Tag Archives: nreum

Lipper Closed-End Fund Summary: June 2015

For the second consecutive month both equity and fixed income CEFs suffered negative NAV-based returns (-2.84% and -0.74% on average, respectively, for June) and market-based returns (-4.31% and -2.83%). Year to date, however, both groups just remained in positive territory, returning 0.41% and 0.91% NAV-based returns. While the Russell 2000 and the NASDAQ Composite managed to break into record territory in mid-June, advances to new highs were generally just at the margin. However, at June month-end concerns about the Greek debt drama, looming U.S. interest rate increases, Puerto Rico’s inability to service its public debt, and China’s recent market gyrations weighed heavily on investors. A positive finish for equities on the last trading day of June wasn’t enough to offset the Greek debt-inspired meltdown from the prior day, and many of the major indices witnessed their first quarterly loss in ten. Volatility was on the rise in June. At the beginning of the month rate-hike worries plagued many investors after an upbeat jobs report raised the possibility of an interest rate hike this fall. The Labor Department reported that the U.S. economy had added a better-than-expected 280,000 jobs for May, beating analysts’ expectations of 210,000. Despite a rise in the unemployment rate to 5.5% (as once-discouraged job seekers reentered the labor market), many pundits felt the Federal Reserve would be more likely to raise interest rates sooner rather than later. However, European equities showed signs of weakness, and investor handwringing began in earnest as investors contemplated the looming deadline for Greece to make its first debt payment to the IMF at the end of June. And while early in the month the Shanghai Composite rose above the 5,000 mark to its highest level since January 2008, on Friday, June 19, the Shanghai Composite posted its worst week in more than seven years as investors bailed on some recently strong-performing Chinese start-ups. Worries of high valuations and record levels of margin debt sparked the exodus. Investors’ trepidations were not easily dispelled, and by mid-month more talk about a Greek exit (“Grexit”) from the Eurozone and anxiety before the Federal Open Market Committee’s June meeting led to further selloffs in the equity markets. A combination of an impasse in the Greek debt talks along with a purported quadruple-witching day sent the Dow to a triple-digit decline on Monday, June 29, with Treasuries rallying on the news as investors looked toward safe-haven plays. For June the Dow, the S&P 500, and the NASDAQ were in the red, losing 2.17%, 2.10, and 1.64%, respectively, while a strong small-caps rally helped send the Russell 2000 up 0.59%. Nonetheless, interest concerns trumped the Greek drama, and for the month Treasury yields rose at all maturities, except the three-month. The ten-year yield rose 23 bps to 2.35% by month-end. For the third consecutive month none of the municipal bond CEFs classifications (-0.36%) witnessed plus-side returns for June. However, the municipal bond CEFs macro-classification did mitigate losses better than its domestic taxable bond CEFs (-1.12%) and world bond CEFs (-1.45%) brethren. Despite the Greek debt drama, world equity CEFs (-2.04%) mitigated losses better than their mixed-asset CEFs (-2.11%) and domestic equity CEFs (-3.41%) brethren. And Growth CEFs (+0.68%) posted the only positive return in the equity universe for the month, while Energy MLP CEFs (-8.85%) was at the bottom. For June the median discount of all CEFs widened 135 bps to 10.52%-worse than the 12-month moving average discount (8.92%). Equity CEFs’ median discount widened 90 bps to 10.74%, while fixed income CEFs’ median discount widened 162 bps to 10.44% (their largest month-end discount since October 2008). For the month only 5% of all CEFs traded at a premium to their NAV, with 7% of equity funds and 4% of fixed income funds trading in premium territory.

Long Duke, But Don’t Load Up Just Yet

Summary An abnormal growth trend in the past two years has caused a relatively stable industry to see much decline due to energy conservation and a lack of overall demand. Bad PR surrounding the new EPA rulings on carbon pollution and coal ash have created nightmares for Duke, resulting in a 10% decline on the year. Capitalization on the higher demand for energy during the summer could help bolster the stock short-term, along with a potential share buyback. Achieving the EPS, setting a greater growth trend for the dividend, keeping the credit ratings high, and EPS growth at least a 5% for the long-term are all pivotal to. After viewing the dividend hike to 82.5 cents a share and sifting through some high short interest stocks, I came across a well-known name: Duke Energy (NYSE: DUK ). Deep in the integrated utilities, the Charlotte -based energy company is a long-time energy producer suffering from a poor growth trend due to a lagging commodities sector and lethargic demand. The company deserves a hold rating, as very few growth catalysts are leadings its outlook. Having only had a positive FCF since 2012, now in the amount of $1.09 billion on a LTM basis, I’m concerned that the recent dividend raise might eat too significantly into FCF. Furthermore, with Lynn Good increasing her salary by 50%, but more notably her short and long-term incentive opportunities to higher multiples of her salary, I believe the money could be better well-spent given their lagging growth recently. Sure, they did implement a new retirement program , but again, there are bigger problems that Duke is facing besides employee turnover. As I figured, the stock saw a lot of downward momentum at the end of the winter, and has really just been on a slow down trend since the spring started. We’re seeing really interesting support around the $70 level. The stock is at April 2013 levels, where they were fairing much the same as they are now. The second half of 2014 proved to be an exceptional growth trend, just about scraping the $90 level, but I can’t reasonably expect the stock to trend in that direction for quite some time. (click to enlarge) Source: Bloomberg We’ve seen a good, but not great three year revenue growth trend from Duke, with most of the gains coming in 2012. With revenues now well above $25 billion, I’m concerned that they won’t be able to sustain this level. Their International Energy segment has seen a small decline of 1.15% over the past three years, which accounts for about $1.4 billion in revenue each year. While much of their efforts are concentrated in Latin America, Brazil has been of particular interest to the company. Much of the operations are similar to their domestic segment, Brazil is suffering from a poor wet season and high water demand, causing reservoirs to be low and inefficient for their hydropower plants. Furthermore, I can’t see them having huge international growth when things like their quarter interest in National Methanol Company (NMC) in Saudi continues to suffer from extremely low margins. Luckily, International Energy does not account for a substantial portion of total revenue, but it’s worth noting that hydropower in Brazil will be lower in future quarters based upon thermal power being prioritized over hydropower and this trend will continue through the end of the year, already down 52.9% in terms of pricing. Sure, there are a few construction and renovation projects that Duke has going for them, but they’re not going to see the light of day until three or four years out, let alone reach their highest potential capacity. For example, a 750 MW natural gas-fired generating plant in South Carolina, which cost about $600 million, won’t be available for use until late 2017 ( 10-Q ). Even little things like the switching from lead acid to lithium-ion batteries in the Notrees Windpower Project in Texas are important steps in helping long-term efficiency and stability for the company. They just recently gained a 40% stake in the $5 billion venture to build the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, which will bring natural gas from Marcellus and Utica in Pennsylvania to West Virginia and coast Virginia and then to North Carolina. Additionally, a 1640 MW combined cycle natural gas plant in Citrus Country Florida, expected to be finished in 2018, will cost $1.5 billion. Based upon hedging activities from many oil companies, like Oasis Petroleum (NYSE: OAS ), running out next year, the input fuel could be very cheap to Duke. On a different note, the stock repurchase program that began earlier this year still has about 15% left approved, which represents a good buyback of about $225 million. This will certainly help push the shares up for a few sessions. The Commodities Caveat Apart from construction and financial growth catalysts, which will have seemingly minimal effects, the commodities market could really end up hurting this company if prices rise. While natural gas prices, via the Henry Hub below, have been on a great YOY downtrend, which reduces input costs, there’s a caveat present. (click to enlarge) Source: Bloomberg With an oversupply of natural gas and plants at Duke reaching 94% capacity, they’re going to suffer from limited profitability. Revenues will eventually decline due to a lower margin received for their output. While demand for natural gas isn’t increasing, but is rather just being adopted as coal-based energy retreats, Duke could have a real profitability problem on its hands, considering their profit margin is expected to drop over 9% this year. The exact same case applies to oil and company management has estimated that the negative effects will be anywhere from 2.5-5% of EPS. I firmly believe their operating margin will remain strong around 24%, but I would need to see significant improvement for this utility company to fend off tough macro conditions. Speaking of said conditions, with a proposed interest rate hike from the Fed later this year, company management has stated that EPS could be affected as much as -$0.07 in the following quarter. Need For Improvement I firmly believe that their regulated utilities segment needs to start showing growth before a reasonable entry point can be made into the stock. Accounting for $22.2 billion in total revenue, the entire segment is up about 27.92% in the past three years, but this has already been priced into the stock, considering many of the gains took place in FY 2014 and FY 2012. Their primary servicing region of the Carolinas, Florida, Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana has about 7.3 million retail customers. Yet, take a look at the factors hampering their growth: Energy efficiency and conservation efforts, particularly in residential areas The Midwest and Carolina servicing regions were lagging; residential growth, overall, was down 1.4% A higher amount of unserviceable calls than normal this past winter and an increasing number of outages this summer Their commercial power segment, which really only represents a fraction of a percent of total revenue, has suffered a 53.22% three-year decline. Their focus, here, is on alternative energy sources, primarily wind and solar. Regulation Woes Rising Regulation via the EPA’s “Clean Power Plan” set to cut carbon pollution for power plants by 30% by 2030 will pass this summer ( Bloomberg ). This effectively eliminates a coal from being the major energy generator in the long-term, as now the cost structure is unfavorable. Coal Ash Disposal has become a recent nightmare for Duke as they are now required to dispose of the coal ash at four major sites sustainably by 2019 and have all sites cleared by 2029. CBS’ 60 Minutes even dedicated an entire segment towards criticizing the current disposal process of Duke. The estimated cost is about $3.4 billion, or about 3x FCF, currently. Again, the company will still be fine in the long-term as they have a current available liquidity of $6.4 billion, and while they could use a bump up in their credit ratings, the company is standing on solid ground. (click to enlarge) Source: Company Presentation Conclusion On the back end, Duke may benefit from higher D&A costs when it comes time for quarterly reports based upon the pipeline and construction activity, Duke Energy will report quarterly earnings on August 6th, just after the end of July surge of earnings reports from major oil and gas companies. It’s worth noting that their Q3 EPS levels have been historically higher than all other calls, and with projections showing a potential 50% increase in EPS from Q2 to Q3 of this year, the stock is definitely worth considering. Looking to the future, I believe this company will most likely be fine – but there’s too much short-term negativity clouding any decent chance at profitability. Note: All Financial Data Taken From Bloomberg Database 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.

Time To (Re)Focus On AllianzGI’s Convertible/Income Bond Fund

Summary For the first time in three years, NCV has traded at a discount to trading price, and this prompted the need for a review of the fund. Since my last NCV/NCZ primer (NCZ/NCV Primer), both NCV/NCZ have maintained their monthly distributions and investors have collected approximately 18% in dividend income. NCV remains a great investment vehicle for yield hungry investors with a healthy debt maturity and sector mix. The markets have been nothing close to stable for the last few weeks and this has led to the broader investment community to lose focus on their investment objectives and strategies (I mean both retail and institutional investors). For the first time in three years, the AllianzGI Convertible & Income Fund (NYSE: NCV ) has traded at a discount to trading price, and this prompted the need for a review of the fund. First off, this isn’t the first time it has happened (the price to trade below the net asset value). NCV has dipped below it’s net asset value several times historically in similar fashions – generally in response to drastic market events (in this case it’s Greece’s and Puerto Rico’s debt default scares). When the markets edge lower, like they have in the last three weeks, and many investment vehicles are impacted due to this concern, I refer to it as ” headline risk ” and without a question, the current headline risk with Greece is not good, but it isn’t going to be THAT bad for the global economy. Investors should remember/realize what exactly is at play here. In this case, it is a country defaulting/postponing/determining how to payoff debt to an entity that is unlevered and does not contain counter party risk (IMF, Germany, European Union, all other creditors). Investors, and the rest of the investment community, should realize that Greece’s headline risk is fairly isolated from investment vehicles like NCV (and the AllianzGI Convertible Fund II (NYSE: NCZ )), which trade and are meant to be benchmarked against convertible bond indices. Therefore, I felt it is time to refocus closed end fund investors back on to NCV, where global macro headline risk should not dictate the performance of convertible funds of U.S. denominated equities. Since my last NCV/NCZ primer ( NCZ/NCV Primer ), both NCV/NCZ have maintained their monthly distributions and investors have collected approximately 18% in dividend income and have been able to book 22% of returns assuming dividends were reinvested. To review the fund’s strategy, NCV invests in short to medium term convertible bonds of companies based in the United States mainly and they achieve a 12% distribution rate by levering their assets by around 33% at all times to benefit from the increased investment, and generate the high monthly distributions of approximately 13% (based on recent price levels). NCV achieves these returns in two main forms: Direct investment into convertible debt via underwritings and secondary market trading. Intra-day trading based on market opportunities to capture mispriced debt events. The downside of NCV’s strategy is that it can face liquidity constraints for some of its debt and may take on the wrong positions which will impact NAV, but difficult to compute on the market price front, making the performance of the current investments fairly difficult to transcribe. NCV Market Price vs. Net Asset Value Price Chart – NCV trades at a healthy premium to the funds net asset value price and for the right reasons… Yield demand. Source: Morningstar As shown above, NCV has consistently traded above its Net Asset Value, and this is largely due to the fact that NCV pays out a substantial dividend compared to other closed end funds. Since NCV consistently yields a monthly 12% (13% at current trading prices), investors made up of both retail and institutional distinctions have found that a 12% distribution rate is very attractive considering it can be a long term investment and executed by a reputable investment manager, Allianz. Investors do not mind paying a slight premium on the fund for the return of an above average distribution rate. NCV Annual Returns vs. Convertible Bond Benchmarks – NCV sell-off is a market overreaction (click to enlarge) Source: Morningstar Above, NCV’s trading price is compared to its convertible benchmark and based on the above chart, YTD 2015 is one of the first times where you see a divergence of NCV’s share price vs. convertible benchmark prices, outlining this investment opportunity. Generally, NCV has been able to beat this index by maintaining an active investment portfolio of convertible debt, granting positioning options the convertible bond index does not benefit from (since it is a passively tracked index). NCV Asset Allocation – The majority of the assets are in Convertible debt, which is concentrated in the United States and far from Europe Source: Morningstar To highlight why I wanted to publish this article, above is a pie chart of NCV’s asset allocation, of which is made up of 75%+ U.S. denominated debt and far from European risk. Just for clarification, the above chart is from Morningstar.com and Morningstar’s asset allocation for closed end funds is automated, confusing investors slightly since convertible debt can be identified as either “bonds” or “other” for various securities. In this case, the bonds and other categories are the convertible debt categories. NCV Bond Maturity Breakdown – With medium-term debt making up the majority of the investment portfolio, AllianzGI portfolio managers can maintain the portfolio mix for long-term investors… (click to enlarge) Source: Morningstar NCV Distributions – Investors should not see the distribution mix change, with focus to remain in distributing income to investors long term. Source: Morningstar Finally, I wanted to highlight several other factors that can help investors refocus on NCV. First, the income distributions are almost completely made up of convertible debt income funds and therefore gives investors the stability of payments since the bulk of the payouts are not driven by intra-day trading bets/performance/strategies, unlike other closed end funds. Second, the recent market price drop can be tied to the headline risk I mentioned/discussed earlier and the fact that NCV holds a portion of U.S. stock holdings in its portfolio, capturing some of the downside that the broader markets have locked onto. Third, investors who originally invested in NCV remain yield hungry and the closed end fund substitutions aren’t really here (there are only a few closed end funds that focus on convertible bonds and simultaneously yield 12% to investors). In my view, the price drop will be corrected back upward after investors have had time to digest the headline risk from Europe and broader market underperformance. NCV remains a great investment vehicle for yield hungry investors with a healthy debt maturity and sector mix, and investors should not mistaken the recent global economic issues with a closed end fund investing in convertible bonds. Disclosure: I am/we are long NCV, NCZ. (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.