatility lower than the benchmark. The traditional type of analysis ultimately fails to determine success for two reasons. First, only one aspect of success (return) is being examined. Second, it can lead to poor decisions. Figure 2 compares Manager A’s and Manager B’s time-weighted returns. This chart illustrates the value added/subtracted (manager return minus benchmark return) over several time periods. Which manager would you choose? Most would pick Manager B because the value add is much higher and consistent than Manager A. The problem is that A and B are the same manager (see Figure 1 ). The only difference is that A represents data through May 31st and B represents data through February 28, 2009. This illustrates one of the major flaws with utilizing only time-weighted returns in your analysis, which is endpoint sensitivity . Figure 2 (click to enlarge) Endpoint sensitivity is a phenomenon which occurs when the conclusions of an analysis can be significantly altered by changing the ending data point (the ending date in this example). Highland’s investment philosophy employs strategies which seek to protect capital during difficult equity markets. This means that the managers in the portfolio tend to have less downside risk and lower overall volatility. Conversely, they tend to perform less well, on a relative basis, in big up markets. Therefore, this type of strategy often suffers severe endpoint sensitivity during market extremes, which was illustrated in Figure 2 . Highland’s Evaluation Methodology In order to minimize potentially erroneous conclusions caused by endpoint sensitivity, Highland employs additional analyses to evaluate manager success. The first is to consider rolling periods of compound returns (i.e. how consistent are a manager’s returns over longer periods of time). This type of analysis examines the entirety of a manager’s return stream to determine their probability of success. In addition, we examine a manager’s rolling excess performance over the benchmark to ensure consistency. By combining these two methods, we believe that we have a more predictable method of assessing whether a manager has the ability to add value. Figure 3 illustrates the global manager’s results based on this methodology. The results show that the manager has the ability to consistently outperform the benchmark, especially when examining longer time horizons (i.e. outperforming 100% of ten-year periods). This also shows how the results in Figure 1 are more driven by the extreme market environment and less by the manager’s ability to outperform. Figure 3 (click to enlarge) While the results in Figure 3 better account for endpoint sensitivity, they still only capture one aspect of success (return). To evaluate the risk aspect, Highland examines volatility and risk-adjusted returns to ensure a manager is providing the return profile required by our investment philosophy. There are numerous methods that can be used to evaluate risk-adjusted returns, and Highland uses most of them to analyze success. Figure 4 is one example, which examines return per unit of volatility over rolling periods (to eliminate endpoint sensitivity). Figure 4 (click to enlarge) Each of the methods used to evaluate success have their own set of pros and cons; therefore, one method cannot be used in isolation to properly judge a manager. Instead, Highland utilizes all of the methods discussed in order to determine if objectives are being met. This allows us to temper our emotions at market extremes and maintain sound judgment when it is the most difficult. We are then able to focus on the long term and put our clients in a position to achieve their investment objectives. Conclusion Conservative investment strategies can be beneficial for investors. They allow investors to stay calm and stick to their investment philosophy when markets are experiencing large corrections, which place an investor in the position to achieve their investment objectives over the long term. On the other hand, these types of strategies struggle to keep up with markets during long, protracted upswings, which could cause an investor to question the validity of a conservative strategy. It is important to understand that traditional evaluation tools at market extremes (i.e. peaks and troughs) often skew the appearance of success or failure. For this reason, Highland utilizes evaluation metrics that limit endpoint sensitivity. Therefore, investors can limit their emotions and make decisions in a manner that is prudent and most beneficial for their portfolio. 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. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Why I’m Now More Of A Buffett And Munger Type Investor

Summary Why I changed from Graham to Buffett and Munger. The importance of low hanging fruit in investing. What Growth as an Investor Really Is. Why You Need to Improve Risk Management. I’ve changed. How? It’s the same evolution that a lot of people have followed. Originally I focused purely on Ben Graham’s criteria and net nets. The beauty is that Graham’s techniques are easy to understand and follow because there is a lot of quantitative factors. Here’s one example of a Graham checklist you can study and follow. Graham came out with this back in his early days while running the partnership with Jerome Newman. ## Graham’s 10 Point Checklist An earnings-to-price yield at least twice the AAA bond rate P/E ratio less than 40% of the highest P/E ratio the stock had over the past 5 years Dividend yield of at least 2/3 the AAA bond yield Stock price below 2/3 of tangible book value per share Stock price below 2/3 of Net Current Asset Value (NCAV) Total debt less than book value Current ratio great than 2 Total debt less than 2 times Net Current Asset Value (NCAV) Earnings growth of prior 10 years at least at a 7% annual compound rate Stability of growth of earnings in that no more than 2 declines of 5% or more in year end earnings in the prior 10 years are permissible. ## Why It’s Important to Change for the Better It’s important to “adapt” your own version of this checklist because times have changed and this 10 point checklist may not work as well as it used to. And like a lot of people that have adapted and changed away from a pure quantitative approach towards buying quality assets, I have too. Buffett is the most obvious example here because he followed Graham’s investment style during his early partnership days until he met Charlie Munger. Of course, Buffett’s focus is now exclusively on buying quality businesses due to the size of Berkshire Hathaway, the compounding required to keep up growth and the special deals Buffett can strike up. But what’s the reason so many people morph from a Graham investor to more of a Buffett and Munger style of investing? My changes were made based on the need to keep things simple, chase low hanging fruit and improve risk management. Graham certainly did all these things, but when combining my temperament with Graham methods, I started digging myself into a hole without knowing it. So I changed. ## Keep Things Simple and Chase Low Hanging Fruit First The truth is that simple ideas and investments are not sexy. Some investments are so easy and obvious that people think it’s a dumb idea. Or, that low hanging fruit type investments have low upside so it’s not worth the investment. Being an early investor in Uber (Pending: UBER ) is much sexier than being an early investor to AT&T (NYSE: T ). The Fitbit (NYSE: FIT ) IPO is a clear indicator of how people want to be in on the next big thing. You get bragging rights if you say you got into the Fitbit IPO. You get more recognition from friends. You can talk and speculate about what the company is going to do to jet you to your next million. But I hold Amerco (NASDAQ: UHAL ). The parent company of U-Haul DIY moving trucks and storage. The investment thesis is simple. Their DIY truck rental business has a huge moat which is close to a monopoly. They own a ton of real estate for its storage business. They are family owned with large insider ownership. The bad family fights are behind them. They do not focus on quarterly performance or what Wall Street expects them to do. Their financials aren’t the easiest to understand because of the different parts and their focus on reinvesting for the long term. I used to think that I had to find complex stocks. That my goal was to find 1,000% potential returns. That would be awesome, but my focus was way off. I was reaching for the golden shiny apple at the top of the tree when there were very good apples hanging in front of my nose. I was simply ignoring them because it didn’t seem complicated enough. Well, here’s a note I received the other day. You should stop relying on your spreadsheet models and being so promotional with your website – it hinders your ability to analyze and think as an investor. I’ve followed you for quite a while, and you haven’t grown much in the past few years. – Anonymous I don’t know about you, but I’m perfectly content with having the skill to quickly know which stocks to pass on and which ones to dig into further. I’d rather know when something is overvalued or undervalued instead of just chasing a stock and falling in love with the story. Take it from Seth Klarman; Many investors are able to spot a bargain but have a harder time knowing when to sell. One reason is the difficulty of knowing precisely what an investment is worth. An investors buys with a range of value in mind at a price that provides a considerable margin of safety. As the market price appreciates, however, that safety margin decreases; the potential return diminishes, and the downside risk increases. Not knowing the exact value of the investment, it is understandable that an investor cannot be as confident in the sell decision as he or she was in the purchase decision. – Seth Klarman A 50 page complex stock analysis is not growth. Increased activity is not growth. Growth as an investor is knowing what to buy and when to buy. Growth is being able to pounce on a deal when it’s obvious. Growth is knowing how you react in certain situations preventing yourself from falling victim to it each time. Growth is being able to sit still and wait for an elephant to shoot instead of trying to shoot every rabbit. And all this comes from keeping things simple instead of trying to do too much. Graham did the same thing. Being such a savvy businessman and investor, Graham knew that he didn’t have to complicate things. He cut out the fat in investing and used discipline and simple ideas to generate his returns. ## Keeping Things Simple from a Baseball Perspective I’m a Seattle baseball fan which is painful. The team has been the definition of mediocrity for the past decade, but one of baseball’s best hitters is Seattle’s very own Edgar Martinez . In case you’re not a baseball fan, know that baseball is a game of failure. Most professional players can’t hit the ball more than 70% of the time. If you can hit the ball at least 3 out of 10 times throughout your career, you are considered elite. Edgar Martinez falls into this category. But what makes him so special? Two current hall of fame pitchers, Pedro Martinez and Randy Johnson, as well as future hall of famer Mariano Rivera have gone on the record saying that they thought Edgar Martinez was the best and toughest batter they’ve faced. Was it his homerun power? No. He had 309 and is no. 125 on the all time list. Was it his speed? No. He was slow due to an injury. It was simply because he was so disciplined, knew himself and limited mistakes that made him so difficult to get out. In recent interviews by Edgar, his approach was to keep things simple even when the stakes were high. Instead of trying to hit the game winning home run, his method was to stick to the basics, not get out and to keep the ball in play. Does that sound familiar? Edgar Martinez was happy with low hanging fruit by maintaining focus on the bigger picture – keeping the game alive in key situations even with a single. Edgar Martinez focused on protecting the downside and letting the upside take care of itself. Edgar Martinez didn’t go all out on one pitch that could blow up his team’s chance of winning. Edgar Martinez style of play wasn’t sexy and why he hasn’t been inducted into the hall of fame. Edgar Martinez is the baseball version of the investor I want to be. That means controlling the things that I can. Things like understanding how the stock fits within my overall investment objective calculating a valuation range to know when to act or not defining an entry price and exit strategy making better decisions with portfolio allocation ## The Need to Always Improve Your Risk Management Risk can be viewed differently between people, but when you boil it down, people don’t want to lose money. As Howard Marks puts it, I don’t think most investors fear volatility. In fact, I’ve never heard anyone say, “The prospective return isn’t high enough to warrant bearing all that volatility.” What they fear is the possibility of permanent loss. I too fear permanent loss of capital. The key to investing is knowing how to survive. That means at times playing conservatively, cutting losses when necessary and keeping a large portion of one’s portfolio out of play. – George Soros As I took up being a Graham first investor, one bad trait that I found myself creating was the focus on upside. Graham never emphasized the upside so this was purely a bad side effect created by myself. While focusing on the upside, I’ve made plenty of bad mistakes that come along with it. Trying to do too much all the time Over allocating on positions that I should have made much smaller Consuming too much information without putting the time to process it Fear of missing out on something Trying to pick up pennies in front of a bulldozer and the list goes on But one day, it finally sunk in. I finally knew and experienced what it meant to limit the downside. Protect the downside. Worry about the margin of safety. – Peter Cundill And another gem from Klarman. Interestingly, we have beaten the market quite handsomely over this time frame, although beating the market has never been our objective. Rather, we have consistently tried not to lose money and, in doing so, have not only protected on the downside but also outperformed on the upside. – Seth Klarman For me, that meant becoming a more Buffett and Munger investor. Slowing down my agendas and giving myself more time to think and process the information on hand. Look for strong moats. Look for good management. Look for businesses that I can hold for a long time without losing sleep over. I’ve changed for the better. Have you? Disclosure: I am/we are long UHAL. (More…) 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.