Tag Archives: nysedpg

Unloved In The Marketplace, Savvy Senior ‘Income Growth’ Portfolio Increases Cash Flow Payout

“Total return” results have been nothing to brag about for this author and many others focused on income and dividend investing in recent months. But through re-investing and compounding, my 10% yielding portfolio has increased its income flow by 14.7% from a year ago. In other words, the “income factory” continues to expand its output, even while the factory itself has seen its market price drop, making re-investment even more attractive. I would worry if I thought the income factory were worth less in an economic sense, but it is not. A lot of what is spooking markets these days (the Fed, Greece, Puerto Rico, inflation) is just noise. From a total return standpoint, it has been a tough first half in 2015 for many dividend-focused investors, including me. Fortunately, I focus on what my “income factory” produces, and not how the market values it from day to day or month to month. From that standpoint, the news is positive since “factory output” (i.e. income) continues to increase steadily, and I can re-invest that output in additional machines (i.e. income-producing assets) at bargain prices. To be specific, the cash income my factory produced for the first 6 months of 2015 was up 14.7%, higher than the cash income it generated during the first six months of 2014. The six-month cash yield was 5.1% (10.2% annualized) versus a total return that was just barely positive at 0.2%, so without the cash distributions, the return would have been a negative 4.9%. In a practical sense, having a 10% dividend stream that I can re-invest in assets that have essentially been “on sale” for the past nine months is a great opportunity and accounts for my income stream increasing at the rate it has. Since the end of the quarter (June 30), market values have dropped even more, so my current total return year-to-date as we go to press is a bit lower (minus 1%). I mention this in order to compare it to a few useful benchmarks that also report on a year-to-date basis: · Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (NYSEARCA: VIG ): YTD total return of 1.6%, with a yield of 2.24% · Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (NYSEARCA: VYM ): YTD total return of -1%, with a yield of 3.26% · ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NYSEARCA: NOBL ): YTD total return of -.27%, with a yield of 1.85% · SPDR Dividend ETF (NYSEARCA: SDY ): YTD total return -2.32%, with a yield of 2.37% · Vanguard Wellesley Income Fund (MUTF: VWINX ): YTD total Return of -0.4%, with a yield of 2.7% · Vanguard Wellington Fund (MUTF: VWELX ): YTD total return of 1.05%, with a yield of 2.4% In short, it’s been a tough quarter for balanced fund or dividend growth type investors, with mostly flat or slightly down results. The poor total returns are offset, of course, by the ability to compound dividends. But that’s limited if you’re only earning 3% or 4% yields like so many “dividend growth” portfolios. That’s why I’m pretty satisfied at this point with my “income growth” strategy (that many readers are familiar with from past articles, like this one , and this one ) that focuses on growing the income stream through compounding high cash distributions (8-10% or so), and does not rely on organic growth (dividend increases) or market value appreciation. The potential “fly-in-the ointment” in a strategy like mine would be if the decline in market value were a genuine signal of a drop in the income generating potential of a particular asset. So we have to ask the question: · Is the current drop in prices, especially for high-yielding assets like utilities, high-yield credits, and leveraged closed-end funds and other vehicles, a sign that the high yields these assets generate are in jeopardy? · Or are they more a reflection of the “nervous Nelly” quality of the equity markets, where concerns about various issues can translate into selling pressure in unrelated markets and asset classes. I subscribe to the “nervous Nelly” view and believe that markets are seeing negatives that don’t actually exist or are not relevant to the high yield and leveraged markets. Some examples: · Concern about Janet Yellen and the Fed raising interest rates. First of all, when the Fed finally does raise rates, it is likely to only be 50-100 basis points, if that. While that may send a signal that the economy is “normalizing” and that the artificially low interest rate era may be ending, it is hardly enough to hurt leveraged closed-end funds or most other leveraged vehicles. So a closed-end fund that is borrowing at 1% will now have to pay 1½% or 2% instead. If they are using the money to invest in loans, bonds or preferred stock, etc. paying 5%, 6%, 7% or more, it is still a good deal. Meanwhile, the rates on what they are buying will likely go up as well. · All bonds are not created equal. Rising interest rates tend to hurt long-term, fixed-rate, government and investment grade corporate bonds. That’s because these bonds have a relatively high duration and most of the interest coupon an investor receives is payment for taking interest rate risk, not credit risk. High yield bonds, leveraged loans and many other high-yielding instruments often have shorter durations and the coupon represents payment for taking credit risk, not interest rate risk. The irony is that many of these assets actually do better when interest rates increase because the rising rates are a sign of an improving economy, which tends to improve credit performance. Credit performance, rather than interest rate risk, is the main factor in portfolio performance of high-yield bonds and loans. (Loans, by the way, are floating rate, so they have virtually no interest rate risk at all). · Concerns about inflation. In general, I do not see inflation as a medium- to long-term threat the way it was 30 years ago. The main reason is the globalization of our economy, including labor markets. Merely living in a developed country no longer guarantees you a developing country level wage anymore, now that companies can move jobs – actually and virtually – all over the world. This will continue to keep wage inflation down in the United States for years to come. This in turn will have a moderating effect on interest rates. · Other negatives – China’s stock market meltdown, Greece’s economic and political problems, Puerto Rico’s insolvency – may make headlines but are unlikely to affect the ability of the companies in our various fund portfolios to meet their obligations and maintain those funds’ cash flows. So those are the various negatives that I’m NOT particularly worried about. On the positive side, I am happy that the economy continues to make steady forward progress. I don’t need it to race ahead, since I’m not looking to the stock market to appreciate for my strategy to work. I just want the hundreds or thousands of companies whose stock, bonds, loans and other securities are owned by the dozens of funds that I own to keep on paying and continuing to provide the cash flow that my funds distribute. I have not changed my basic portfolio much at all from three months ago, and you can see it in my April article here . A few tweaks included: · Selling off a portion of my Cohen & Steers CEF Opportunity Fund (NYSE: FOF ) when it reached a market high a few months ago. It’s a great fund, and I’ve been buying back in now that it’s at a lower price point and yielding 8.7%. · Started adding Babson Capital Participation Investors (NYSE: MPV ) as a solid “buy once, hold forever” sort of investment. It has been managed by Mass Mutual Insurance since 1988, with an average annual return over that time of over 10%. It holds “private placements” which are the fixed income “bread and butter” of the insurance industry, and Mass Mutual is a long-time professional at it. The shares sell at a 9.7% discount, well below its typical 4% discount, and it pays a distribution of 8.6%. · Added to Reaves Utility Income Fund (NYSEMKT: UTG ) as its price came down and yield went back up to 6.25%, which is high for this excellent fund that many of us here on Seeking Alpha have liked and held for many years. · Added to Duff & Phelps Global Utility Income Fund (NYSE: DPG ); good solid holding in the utility sector; great opportunity right now at almost 14% discount, 8.2% yield. · Added to Blackstone/GSO Long-Short Credit Income Fund (NYSE: BGX ); good solid floating rate loan fund at 14% discount with 7.6% yield; excellent managers. I continue to watch some of my higher volatility holdings like a hawk. Oxford Lane Capital (NASDAQ: OXLC ) and Eagle Point Credit Company (NYSE: ECC ) continue to bounce around price-wise, but still make their regular distributions, with yields of 16.7% and 11.8%, respectively. They both are challenging to analyze and understand, but the bottom line is that both seem to have plenty of cash flow (which in their world of CLO investing is different than GAAP income) to make their dividend payments, so I am happy to have them in my portfolio. All my high-yield bond funds are underwater, but for reasons mentioned earlier in the article, as an asset class they seem to be in no economic danger of not being able to meet their distributions, so I am inclined to hold them. In fact, the improving economy should help them. If I were not already an investor, I’d be buying into the asset class, just as I did in 2008 and 2009. (When there’s blood in the streets, you buy, right?) That’s about it. “Steady as you go,” is my mantra. Keep re-investing those dividends. Disclosure: I am/we are long BGX, MPV, UTG, ECC, OXLC, DPG, FOF. (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.

Utility CEFs For Defensive Income

Summary Utilities have gone from overvalued to a more reasonable valuation. At appropriate valuation, the utility sector offers opportunity for defensive income investing. This article summarizes nine utility closed-end funds with a median distribution yield of 7.6%. Only a few months ago the utility sector was overvalued. Such is the nature of a bond-substitute investment when bond yields collapse and investors look for safe income elsewhere. But the sector has given back 15% since last January’s high and overvaluation is much less the case. (click to enlarge) Figure 1: Dow Jones Utility Average ( google finance ). Although still about 7% above the 52 week low, the sector has been trading below its 20, 50 and 100 day simple moving averages, and appears to have found support recently (see chart in Fig. 1). An income investor wary about the prospects of a looming correction may well be considering this background as a reason to focus attention on this most defensive of sectors. When I’m looking for income investments, my first stop is to look to closed-end funds. For one thing, CEFs can provide excellent income relative to ETFs or holding individual stocks. For another, CEFs tend to overreach sector movements, so when a sector like utilities approaches bargain territory, sector CEFs may exaggerate the apparent value. Utility Closed End Funds Cefconnect.com lists nine utility funds. These are summarized below: Fund Market Cap % USA Blackrock Utility & Infrastructure Trust (NYSE: BUI ) $314,921,520 72.7% Duff & Phelps Global Utility Income Fund Inc. (NYSE: DPG ) $694,255,355 57.0% Wells Fargo Advantage Utilities & High Income Fund (NYSEMKT: ERH ) $108,982,680 46.4% Gabelli Global Utility & Income Trust (NYSEMKT: GLU ) $77,567,946 61.5% Gabelli Utility Trust (NYSE: GUT ) $298,074,054 100.0% Macquarie/First Trust Global Infrastr/Util Div & Inc Fund (NYSE: MFD ) $137,707,333 41.8% Macquarie Global Infrastructure Total Return Fund Inc. (NYSE: MGU ) $306,986,780 36.6% Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Fund Inc (NYSE: UTF ) $1,877,774,640 58.0% Reaves Utility Income Fund (NYSEMKT: UTG ) $844,916,800 100.0% Two of the nine are purely domestic; the others are global in scope. All but one of the funds currently sells at a discount to NAV. GUT maintains a premium of 28.4%. This leaves the Reaves Utility Fund as the only wholly domestic utility CEF to be priced at a discount (-4.15%). Figure 2. Premium/Discount status of Utility CEFs ( cefanalyzer.com ) Distributions Distributions range from a low of 6.1% to a high of 8.7%. Median distribution for the nine funds is 7.6%. Figure 3. Utility CEF distributions on price and NAV (cefanalyzer.com). Typical of closed-end funds, these distributions exceed that of utility ETFs such as, for example, the Guggenheim S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities ETF (NYSEARCA: RYU ) with a current yield of 5.3% or the iShares Global Utilities ETF (NYSEARCA: JXI ) currently yielding 3.14%. The enhanced yields are achieved by the usual equity closed-end fund strategies of leverage (for 8 of the funds) and option-writing for the remaining fund. In addition, some of the funds generate income from utility debt instruments including bonds and preferred shares. (click to enlarge) Figure 4. Percent leverage for utility CEF portfolios (cefanalyzer.com). Total Returns The following charts show total returns on NAV and Market Price for 1, 3 and 12 months. Figure 5. Total return for utility CEFs on NAV (top) and Market Price (bottom) basis (cefanalyzer.com). None has turned in a gain on NAV for the past month, as one would expect from the utility sell-off noted in Figure 1 above. GUT has managed a positive price return over that time as its premium has increased from an already high 25% to 28%. During this time most of the remaining funds have seen their discounts deepen. Z-Scores Looking carefully at these return performance charts it becomes clear that for several of the funds, price returns are not tracking NAV returns. BUI, for example has suffered declines in market price while turning in respectable gains on NAV relative to its peers. This situation can be demonstrated most effectively by looking at Z-scores, which quantify the relationship between current premium/discount and mean premium/discount status. Figure 6. Z-Scores for 3, 6, and 12 months for utility CEFs (cefanalyzer.com). The Z-scores for GUT illustrate the extent to which its premium has been increasing relative to its average status for this metric. The current premium is more than 2 standard deviations greater than the average premium for each of the time periods shown. Contrast that with BUI whose discounts for 3 and 12 months are approximately 3 standard deviations below their means with Z-scores of -3.1 for both 3 and 12 months and -2.4 for 6 months. UTF, DPG and ERH also have low negative Z-scores. If one believes that reversion to mean discount/premium status is a likely predication, then these three funds would seem attractively priced on this basis. Summary and Selections Investors seeking high-income yield with defensive characteristics may want to look carefully at the utility sector. I think it’s a fair generalization that defensive investing is not something one normally associates with leverage, so the inclination would be to look to funds with no or minimal leverage. For the nine closed-end funds that comprise the sector’s offerings, only one is effectively unlevered (BUI, 0.9% leverage). The remaining funds carry 15% to 36% leverage. Investors who choose to focus on domestic utilities have only two choices: GUT and UTG. To my thinking there is no contest between the two; GUT’s unsustainable premium takes it out of my consideration. UTG sells at a discount of -4.1%, but this is somewhat higher than its 3 and 12 month mean discounts, and higher than all but one of the 8 discounted funds (MFG at -1.8%). UTG’s distribution yield (6.24%) is the second lowest of the group. The remaining funds carry discounts from -12 to -14%. One of these stands out for having an exceptionally deep discount relative to its historical status. BUI’s yield is an attractive 7.8%, a bit above the median yield of 7.6% for all the funds. These factors, along with its unleveraged status, makes it my choice from this group of funds. In closing I’d like to present a snapshot of the portfolios of my two picks here. Both are nearly entirely equity. UTG includes 4% MLPs and less than 1% preferred stock and corporate bonds. Both are more diverse than strict utility-sector portfolios. BUI holds 53% Utilities, 25.7% Energy and 12.5% Transportation. UTG breaks its portfolio down by industry rather than sector, with the top three being Multi-Utilities, 27.8%; Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels, 18.5%; and Transportation Infrastructure, 16.03%. Top ten holdings for each are: UTG   NextEra Energy Inc (NYSE: NEE ) 5.25% DTE Energy Holding Company (NYSE: DTE ) 4.87% ITC Holdings Corp (NYSE: ITC ) 4.72% Union Pacific Corp (NYSE: UNP ) 4.66% Verizon Communications Inc (NYSE: VZ ) 4.25% American Water Works Co Inc (NYSE: AWK ) 3.94% Duke Energy Corporation (NYSE: DUK ) 3.65% SCANA Corp (NYSE: SCG ) 3.64% Dominion Resources Inc (NYSE: D ) 3.57% BCE Inc (NYSE: BCE ) 3.45% Time Warner Cable Inc A (NYSE: TWC ) 3.10%         BUI   NextEra Energy Inc 4.35% CMS Energy Corp (NYSE: CMS ) 3.86% Sempra Energy (NYSE: SRE ) 3.81% Dominion Resources Inc 3.77% Dominion Midstream Partners LP (NYSE: DM ) 3.62% Shell Midstream Partners LP (NYSE: RDS.A ) 3.52% Duke Energy Corporation 3.37% National Grid Plc (NYSE: NGG ) 3.31% Atlantia SPA ( OTCPK:ATASY ) 2.96% American Water Works Co Inc 2.78% Disclosure: The author has no positions in any stocks mentioned, but may initiate a long position in BUI over the next 72 hours. (More…) The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.