Tag Archives: send-xhr-start

Fund Watch: Gotham, Transamerica, Highland, ALPS And More

In this edition of Fund Watch, we preview new fund filings from: Eccles Street Event-Driven Opportunity ETF Transamerica Event Driven Fund ALPS Advanced Put Write Strategy ETF Gotham Index 500 and Total Return Funds Highland Files for 17 Alternative ETFs Eccles Street Event-Driven Opportunity ETF Eccles Street Asset Management filed paperwork with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on January 9, announcing its intention to launch the Eccles Street Event-Driven Opportunity ETF. Eccles Street will invest the fund’s assets in “event-driven” credit instruments, mostly corporate bonds and bank loans with an average maturity of 3-5 years. The instruments are considered “event-driven” because their issuers are involved in corporate “events,” such as mergers, acquisitions, bankruptcies, credit downgrades, proxy fights, or other restructuring. The Eccles Street Event-Driven Opportunity ETF will also invest in equities, especially credit-related ETFs and ETNs. Investments will be selected after Eccles Street Management, the fund’s sub-advisor, performs a credit analysis of the issuers of potential investments. The fund’s objective will be current income, with a secondary objective of capital appreciation. Transamerica Event Driven Fund Transamerica Funds filed a Registration Statement with the SEC for the Transamerica Event-Driven Fund on January 15. The fund will be sub-advised by Advent Capital Management, and it will pursue an event-driven strategy by investing in companies involved in corporate events or special situations. Absolute return is the fund’s objective. The Transamerica Event-Driven Fund will be available in A- and I-class shares, with net-expense ratios of 1.6% and 1.35%, respectively. Advent Capital Management’s Odell Lambroza, Tracy Maitland, and Doug Teresko are listed as the fund’s portfolio managers. ALPS Advanced Put Write Strategy ETF On January 6, ALPS ETF Trust filed a Form N-1A with the SEC announcing its plan to launch the ALPS Advanced Put Write Strategy ETF. The fund will seek total return, with an emphasis on income, by writing one-month put options on the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ) . To write a put option is the same thing as short-selling a put option, and the ALPS Advanced Put Write Strategy ETF earns income by writing (short-selling) puts, effectively on the S&P 500. Put options rise in value as the value of their underlying instrument declines, and fall in value as their underlying instrument appreciates. The objective of a put writer is for the put contracts he or she sells short to expire worthless. The ALPS Advanced Put Write Strategy ETF will give investors the opportunity to earn income from unrealized fears as the S&P 500 climbs higher. Gotham Index 500 and Total Return Funds On January 15, Fundvantage Trust filed paperwork with the SEC for a pair of new alternative mutual funds: the Gotham Index 500 Plus Fund and the Gotham Total Return Fund. Author and former hedge-fund manager Joel Greenblatt is a co-portfolio manager of both funds. The Gotham Index 500 Plus Fund seeks to outperform the S&P 500 over most investment periods by using a long/short equity strategy. In addition to shares of common stock, its investments may include preferred stock, convertible bonds, rights, and warrants – all of which are featured in portfolio manager Joel Greenblatt’s 1997 book You Can Be a Stock-Market Genius . The Gotham Total Return Fund will be a non-diversified fund aiming to outperform the top-ranked university endowments over a full market cycle. Its assets will be allocated across other Gotham mutual funds, particularly the Gotham Absolute 500 Fund, the Gotham Enhanced 500 Fund, the Gotham Neutral Fund, and the new Gotham Index 500 Plus Fund. The fund’s long equity exposure is expected to be between 40% and 80%. Highland Files for 17 Alternative ETFs Highland Capital Management has made a big commitment to liquid alternatives space with a new filing for 17 ETFs that span across four broad hedge funds styles, including equity hedge, event driven, macro and relative value. The full list of funds is as follows: Highland Equity Hedge Fundamental Growth ETF Highland Equity Hedge Fundamental Value ETF Highland Equity Hedge Multi-Strategy ETF Highland Equity Hedge Technology ETF Highland Equity Hedge Healthcare ETF Highland Event-Driven Activist ETF Highland Event-Driven Credit Arbitrage ETF Highland Event-Driven Merger Arbitrage ETF Highland Event-Driven Multi-Strategy ETF Highland Macro Discretionary Thematic ETF Highland Macro Multi-Strategy ETF Highland Relative Value Fixed-Income Asset Backed ETF Highland Relative Value Fixed-Income Convertible Arbitrage ETF Highland Relative Value Fixed-Income Corporate ETF Highland Relative Value Fixed-Income Sovereign ETF Highland Relative Value Volatility ETF Highland Relative Value Multi-Strategy ETF Highland currently has one ETF in the market, the Highland iBoxx Senior Loan ETF (NYSEARCA: SNLN ), along with a range of alternative strategy and alternative income mutual funds. The launch of 17 alternative ETFs will make Highland one of the largest managers of alternative ETFs in the market.

Are Multi-Asset Funds A Threat To The Fund Industry?

By Detlef Glow The chase for yield by all kinds of investors has driven up the popularity of so-called multi-asset funds, since the funds promise to be widely diversified and therefore able to generate returns from all kinds of assets. In a number of cases the promise also extends to all kinds of market conditions, since some of the funds have the ability to use shorts or so-called market-neutral strategies. With regard to the investment objectives of multi-asset funds, these funds can be considered as really actively managed funds. That mixed- or multi-asset funds are privileged products for European investors is shown in the impressive inflows these funds have been able to gather. Asset allocation funds were not only the best selling fund sector for 2013 (+€61.6 bn), they also led the table for the first 11 months of 2014. In this period asset allocation products gathered €63.3 bn, far ahead of the second and third best selling sectors: mixed-asset conservative (+€27.9 bn) and bonds EUR (+€27.5 bn). The strong inflows into the multi-asset sector, combined with the fact that more and more fund promoters are launching multi-asset products to benefit from this trend, have raised questions and concerns about multi-asset products. One of these questions is whether all of these new managers are able to handle multi-asset portfolios, especially in tough times. Will these managers be able to meet the expectations of their investors in bear markets? The fear behind this question is linked to the negative image of the fund industry that stemmed from a number of absolute return funds failing to meet their goals during the 2008 financial crisis. From my point of view this is a valid concern: some managers may not be able to handle rough markets. They might not be experienced in the use of shorts, or they may not have the right risk management tools in place. Another point of concern is that some asset managers try to run their multi-asset portfolios with small teams to cover a large number of asset classes, or they are managing these portfolios in addition to other portfolio management tasks. In this regard, investors should make sure the fund management team of their fund is focused on the multi-asset portfolio and has enough resources to handle all the asset classes in the portfolio. The second major concern I have heard often in recent months is about fund flows. Since multi-asset products seem to have been the investment of choice of both institutional/professional and private investors in the past two years, some observers state that the flows might have reached their peak. Investors may start to pull out their money from these funds, which could lead to major outflows and therefore disruptions in some asset classes. I do not think that private investors will stop investing in multi-asset products as long as the funds fulfill their investment objectives and the goals of the investors. But it looks a bit different on the institutional side. New regulations such as Solvency II, with its high reporting standards, may cause some outflows from mutual funds, regardless of whether the fund promoters are able to deliver holdings data and other statistics on time. Another reason for outflows might be because asset managers are using multi-asset funds instead of buying the single building blocks and building multi-asset portfolios of their own. That would be the only way for them to have their asset allocation fully under control. From my point of view both concerns are valid; institutional outflows could easily offset inflows, which might cause outflows from the asset allocation sector. Even so, I would not expect any major disruptions in the utilized asset classes from this, since major outflows are unlikely to happen from one day to the next. In addition, I don’t think all the institutional investors who have bought multi-asset funds are able to manage this kind of portfolio in-house and therefore need an external manager to participate in these broadly diversified investment strategies. I would assume some questions and concerns around multi-asset funds are valid, but as long as at least the major funds in this market segment continue to deliver on their investment objective, the fund category is not a major threat for the European mutual fund industry. From my point of view, the major risk for the fund industry would be if one of the top-selling funds in this segment fails to deliver on its investment objective or faces major losses during a crisis. That would once again damage the reputation of the fund industry, which might then irrevocably lose investors’ trust. The views expressed are the views of the author, not necessarily those of Thomson Reuters.

Equity CEFs: Global CEFs For A QE Europe

Summary After years of lagging the US markets, will Quantitative Easing by the European Central Bank inflate the European stock markets much like the Federal Reserve did for US markets? That seems to be the central question as the ECB begins its own QE bond buying program designed to help stimulate the Eurozone economies. And if the ECB is successful, then what global equity CEFs might benefit as well? If Quantitative Easing – Europe style helps European stocks much like Quantitative Easing – USA helped our equity markets, then it stands to reason that global equity based CEFs that have a high exposure to European stocks might benefit as well. Though I am not familiar with any equity CEFs that are pure European stock focused, i.e. follow an index that includes the largest and most popular European stocks like an S&P 500, you can certainly find equity CEFs that have a large percentage of their portfolios, typically around 25% to 35%, exposed to the large cap European stock markets. This is in contrast to the Asia/Pacific region in which there are quite a number of equity CEFs dedicated entirely to stocks in these markets, whether they be general equity CEFs, emerging market CEFs or more country specific CEFs. The theory, however, is that any QE – Europe would probably benefit the largest and most liquid European stock names and thus investors should focus on equity CEFs that include these securities as part of their overall portfolio. There are also several ETFs, such as the popular iShares Europe fund (NYSEARCA: IEV ) , that will give you a pure play on the largest and most popular European stocks as a non-managed index fund, but I personally like the global equity CEF approach since not only are many of these funds trading at wide discounts and are at the low end of their discount/premium range, but they also are diversified so that you don’t put all your eggs in one basket in case QE – Europe doesn’t have quite the same effect as QE – USA. Most of the global equity CEFs I follow are diversified among the US, Europe and Asia/Pacific markets and can also offer varying income strategies that help pay for their large yields, generally in the 7% to as high as 11%. For example, leveraged income global equity CEFs will often include fixed-income securities such as preferreds or corporate bonds to reduce volatility and provide further diversification to protect against any one sector underperforming. After all, we’re not looking for home runs in these funds but rather relative outperformance over their CEF and ETF counterparts. So if you want the pure play European stock approach, then IEV or some other European stock focused ETF is probably a better way to go. But as you’ll see, diversification has its merits and many of these global equity CEFs have outperformed, both at the NAV and market price levels – the most popular international ETFs such as IEV or the more broadly based iShares Morgan Stanley EAFE international index (NYSEARCA: EFA ) , which includes Europe, Asia and the Far East stock markets, hence the EAFE. Global Equity CEF 1-Year and 3-Year Performances The following two tables sorts the global equity CEFs I follow by their total return NAV performances over one-year and then three years (through January 23rd so a little longer than one-year and three-ye ar periods). All of these funds have roughly 25% – 35% large cap European stock exposure though most will still have a higher exposure to US markets and some may be more Asia/Pacific stock weighted than European stock weighted. What are not included in the tables are global equity CEFs that focus in emerging markets are country specific or sector specific funds such as global utilities or global REITs. In other words, I’m just including global equity CEFs that may be beneficiaries of any QE – Europe due to their large cap European stock exposure. Also included at the bottom of each table are the total return ETF performances of the most popular international ETFs, IEV and EFA , and from the US major market indices, the SPDR S&P 500 (NYSEARCA: SPY ) , the Powershares NASDAQ-100 (NASDAQ: QQQ ) , the SPDR Dow Jones 30 Industrials (NYSEARCA: DIA ) . 1-Year Total Return Performance 3-Year Total Return Performance Recommended Global Equity CEFs For QE – Europe Using the tables above and other proprietary information regarding relative valuations and historic NAV performance, these are the global equity based CEFs with European stock exposure that I would recommend. First is the Eaton Vance Tax-Advantaged Global Dividend Income fund (NYSE: ETG ) , $16.15 market price, $17.71 NAV, -8.8% discount, 7.7% current market yield . ETG , along with (NYSE: ETO ) , are Eaton Vance’s two global leveraged equity based CEFs that also include about 20% of their portfolios in fixed-income preferred securities. Both of these funds, along with (NYSE: EVT ) , which is Eaton Vance’s leveraged US based CEF, are higher risk, higher reward CEFs due to their use of leverage but all have been fantastic performers over the past few years both at the NAV and market price level. ETG used to have the highest valuation of all of the Eaton Vance leveraged CEFs but currently trades at a -8.8% discount, at the low end of its Premium/Discount range as shown in this 3-year Premium/Discount chart. (click to enlarge) ETG includes about 32% of its portfolio in large cap European stocks, 7% exposure in Asia/Pacific and the rest mostly in US based large-cap stocks. ETG’s overall portfolio is 82% equities and 18% preferred securities. I have followed ETG for years and I often used it as a short hedge against my long CEF positions as the fund would often spike up to trade close to a premium valuation for short periods only to drop back to a wider discount. For investors who think that CEFs don’t stray much from their premium/discount valuations over time, ETG is a good example of a fund that does. Eaton Vance’s other leveraged global equity CEF, ETO is similar to ETG but trades at a much narrower and even historically narrow -1.2% discount due to recent distribution increases and very large capital gain distributions over the last couple years. Frankly though, both of these funds have knocked the cover off the ball the last few years even with their global stock exposure and have far outperformed IEV or EFA at both the NAV and market price levels. Referring to the tables above, ETG has returned 62.4% to investors at its market price in a little over three years while ETO has returned a whopping 81.6% . Have The Alpine CEFs Finally Turned The Corner? Well, I never thought I would say this but the second group of global equity CEFs I would recommend to take advantage of a European market turnaround are the Alpine Total Dynamic Dividend fund (NYSE: AOD ) , $8.66 market price, $10.02 NAV, -13.6% discount, 7.8% current market yield and the Alpine Global Dynamic Dividend fund (NYSE: AGD ) , $9.99 market price, $11.25 NAV, -11.2% discount, 7.7% current market yield . For those of you who have followed my articles over the years, you know that I had been one of Alpine’s biggest bears ever since I started writing on Seeking Alpha due to the two fund’s ineffective dividend harvest income strategy that dramatically eroded the fund’s NAVs over the years while overpaying their distributions. Alpine finally got the message a couple years ago and brought in new portfolio managers who first took steps to minimize the use of their dividend harvest strategy while significantly reducing the distributions to a more reasonable NAV yield. Then just a year ago, Alpine implemented a reverse split (not their first) for the two funds to boost up their depressed NAV prices. Though this was tough medicine to take and the funds still reflect some of the worst NAV and market price performances of any equity CEFs since their inceptions in 2006 and 2007, it’s safe to say that the funds have finally turned it around and are seeing a resurgence in their NAV performances. Though AGD is considered the global of the two funds, the fact is both funds have similar portfolios and similar exposure to European equities, with AGD showing 32% of its portfolio in European stocks, 55% in US stocks and about 11% in Asia/Pacific while AOD’s portfolio breakdown is 29% in European stocks, 58% in US stocks and 11% in Asia/Pacific (as of 10/31/2014). Though the funds rely less on a dividend capture income strategy now and have much more achievable NAV yields of about 6.8% instead of the 12%+ NAV yields they use to have, there still seems to be hesitation by investors as to whether the funds have actually turned the corner. This is reflected in the fund’s wide discounts with AGD at a current -11.2% discount and AOD at one of the widest discounts of all equity CEFs at -13.6%. But this is where the opportunities lie because investors were wrong in their zeal for AGD and AOD several years ago (as I pointed out in many articles) when investors drove the fund’s valuations up to market price premiums as high as 50% in early 2010 and I believe they are wrong now as the fund’s drop to double digit discounts just at a time when their improved income and growth strategies could really start to pay off. A Global Equity CEF With The Highest European Exposure The last global equity CEF I am recommending is also one I used to pan because of its high valuation and lackluster NAV performance, but it also has one of the highest exposures to large cap European stocks if you believe the time is now for this region to outperform. The Voya International High Dividend Equity Income fund (NYSE: IID ) , $7.94 market price, $8.44 NAV, -5.9% discount, 10.4% current market yield targets 50% of its portfolio to be invested in European stocks, 40% in the Asia/Pacific region and only about 9% in US stocks. This minimal exposure to the US markets has resulted in IID’s severe NAV and market price underperformance over the last few years though the fund has continued to maintain a high NAV yield and offer an extremely generous market price yield, currently 10.4% paid monthly, even in the face of this underperformance. Some might argue that this is still too generous as the fund’s NAV yield of 9.8% will not be easy to achieve for an option-income CEF that targets a fairly low 20% – 50% of its portfolio to write options against. In other words, IID will need a lot more portfolio appreciation going forward if it wants to continue to pay out that high of an NAV yield. Because the alternative is continued NAV erosion and a diminishing asset base, which makes it that much more difficult to sustain the current distribution. I personally would feel even better about IID’s turnaround prospects if Voya cut the distribution to a more attainable 7% – 8% NAV yield because if the QE – Europe effect doesn’t play out, then Voya will probably have to take that step. IID , like ETG , is another fund that can vary widely in its valuation, going from a market price premium to a market price discount in a matter of weeks as seen in this three-y ear Premium/Discount graph. (click to enlarge) As you can see, IID’s current -5.9% discount is at the bottom of its range for a fund that typically can trade at a market price premium. Though IID is certainly not the most undervalued global equity CEF even at the bottom of its discount range, one reason why it trades at such a high relative valuation is because of its appreciation potential. Because if the international markets like Europe start to play catch up with the US markets, then IID is one of the best high risk/high reward equity CEFs to take advantage of that. Conclusion All of these fund’s portfolios can be seen at their fund sponsor’s websites and this analysis does not take into account a fund’s actual stock holdings though there tends to be a lot of overlap in the large-cap international stocks these funds own. In addition, most of these global equity CEFs use hedging strategies to reduce currency risk and the effectiveness of these strategies is also not taken into consideration. But if you believe that QE – Europe has the potential to do for large-cap European stocks what QE – USA did for our markets, then these global equity CEFs, offering low valuations and high yields, could be an excellent way to play off that effect.