Tag Archives: open-xhr-start

Watch These Europe ETFs If The ECB Prints Money

The European Central Bank (ECB) is apparently set to embark on the final voyage of its easing policy. At least, the ECB president Mario Draghi’s latest comments in a German financial newspaper give such cues. Going by what Draghi said, we can comprehend that the ECB is all for bank reforms, levying lower taxes and slashing excessive regulations to accelerate the Euro zone’s recovery, which the president was quoted as saying that it is presently “fragile and uneven.” The Euro zone’s manufacturing activity expanded slower than initially estimated in December with each month of Q4 recording the lowest PMIs since Q3 of 2013. Such downbeat data definitely creates a backdrop for the initiation of the QE policy. Thus, investors considered the president’s latest comments as the start of an asset buyback program or some other sort of stimulus program. Sensing potential easing, the common currency euro plunged to a nine-year low against the greenback. As a result, the CurrencyShares Euro Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: FXE ) kick started the New Year with a decent sized loss. Gains were invisible even in the broad large-cap Euro ETFs including the Vanguard FTSE Europe ETF (NYSEARCA: VGK ) and the SPDR Euro STOXX 50 ETF (NYSEARCA: FEZ ) which shed in the range of 0.2% to 0.5% as well. Needless to say, in a falling euro backdrop, hedged Europe ETFs turned out as winners as evidenced by the 0.6% gains offered by the WisdomTree Europe Hedged Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: HEDJ ). But some other areas of Europe investing should be closely watched if the ECB jumps on the bandwagon of QE movement like the U.S. and Japan have already implemented. Normally, smaller companies pick up faster than the larger ones in a growing economy. Since these pint-sized securities usually focus more on the domestic market, these are less ruffled by international worries than their globally exposed larger counterparts. This is especially true as a pile of woes hit the global economy last year. In short, likely monetary easing and currency weakness would support European consumption which in turn may boost small cap ETFs. Per CNBC , a sluggish euro will trigger purchases by the domestic consumers as they will have to pay less money for buying domestically manufactured goods than imported ones. Low oil prices should be another drive to spur consumer purchases. Investors should note that U.S. small-cap stock index Russell 2000 added about 85% return when the QE policy was underway. So, investors can expect the replication of the same trend on the European front. Market Impact Unlike VGK, the WisdomTree Europe SmallCap Dividend ETF ( DFE ) has added about 0.5%. Below, we highlight three ETFs that should be in focus if the QE is actually implemented. DFE in Detail This ETF provides exposure to the small cap segment of the European dividend-paying market by tracking the WisdomTree Europe SmallCap Dividend Index. It is one of the popular funds in the European space with AUM of $698 million. The fund charges 58 bps in annual fees from investors. The fund is heavy on industrials as this segment accounts for more than one-fourth of the portfolio while financials, information technology and consumer discretionary take the remainder. Among countries, United Kingdom (32.6%), Sweden (14.6%), Italy (9.5%) and Germany (8.7%) dominate the holdings list. Heavy focus on some of the better-positioned nations like the U.K., Sweden and Germany is positive of the fund. Plus, a tilt toward dividends was the icing on the cake in a yield-starved continent. The fund was down 1.62% in the last one month (the lowest loss in the space), but was up 0.8% in the last three months, indicating commendable performance in the pack of European ETF losers. iShares MSCI Germany Small Cap Index ETF ( EWGS ) Germany has been a better-placed economy in the Euro bloc. Zew Economic Sentiment Index in Germany expanded for the second successive month to 34.90 in December of 2014 from 11.50 recorded last month and also surpassed analyst expectations. The number was even higher than Euro Area average of 31.80 and 18.40 touched in the U.K. This gives EWGS – an ETF with $26.4 million under management – an edge over its other domestic cousins as well as broader Euro zone counterparts. The fund was up 4.44% in the last three month period – the second best show in the European pack, but lost about 2.4% in the last one month.

Market Timing Vs. Macro Decision Making

Here’s a very good post over at Brooklyn Investor on some of the differences between market timing and macro hedge funds. As more and more people become index fund investors I think these concepts become increasingly important to understand because all index fund investing is a form of macro investing (picking aggregates). But being an “asset picker” doesn’t make you a “market timer” in the sense that I think many people have come to think. First, market timers are people with extremely short time horizons. These are the people who think they can time the daily, weekly or monthly moves of the market. For some perspective, you can see how much the average holding period has declined over the years: If you go back even further in history the holding period used to be quite a bit longer (as high as 7 years). The crucial point in the discussion about how “active” an investor is really comes down to efficiency in decision making as opposed to “passive” vs “active” (since we’re all “active” to some degree). That is, we all deviate from global cap weighting, we all rebalance, lump sum invest, alter our risk profile, “factor tilt”, etc. Portfolio construction and maintenance is an active endeavor by necessity. The more important questions revolve around how we are optimizing frictions around our decisions. This comes down to two big points: Taxes will take between 15-38% of your profits. Reducing this friction is crucial. A tax aware investor not only uses the proper products to maximize after tax returns, but implements a portfolio that takes advantage of long-term vs short-term capital gains. Fees are the other big friction in a portfolio. As I’ve described before , the difference between using a 1% fee fund and a 0.1% fee fund over the long-term will result in tremendous outperformance: (The fee impact of $100,000 compounded at 7% with avg MF and low fee index) The smart macro investor knows that taxes and fees are a killer in the long-term. If the global financial portfolio generates a return of 7% per year then you can’t afford to be giving away 1% in fees every year and another 1-2%+ to the tax man every year. So here’s a safe rule of thumb – the difference between a “market timer” and someone who makes necessarily “macro decisions” (even if that’s just rebalancing, dollar cost averaging or making new contributions, etc) is 12 months and one day. Since taxes are such a large chunk of our real, real return then it makes sense to take a bit of a longer perspective. Rebalancing on a monthly or quarterly basis doesn’t add much value to your portfolio and increases fees & frictions significantly. At the same time, you have to be careful about the Modern Portfolio Theory concept of “the long-term.” As I described here , taking a “long-term” perspective could actually result in taking much more risk than is appropriate for you. Our financial lives are actually a series of short-terms within one longer time period so it’s best to treat your portfolio as a “savings portfolio” instead of a higher risk “investment portfolio”. As I’ve described in detail , we’re all active investors to some degree. We are all active asset pickers in a world where we all pick asset allocations that deviate from global cap weighting. That’s totally fine! So, the discussion really comes down to how efficient we are at picking our allocations and how we implement the process by which we manage that allocation. If you’re using a very short-term strategy that results in a holding period that is less than 12 months then I’d call you a market timer who is likely increasing your frictions and hurting your overall performance. If, however, you are making macro portfolio decisions in a more cyclical nature (over a year or several years on average) then you are a macro investor who is minimizing the negative impact of portfolio frictions. Of course, the discussion about how to efficiently or effectively we “pick assets” is a whole different discussion and opens up a whole new can of worms in the “active” vs “passive” debate….

Arbitraging 20% As An Exuberant Closed End Fund Returns To Normalcy

Summary ETFs and CEFs that track emerging market economies are often popular with foreign investors because they mitigate some risks of owning foreign equities such as accessibility, liquidity and local governance. However, emerging economies often have substantial risks that cannot be priced out by convenience, so these funds usually trade at a discount to their NAV. Occasionally, irrational exuberance will elevate an ETF or CEF above its NAV, creating an arbitrage opportunity. The CEF CUBA has been steadily returning to normalcy after a zealous run following President Obama’s Cuban Diplomacy announcement; ~20% profit potential is still on the table. Business As Usual Exchange traded funds (ETFs) and closed end funds (CEFs) are convenient – one can buy a single asset and have a basket of exposure. ETFs and CEFs can be especially useful when they track foreign stock markets. They can mitigate a host of risk factors, such as accessibility to a foreign stock market, the liquidity of foreign equities, and local governance’s barriers to entry for foreign capital. (Sourced from Google via Barclays ) While ETFs and CEFs can neatly catalog foreign equities into a convenient bundle, risks inherent to emerging markets remain. Currency woes, inflation battles, corruption – the list isn’t a short one. Therefore, it is rather common for ETFs and CEFs to trade at a discount to their net asset value (NAV). This is a combination of risk premium as well as management and expense fees. Typically the spread between a fund’s NAV and its tick price – its discount/premium – is fairly constant. EM risk factors and management fees are generally sticky, so there isn’t much reason for the spread to fluctuate. However, an exogenous event can distort the discount, even turning it into a premium. This creates potential arbitrage opportunities. Business Is… Unusual Three and a half weeks ago, President Obama ordered a return to full diplomatic relations with Cuba. While a significant departure from the decades old stalemate, significant hurdles remain. In particular, the 54-year-old trade embargo remains. (Source: Daily Mail UK ) This highly unexpected event ignited an energetic rally in any equity with even loose ties to Cuba or the Caribbean. The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Closed End Fund (NASDAQ: CUBA ) was one such beneficiary. At one point, it traded nearly 50% above its NAV. Now that the political reality is beginning to sink in, CUBA’s premium has seen a steady reduction. However, it is still trading well above a rational value and the spread can be approximately arbitraged out, creating a nearly risk-free investment. The Nuts And Bolts Despite its suggestive ticker, the CUBA CEF is not relegated to Cuban assets (something that would be nearly impossible); in fact, it isn’t even meant to mimic the Cuban economy in particular. To quote from the fund management’s website : The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund’s investment objective is long-term capital appreciation. To achieve its objective, the Fund invests in issuers that are likely, in the Advisor’s view, to benefit from economic, political, structural and technological developments in the countries in the Caribbean Basin, which consist of Cuba, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, Barbados, Aruba, Haiti, the Netherlands Antilles, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, Belize, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia and Venezuela. The fund invests at least 80% of its total assets in a broad range of securities of issuers including U.S.-based companies that engage in substantial trade with, and derive substantial revenue from, operations in the Caribbean Basin Countries. Since the fund’s investment scope has a loose mandate, let’s see what some of the actual assets are: CUBA Top 25 Holdings Company Ticker CUBA Weight Country Copa Holdings CPA 8.46% United States MasTec Inc MTZ 6.28% United States Coca-Cola Femsa SAB KOF 6.03% Mexico Royal Caribbean RCL 5.34% United States Seaboard Corp SEB 5.17% United States Lennar Corp LEN 4.80% United States Norwegian Cruse Line Holdings NCLH 4.01% United States Banco Latinamericano de Comercio Exterior BLX 3.96% United States Carnival Corporation CCL 3.80% United States Consolidated Water Co CWCO 3.71% United States America Movil AMX 3.44% Mexico BanColombia CIB 3.34% Colombia Watsco Inc WSO 3.24% United States Grupo Televisa TV 2.94% Mexico Chiquita Brands International CQB 2.77% United States Freeport-McMoRan Inc FCX 2.69% United States Fomento Economico Mexicano FMX 2.67% Mexico Cemex CX 2.26% Mexico Steiner Leisure STNR 2.24% United States TECO Energy TE 2.15% United States Norfolk Southern Corp NSC 1.87% United States Wal-Mart de Mexico OTCQX:WMMVY 1.62% Mexico Tahoe Resources Inc THO 1.48% Canada Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc FDP 1.35% United States Atlantic Tele-Network Inc ATNI 1.32% United States (Source: Morningstar ) The above table represents 86.94% of the closed end fund. Fund Insiders Sell Millions Fund insiders were clearly aware of their good fortune – it’s not every day that one’s holdings start to trade nearly 50% above their intrinsic value! Consider the chart below of insider disposals charted behind CUBA’s adjusted close price: (click to enlarge) (Chart created by author; data from SEC , NASDAQ and Yahoo Finance ) The above transactions add up to nearly $4,000,000 of equity disposals. CUBA is worth around $28 million now, so the disposals were of an meaningful magnitude. In fact, with around 3,700,000 common shares outstanding, insiders sold nearly 8% of the entire float. Those transactions were the only sales by insiders in the last 12 months. The Fun Isn’t Over While the boat may have sailed on the astronomical overvaluation of a few weeks ago, there is still plenty of juice left for a mean reversion trade (or for a nearly risk-free approximate arbitrage). The CEF still trades ~11% above its NAV, and that’s cream waiting to be scraped off the top. However, it is entirely reasonable to expect the potential profit to be closer to 20%. Over the past 3 years – including the data distorting recent spike – CUBA has traded at an average discount of 8.70% to its NAV. Over the past six months – inclusive of the recent spike, again – the average discount has been 8.76%. ( Source ) (Source: CEFConnect ) It is reasonable to expect an eventual reversion to the historical discount rate yielding a potential profit of ~20%. Let’s discuss why. Plus Ca Change, Plus C’est La Meme Chose Emerging market funds, whether bundled as an ETF or a CEF, typically trade at a discount to their NAV because of risk premia and management fees. The most recently reported fiscal year saw CUBA with a reported total expense ratio of 2.46%. ( Source ) General risks to emerging market funds apply: currency risks, inflationary tendencies, payments on foreign debt, and corruption, to name a few. Many of CUBA’s holdings are readily accessible for retail investors because they trade either: directly on American exchanges, as ADRs on American exchanges, or OTC. There is no meaningful reason for CUBA to continue to trade above its NAV. The premium is totally resultant from irrational exuberance relating to President Obama’s announcement and traders buying into an investment vehicle that is (superficially) related to the geopolitical news. This is clearly evident when comparing the CEF to its NAV over a long time frame. (Source: Morningstar ) This is not to say that premiums do not occur “often” in CEFs. It is rather regular for eager bidders to push CEFs above their NAV after some unexpected bullish event has occurred. What history tells us about moments like that, though, is that the funds return to their historical trading pattern of NAV discounting because the underlying factors, mentioned earlier, motivating the spread have not changed. Exciting news doesn’t change finance fundamentals – there is no practical reason for an asset to continue to trade above its NAV for an extended period of time – it simply changes the flow of buyers and sellers, which can create a short-term dislocation between ordinary price relationships. How To Play It If one is confident in the continuation of the historical financial relationships such as the ones discussed here, then shorting CUBA is sufficient to manifest that investment view. That would be a mean reversion play and is de facto volatility selling. It makes sense for this situation, considering the recent bout of volatility was caused by an unexpected political event. If one wants to try to arbitrage the relationship, then one would have to buy an approximate basket of weighted equities that CUBA holds and short sell CUBA. Throughout the article I have been saying things like “approximate arbitrage” rather than just arbitrage – that is because there are practical limitations to achieving a pure arbitrage here. While using a mirrored basket of equities limits “risk” in a sense, it is pragmatically problematic and rather cumbersome to do so. One would have to buy ~50 positions and then weigh the individual equities according to the CEF disclosures. To do so correctly one would have to invest a decent chunk of money so as to have a common denominator between individuals positions. There is also the practical problem of information lag – most CEFs report their holdings either quarterly or semiannually. If the fund is actively managed, then one would always have an imperfect basket, regardless of the pains taken to weigh each equity properly. Of course, one could create a basket of Carribbean related assets, and weigh them according to traditional portfolio metrics (as opposed to mirroring CUBA), and assume that the correlation between those two portfolios is “good enough”. In my opinion, short CUBA is “good enough”. Historical norms will return, and CUBA will likely begin to trade at the historical discount of nearly 10% that it has traded at for years. The Opportunity In Summary What happened: Nearly all emerging market closed end funds trade at a discount to their NAV. This relationship is due to EM risk premia and management fees. CUBA is a closed end fund that is currently trading ~10% above its NAV. This premium was recently as high as 50%. The richening of the valuation was catalyzed by President Obama’s announcement of resuming diplomatic relations with Cuba. Expectations: CUBA will return to its historical average discount to NAV of ~8-10%. This leaves about ~20% of juice left in the opportunity. Reasoning CUBA, the CEF, has very indirect exposure to Cuba, the country. This is by no fault of the fund managers – it is nearly impossible (and possibly illegal) to have direct exposure to a communist country that the U.S. forbids nearly all trade with. Therefore, the run up of CUBA was likely a case of benefit-by-association. The political quagmire that is the U.S. congress is highly unlikely to normalize trade relations with Cuba – especially in an efficient manner. This reality will become evident and likely impact Cuba-related equity premiums. Risk premia and relatively high management and expense fees (~2.5% all in) justify a discount to NAV, especially when many of the top holdings in the CEF are easily accessible to U.S. investors. A long CUBA position may be a nice investment one day – basket exposure to the Carribbean is enticing, especially with the long term expectation of Cuban trade with the U.S. However, waiting for the NAV discount to return to initiate such a position is wise, and taking some easy profits while that long-standing relationship returns to normalcy is an appealing opportunity. The downside is nearly non-existent and the upside of 20% makes the opportunity worthwhile. On a closing note, consider this graphic showing emerging market closed end fund discount/premium relationships. See if you can spot the one that’s different. (click to enlarge) (Source: Wall Street Journal ) Additional disclosure: I retain the right to open L/S positions in any equities mentioned.