Tag Archives: pro

When Hedging Makes A Difference

The fund takes advantage of hedging a strong U.S. Dollar against a weak Japanese Yen. The fund is heavily weighted towards industrial and auto manufacturers; major Japanese exports. The fund is passively managed with over 300 companies in the fund. Japan has been struggling to inflate its economy for decades. Immediately after his 2012 reelection, Japanese Prime Minister Mr. Shinzo Abe initiated a ‘three arrow plan’ consisting of fiscal stimulus, monetary easing and structural reforms all intended to attain a 2% annualized inflation rate. Although it was unprecedented and did have an immediate positive effect, the plan soon lost velocity. Complicating the matter, the massive 2011 earthquake and Tsunami which led to the destruction of the Fukushima reactors forced the government to order an immediate shutdown of all nuclear facilities. To replace the lost power generation, oil and gas imports increased dramatically, and by 2012 the increase in fuel imports had created a large trade deficit as demonstrated in the chart. (click to enlarge) Further, a value added tax increase caused consumers to reduce spending. At the very end of October 2014, BOJ Governor Mr. Haruhiko Kuroda unexpectedly announced a sizable expansion of the bank’s existing bond buying program. The Japanese Government Pension Fund simultaneously announced plans to double equity holdings. However, nearly 10 months later, chronic disinflation still persists in the Japanese. Recently, the IMF has called for Japan to expand its stimulus measures still further opining that the Bank of Japan’s current projections are “overly optimistic”. However, Mr. Kuroda considers that the growth policy remains on track and no further actions are required. Is this the right time to have exposure to the Japanese economy in your portfolio? Note though, it isn’t just the Japanese economy investors need to be concerned with. All economies phase in and out of business cycles. However, because of the extreme quantitative stimulus measures implemented for such an extended length of time, and often quite unexpectedly, it would be better to enter a position with a currency hedge. Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management offers the X-tracker MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: DBJP ) . The fund’s objective is to track the performance, ” of the MSCI Japan U.S. Dollar Hedged Index. The index is designed to provide exposure to Japanese equity markets, while at the same time mitigating exposure to fluctuations between the value of the U.S. dollar and Japanese yen … ” The index is 100% hedged to the U.S. Dollar, selling Yen forward contracts at the one month forward rate. Should the Yen depreciate, the tracking index as well as the fund’s Net Asset Value is hedged against losses. Consumer Discretionary leads the fund’s sector allocation at 22.26% with 57 holdings, followed by Financials at 19.64% with 53 holdings; Industrials, 19.48% with 67 holdings; Information Technology, 11.14% with 41 holdings; Consumer Staples, 6.67% with 20 holdings; Health Care, 6.30% with 21 holdings; Materials, 5.92% with 28 holdings; Telecom Services, 4.96% with 4 holdings; Utilities, 2.45% with 11 holdings and Energy 0.91% with 5 holdings. (Data from Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management) The fund is weighted towards cyclical industries 47.45%, followed with cyclically sensitive industries at 23.66% and lastly, 16.83% are in defensive holdings. (Data from Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management) Of the 10 most heavily weighted companies, 66% are in cyclical industries, 21% are semi-cyclical and 13% are defensive. (Data from Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management) The leading fund holding is Toyota Motor Corp (NYSE: TM ) , at 6.16% of the fund, 28.166% of the top ten, and 27.668% of all the 58 Consumer Discretionary holdings. The second largest Consumer Discretionary in the top ten is also an auto manufacturer, Honda Motor (NYSE: HMC ) at 1.84%, accounting for 8.41% of the top ten and 8.264% of all consumer discretionary holdings. It’s important to note that the fund’s 10 motor vehicle manufactures add up to 10.425% of the net asset value. This means that 46.833% of the fund’s consumer discretionary holdings are auto manufacturers. Its then worth noting that automobiles and vehicle parts make up over 18% of Japanese exports. (click to enlarge) (Data from OEC) Lastly, almost 35% of Japan’s exports to the U.S. are autos and vehicle parts and just over 9% of the same to China. Hence a sizable portion of the fund is dependent on U.S. and Chinese automobile demand. The fund’s second heaviest weighted sector is financials at 19.64%, numbering 56 institutions. The largest in the top ten are Mitsubishi Financial (NYSE: MTU ) at 3.11%, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial (NYSE: SMFG ) at 1.91% and Mizuho Financial Group (NYSE: MFG ) at 1.65%. These three financials combined comprise 29.96% of the top ten holdings and 33.98% of all financial holdings. Once again, an important caveat needs to be stated here as well. Because of the Bank of Japan’s extraordinary QE policy, Japan’s banks are seeking higher yields overseas, and thus may be incurring higher risk. As noted in the Financial Times last April: … ultra-low BOJ interest rates are causing at Japan’s regional lenders, which have significant deposits but few lending opportunities because of their ageing local customer base…With 10-year JGB yields at 0.34 per cent, regional banks are investing in overseas sovereign debt or buying real estate funds in search of a yield pick-up.. The fourth largest sector is industrials at 19.48% of the fund. Within the top ten, one industrial, Fanuc LTD (FANUY ) , 1.49%, comprises 6.69% of the top ten and 7.649% of the fund’s 67 industrial holdings. Consumer Staples rank 5th at 6.67% and represented by Japan Tobacco ( OTCPK:JAPAY ) at 1.30%, 5.84% of the top ten and 19.23% of all consumer staples. Health Care follows at 6.30% represented by Takeda Pharmaceutical Co ( OTCPK:TKPYY ) at 1.25% of the top ten and 3.251% of all 21 Healthcare holdings. Lastly, Telecommunications is represented in the top ten by KDDI ( OTCPK:KDDIY ) , 1.29%; 5.79% of all top ten holdings and 62% of all telecom holdings. A trade profile of Japan reveals that, as noted, Autos are the lead export at 13%; Vehicle Parts, 5.3%; Integrated Circuits, 2.4%; Industrial Printers, 2.2% and Specialized Machinery, 1.7%. Of total exports to China, Integrated Circuits are 7.51%, followed by Vehicle Parts, 5.10% and Autos, 4.04%. Of total Japanese exports to U.S. Autos are 27.57% followed by Vehicle Parts, 7.40%; industrial Printers, 2.57%; Construction Vehicles, 2.41% and Aircraft Parts 2.33%. South Korea receives a sundry of intermediate industrial products, such as Hot Rolled Iron, 4.60; Raw Plastic Sheeting, 4.45% and Integrated Circuits, 3.90%. Exports to Thailand, a major Automobile manufacturing and assembly center, are Vehicle Parts, 11.59%; Engine Parts, 3.64% and Combustion engines, 2.22%, as well as intermediate iron. Lastly, according to the World Trade Organization, Japan accounts for 3.13% of Commercial Service exports and 3.70% of Commercial Service imports. Hence, automobiles, automobile components, heavy industrial machinery and construction equipment are important to Japan’s economy. Current Bank of Japan policy is maintaining a weaker Yen, with pressure mounting to stimulate the economy even more. This policy makes Japanese export products less expensive to the importers. Since the U.S. is a major importer of Japanese autos and heavy equipment, the Yen/Dollar hedge will offset the risk of a weakening Yen. Further, strengthening U.S. consumer spending bodes well for Japanese auto and electronics manufacturers. (click to enlarge) There are several USD/JPY hedged funds in this space. Based on the best one year returns of the top ten Japan focused funds, five are focused on a specific sector, two on subsets of the broader indices and the remaining three, including the X-Tracker fund are based on the broader indices. A summary comparison of the three broad based indices is presented in the table below. Fund/Inception Tracking Index 1 Year Return Total Assets Shares Outstanding Premium / Discount Distribution Yield Fees Recent Price P/E iShares Currency Hedged MSCI Japan ETF ( HEWJ) 1-31-14 MSCI 27.16% $830.7 million 26.4 million Discount at -0.08% 1.17% 0.48% after waiver $31.68 16.00 DBJP 6-9-11 MSCI 26.39% $1.358 billion 32.00 million Discount at -0.87% 1.74% 0.45% $42.03 17.00 WisdomTree Japan Hedged Equity ETF ( DXJ) 6-16-06 WisdomTree 25.04% $17 billion 314.6 million Discount at -0.49% 2.28% 0.48% $56.47 14.00 The fund is relatively new, having initiated trading in June of 2011. The market yield to date return is 16.42% and the trailing twelve month yield is 11.46% According to the prospectus , the fund is at least 80% invested and tracks the MSCI Japan U.S. Dollar Hedged Index, based on a subset of the Japanese Equity Market. There are 1,891 top tier companies and 3,486 in total in that index. Over the three years the fund has paid dividends totaling $6.55/share, the largest distribution, $3.42849, paid in December of 2014. The fund is currently trading at a slight discount to NAV at -0.87%. The extreme measures the BOJ needed to make weakened the currency considerably against the U.S. dollar. As it is now, it seems that the Yen will remain weak against the dollar for some time to come. Lastly, although the U.S. economy is growing it is doing so at a very moderate pace, whereas China’s rapid expansion seems to have come to a sudden halt, and might even be contracting. However, if indeed contracting, it offers Japan the opportunity to regain its status as the second largest global economy; an important point to consider. 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. Additional disclosure: CFDs, spread betting and FX can result in losses exceeding your initial deposit. They are not suitable for everyone, so please ensure you understand the risks. Seek independent financial advice if necessary. Nothing in this article should be considered a personal recommendation. It does not account for your personal circumstances or appetite for risk.

Low Volatility & Momentum: Doubling The Market Return

Summary This series offers an expansive look at the Low Volatility Anomaly, or why lower risk stocks have historically produced stronger risk-adjusted returns than higher risk stocks or the broader market. While low volatility strategies are often an appropriate long-term buy-and-hold strategy, this article offers a strategy that uses a momentum signal to tilt towards higher beta securities selectively. The alpha-generative strategy combines two market anomalies – Low Volatility and Momentum – to produce outsized returns. In recent articles, I have been authoring a fairly extensive examination of the Low Volatility Anomaly, the tendency for low volatility assets to outpeform high beta assets over long-time intervals. A Low Volatility strategy was one of five buy-and-hold factor tilts that I described in a previous series of articles. I believe that these buy-and-hold strategies to capture structural alpha are appropriate for many in the Seeking Alpha audience, but understand that some readers are looking for strategies that can generate even higher absolute returns. This article depicts one such strategy. Long-time readers know that two of favorite topics on which to author have been Low Volatility and Momentum strategies. This article combines these two strategies to produce a return profile that as the title of the article suggests has more than doubled the return of the S&P 500 over the past quarter-century. Before we delve into this strategy, we should first discuss the two components that drive this tremendous performance. Low Volatility Anomaly Regular readers know that I am currently authoring a multi-part series on the Low Volatility Anomaly. These articles include an introduction to the concept, a theoretical underpinning for the anomaly , cognitive and market structure factors that contribute to its long-run performance, and empirical evidence that demonstrates the outperformance of low volatility strategies across markets, geographies and long-time intervals. In past articles, I have depicted the relative outperformance of Low Volatility strategies using the graph below which shows the cumulative total return profile (including reinvested dividends) of the S&P 500 (NYSEARCA: SPY ), the S&P 500 Low Volatility Index (NYSEARCA: SPLV ), and the S&P 500 High Beta Index (NYSEARCA: SPHB ) over the past twenty-five years. The volatility-tilted indices are comprised of the one-hundred lowest (highest) volatility constituents of the S&P 500 based on daily price variability over the trailing one year, rebalanced quarterly, and weighted by inverse (direct) volatility. Source: Standard and Poor’s; Bloomberg The Low Volatility strategy contributes an important base component to this strategy that would have doubled the return of the market over the past twenty-five years, but we also need an element that pushes the strategy into riskier parts of the market when we can get paid for this tilt in the form of higher returns. Momentum Like the low volatility strategy, momentum strategies have been alpha-generative over long-time intervals and across markets. Consistent with Jegadeesh and Titman (1993), which documented momentum in stock prices that have outperformed in the recent past over short forward intervals, the efficacy of momentum strategies have been widely documented. Academic literature has described excess returns generated by momentum strategies in foreign stocks ( Fama and French 2011 ), multiple asset classes ( Schleifer and Summers 1990 ), commodities ( Gorton, Hayashi and Rouwenhorst 2008 ), and my own studies on momentum in fixed income strategies and more recently the oil market . Academic literature offers competing theories on why momentum has generated alpha over long-time intervals across markets and geographies. Proponents of market efficiency suggest that momentum is a unique risk premium, and the long-run profitability of these strategies is compensation for this unique systematic risk factor ( Carhart 1997 ). Behaviorists offer multiple competing explanations. In my previous series, I referenced both Lottery Preferences and Overconfidence as potential justifications. Studies contend that markets under-react to new information ( Hong and Stein 1999 ), which allows for the autocorrelations found in return series. Other behavioral economists contend that the disposition effect, or the tendency for investors to pocket gains and avoid losses, makes investors prone to sell winners early and hold onto losers too long ( Frazzini 2006 ), which could be further amplified by a “bandwagon effect” that leads investors to favor stocks with recent outperformance. Blitz, Falkenstein and Van Vliet (2013) offer an expansive summary of these explanations. The Strategy I am of the opinion that low volatility stocks should be a part of investors’ longer-term strategic asset allocation given that class of stocks’ historical higher average returns and lower variability of returns. In ” Making Buffett’s Alpha Your Own ,” I described academic research ( Frazzini, Kabiller, Pederson 2013 ) that broke down the Oracle of Omaha’s tremendous track record at Berkshire Hathaway ( BRK.A , BRK.B ) into two components – capturing the Low Volatility Anomaly and the application of leverage. If an allocation to low volatility stocks should be part of your long-term strategic asset allocation, then an allocation to high beta stocks must be done tactically with a short-term focus given that class of stocks’ lower long run average returns and higher variability of returns. This view is borne out of the data underpinning the chart above. However, a temporary allocation to the High Beta Index in sharply rising markets can further boost performance. The High Beta stock index has typically outperformed in post-recession recoveries. How do we combine Low Volatility and Momentum? A quarterly switching strategy between the Low Volatility Index and the High Beta Index, which buys the leg that has outperformed over the trailing quarter and holds that leg forward for the subsequent quarter, would have produced the return profile seen below since 1990, easily besting the S&P 500 with lower return volatility. For a pictorial demonstration of the leg that would be chosen by the Momentum strategy, please see the exhibit at the end of the article. It is a very simple heuristic. The Momentum strategy buys either Low Vol or High Beta stocks based on the index that outperformed in the trailing quarter and holds that index for the subsequent quarter before re-examining the allocation once again. The results are striking. (click to enlarge) From the cumulative return graph above, one can see that $1 invested in the S&P 500 would have produced $9.04 at the end of the period (including reinvested dividends) whereas $1 invested in the Momentum portfolio would have produced $19.90. These are gross index returns and do not consider taxes. Readers envisioning employing momentum strategies should utilize tax-deferred accounts. Summary statistics of the trade are captured below: (click to enlarge) The simple quarterly switching momentum strategy would have produced a 13% return per annum over the long sample period. This 3.6% outperformance relative to the S&P 500 led to the cumulative doubling of the market returns over time. Note that while the Momentum strategy is riskier than the broad market as measured by the variability of quarterly returns, practitioners of this strategy would have been rewarded with correspondingly higher returns for this incremental risk. While I contend that a long-run, buy-and-hold tilt towards lower volatility equity is probably appropriate for many Seeking Alpha readers, this article demonstrates a momentum-based switching strategy that can help inform investors when to pivot towards higher beta stocks when they offer returns commensurate with their higher risk. Disclaimer My articles may contain statements and projections that are forward-looking in nature, and therefore inherently subject to numerous risks, uncertainties and assumptions. While my articles focus on generating long-term risk-adjusted returns, investment decisions necessarily involve the risk of loss of principal. Individual investor circumstances vary significantly, and information gleaned from my articles should be applied to your own unique investment situation, objectives, risk tolerance, and investment horizon. Exhibit: Returns of Low Vol, High Beta, Momentum, & Market (click to enlarge) Disclosure: I am/we are long SPLV, SPHB. (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.

Low Volatility And Momentum: Doubling The Market Return

Summary This series offers an expansive look at the Low Volatility Anomaly, or why lower risk stocks have historically produced stronger risk-adjusted returns than higher risk stocks or the broader market. While low volatility strategies are often an appropriate long-term buy-and-hold strategy, this article offers a strategy that uses a momentum signal to tilt towards higher-beta securities selectively. The alpha-generative strategy combines two market anomalies – Low Volatility and Momentum – to produce outsized returns. In recent articles, I have been authoring a fairly extensive examination of the Low Volatility Anomaly, the tendency for low volatility assets to outpeform high beta assets over long-time intervals. A Low Volatility strategy was one of five buy-and-hold factor tilts that I described in a previous series of articles. I believe that these buy-and-hold strategies to capture structural alpha are appropriate for many in the Seeking Alpha audience, but understand that some readers are looking for strategies that can generate even higher absolute returns. This article depicts one such strategy. Long-time readers know that two of favorite topics on which to author have been Low Volatility and Momentum strategies. This article combines these two strategies to produce a return profile that as the title of the article suggests has more than doubled the return of the S&P 500 over the past quarter-century. Before we delve into this strategy, we should first discuss the two components that drive this tremendous performance. Low Volatility Anomaly Regular readers know that I am currently authoring a multi-part series on the Low Volatility Anomaly. These articles include an introduction to the concept, a theoretical underpinning for the anomaly , cognitive and market structure factors that contribute to its long-run performance, and empirical evidence that demonstrates the outperformance of low volatility strategies across markets, geographies and long time intervals. In past articles, I have depicted the relative outperformance of Low Volatility strategies using the graph below which shows the cumulative total return profile (including reinvested dividends) of the S&P 500 (NYSEARCA: SPY ), the S&P 500 Low Volatility Index (NYSEARCA: SPLV ), and the S&P 500 High Beta Index (NYSEARCA: SPHB ) over the past twenty five years. The volatility-tilted indices are comprised of the one-hundred lowest (highest) volatility constituents of the S&P 500 based on daily price variability over the trailing one year, rebalanced quarterly, and weighted by inverse (direct) volatility. Source: Standard and Poor’s; Bloomberg The Low Volatility strategy contributes an important base component to this strategy that would have doubled the return of the market over the past twenty-five years, but we also need an element that pushes the strategy into riskier parts of the market when we can get paid for this tilt in the form of higher returns. Momentum Like the low volatility strategy, momentum strategies have been alpha-generative over long time intervals and across markets. Consistent with Jegadeesh and Titman (1993), which documented momentum in stock prices that have outperformed in the recent past over short forward intervals, the efficacy of momentum strategies have been widely documented. Academic literature has described excess returns generated by momentum strategies in foreign stocks ( Fama and French 2011 ), multiple asset classes ( Schleifer and Summers 1990 ), commodities ( Gorton, Hayashi and Rouwenhorst 2008 ), and my own studies on momentum in fixed income strategies and more recently the oil market . Academic literature offers competing theories on why momentum has generated alpha over long time intervals across markets and geographies. Proponents of market efficiency suggest that momentum is a unique risk premium, and the long-run profitability of these strategies is compensation for this unique systematic risk factor ( Carhart 1997 ). Behaviorists offer multiple competing explanations. In my previous series, I referenced both Lottery Preferences and Overconfidence as potential justifications. Studies contend that markets under-react to new information ( Hong and Stein 1999 ), which allows for the autocorrelations found in return series. Other behavioral economists contend that the disposition effect, or the tendency for investors to pocket gains and avoid losses, makes investors prone to sell winners early and hold onto losers too long ( Frazzini 2006 ), which could be further amplified by a “bandwagon effect” that leads investors to favor stocks with recent outperformance. Blitz, Falkenstein and Van Vliet (2013) offer an expansive summary of these explanations. The Strategy I am of the opinion that low volatility stocks should be a part of investors’ longer-term strategic asset allocation given that class of stocks’ historical higher average returns and lower variability of returns. In ” Making Buffett’s Alpha Your Own ,” I described academic research ( Frazzini, Kabiller, Pederson 2013 ) that broke down the Oracle of Omaha’s tremendous track record at Berkshire Hathaway ( BRK.A , BRK.B ) into two components – capturing the Low Volatility Anomaly and the application of leverage. If an allocation to low volatility stocks should be part of your long-term strategic asset allocation, then an allocation to high beta stocks must be done tactically with a short-term focus given that class of stocks’ lower long-run average returns and higher variability of returns. This view is borne out of the data underpinning the chart above. However, a temporary allocation to the High Beta Index in sharply rising markets can further boost performance. The High Beta stock index has typically outperformed in post-recession recoveries. How do we combine Low Volatility and Momentum? A quarterly switching strategy between the Low Volatility Index and the High Beta Index, which buys the leg that has outperformed over the trailing quarter and holds that leg forward for the subsequent quarter, would have produced the return profile seen below since 1990, easily besting the S&P 500 with lower return volatility. For a pictorial demonstration of the leg that would be chosen by the Momentum strategy, please see the exhibit at the end of the article. It is a very simple heuristic. The Momentum strategy buys either Low Vol or High Beta stocks based on the index that outperformed in the trailing quarter and holds that index for the subsequent quarter before re-examining the allocation once again. The results are striking. (click to enlarge) From the cumulative return graph above, one can see that $1 invested in the S&P 500 would have produced $9.04 at the end of the period (including reinvested dividends) whereas $1 invested in the Momentum portfolio would have produced $19.90. These are gross index returns and do not consider taxes. Readers envisioning employing momentum strategies should utilize tax-deferred accounts. Summary statistics of the trade are captured below: (click to enlarge) The simple quarterly switching momentum strategy would have produced a 13% return per annum over the long sample period. This 3.6% outperformance relative to the S&P 500 led to the cumulative doubling of the market returns over time. Note that while the Momentum strategy is riskier than the broad market as measured by the variability of quarterly returns, practitioners of this strategy would have been rewarded with correspondingly higher returns for this incremental risk. While I contend that a long-run, buy-and-hold tilt towards lower volatility equity is probably appropriate for many Seeking Alpha readers, this article demonstrates a momentum-based switching strategy that can help inform investors when to pivot towards higher beta stocks when they offer returns commensurate with their higher risk. Disclaimer My articles may contain statements and projections that are forward-looking in nature, and therefore inherently subject to numerous risks, uncertainties and assumptions. While my articles focus on generating long-term risk-adjusted returns, investment decisions necessarily involve the risk of loss of principal. Individual investor circumstances vary significantly, and information gleaned from my articles should be applied to your own unique investment situation, objectives, risk tolerance, and investment horizon. Exhibit: Returns of Low Vol, High Beta, Momentum, & Market (click to enlarge) Disclosure: I am/we are long SPLV, SPHB. (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.