Tag Archives: united-states

XLE: Energy Stocks Still Overvalued Relative To The Oil Price

Oil may find a bottom this fall at $35-$40 — but that doesn’t mean oil stocks will find a bottom. The XLE energy stock ETF remains highly inflated, as compared with the oil price. Oil and the broader stock market have been trading together since volatility spiked in August. If the S&P 500 goes down another leg to the 1680 range this fall, XLE will fall even farther than the S&P and the oil price will. Don’t buy oil stocks yet — in fact, consider shorting XLE. Ever since the oil price crashed in the fall of 2014, investors have been trying to call a bottom and find an opportunity to invest in the energy sector at bargain values. But so far, the market has frustrated would-be value investors in energy, as the oil price and energy stocks of all types have continued to fall farther and farther. The low to date was reached in the market selloff of August 24-25, when WTIC oil settled at $38.22 and the Energy Select Sector SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA: XLE ) fell to $59.22. Some investors are now hopeful that these prices were the bottom that they have been waiting for, and they think now is finally the time to buy energy stocks and make big profits on the oil price rebound in the coming years. I believe they are half right, but unfortunately it is not the most profitable half. The oil price itself was probably very close to the bottom when it fell into the $37-$40 range for a few days, below $40 for the first time since February 2009. But the large-cap and mid-cap energy stocks in XLE probably have a lot farther to fall. XLE was in the low $40s in February 2009, and it could fall another 33% from its current price before it reaches that level again. The point is that large-cap and mid-cap energy stock prices are influenced both by the oil price and by the performance of the broader stock market in general. Their prices were very low in February 2009 because the oil price and all stock prices were very low. Their prices held up relatively quite well from fall 2014 through spring 2015 because the whole stock market was holding up well then. Investors had confidence that the big oil companies would ride out the oil price drop and continue to prosper along with the entire economy when oil prices recovered. But since the return of volatility in all markets since August, oil stocks no longer have the assurance of the broader market to fall back on. Stocks have dropped decisively from their highs earlier in 2015, and the technical charts point to further declines coming this fall, which of course is a historically weak seasonal period for stocks. Numerous technical indicators signal that if the S&P 500 cannot hold support in the 1820-1867 range, a drop all the way to 1680 is the next likely step down. Moreover, in the current period of volatility, stocks and oil are trading together. When one goes down, so does the other. A bearish market trend and linkage of stocks and oil is very, very bad news for the energy stocks in XLE. One chart shows clearly how much more room XLE has to fall: (click to enlarge) This chart shows the ratio of the share price of XLE to the actual price of WTIC oil, over the entire history of XLE as an ETF, from 1999 to the present. Notice how elevated the XLE price remains today, as compared with the oil price. The ratio has retreated from its all-time highs earlier this year, but it still remains very high compared to most of the past decade and a half. If the broader stock market takes another turn for the worse, this charts shows that XLE has plenty of room to fall along with it, even after the oil price itself nears a bottom and stops falling so steeply. Notice in the chart that until last year, the XLE:$WTIC ratio normally stayed in a range from 0.6 to 0.8. With all stocks in a downward trend, there is no particular reason to expect that XLE will stay elevated above that range, and every reason to expect the likelihood of XLE returning to that range. For example, if the oil price settles at $40 and the XLE:WTIC ratio even returns to the top of the old range at 0.8, that would mean an XLE share price of $32, almost a 50% drop from its current price. If the oil price settles at $35 and the ratio falls to the bottom of the old range at 0.6, that would mean an XLE share price of $21, a 66% drop from its current price. I am not predicting that XLE will crash to $21 or even $32 this fall. I am just pointing out that it is well within the realm of reasonable possibility and would not represent an extreme change in the historical performance of XLE relative to the oil price. More likely is a decline to the low $40s or high $30s this fall, the range that XLE fell to in the crash of 2008-2009. The overall stock market would not have to crash 2008-style for XLE energy stocks to fall to those levels. The process will look very different because in 2008, stocks crashed first and then the oil price dropped, whereas this time the oil price dropped first and stocks are falling later. Actions to take: First of all, don’t buy oil stocks yet! The knife is still falling. More aggressive investors can consider shorting XLE. As a hedge, investors can short XLE and buy The United States Oil ETF, LP ( USO) to play a decline in the XLE:$WTIC ratio.

ETFs Driving Big Gains For Oil Shorts

Summary Money moving in and out of long and short oil ETFs, as low oil price visibility creates more uncertainty. Retail investors should focus on only holding for a very limited time period if they go short. There is nothing to suggest oil prices can rise to sustainable levels in the near future. Traders with a high tolerance for leveraged risk have been making a killing by shorting oil in 2015, led by a number of ETFs that have been, in some cases, up well over 200 percent on the year. There has been a lot more volatility than usual in these types of instruments, as headlines contradicting one another on the movement of the price of oil have money moving in an out of ETFs catering to short and long outlooks for oil. Some large players have been short oil all year, but for the retail investor, it would be wise to take a position in these ETFs for a very short period of time. Some ETFs even suggest and encourage that to their investors, saying in many cases they’re built to hold a position for only one day. All the volatility and inflows and outflows reinforce the fact no one really knows where the price of oil will go, with some like Goldman Sachs saying it could plunge to as low as $20 per barrel, and OPEC recently saying it’s looking at it rebounding to $80 per barrel. In the case of OPEC, that’s primarily because it believes a decrease in American production will begin to offset excess inventory, and start to drive up prices. That is based upon its assessment it has beaten down a lot of the tight or shale oil drillers, which it believes will be a sustainable event. I disagree with that because of the plethora of drilled but uncompleted (DUC) wells, which can quickly and inexpensively be brought online in response to an increase in the price of oil. The truth is, as the market is showing, it could go either way. ETF oil shorting products Before getting into a couple of products and some interesting facts about their performance and why money has been changing hands, it’s worth looking at a couple of elements related to these types of ETFs. As already mentioned, most if not all retail investors should be thinking very limited holding periods for ETFs that short oil. They are extremely volatile, and can move up or down very quickly. If using leverage to make the trade, when including daily rebalancing, the short term movement can be very different than what is expected of the long-term performance data of the ETF or ETN. At this time risk/reward is worth the plunge for those that have some spare capital and a high tolerance for risk. There has to be the belief the price of oil will continue to go down to enter this play. I’m not in this particular play at this time, but I’ve done it with other commodities, and there is a lot of money to be made if you’re right in your assessment of the market. That said, leverage is becoming more of a risk as things get murkier, as conflicting outlooks suggest the underlying catalysts for either direction are no longer as sure – at least in the mind of traders – as they were earlier in the year. That’s one of the major reasons, even as oil has remained under pressure, a lot of money has been taken off the table. VelocityShares 3x Inverse Crude Oil ETN (NYSEARCA: DWTI ) Since DWTI has been one of the top performers in the sector in 2015, we’ll take a look at it first. DWTI offers 3x or 300% exposure to how the S&P GSCI Crude Oil Index ER performs on a daily basis. It does have a fairly high annual fee of 1.35 percent. Since this and others are so volatile, I’m not going to even attempt to look at how much it’s up for the year. It changes significantly in a very short period of time, as you can see in the chart below. Its prospectus states it’s “suitable” to be held by most investors for one day. This is a short-term play where it simply doesn’t matter. Again, larger investors can hold longer if they believe the trend will remain down, but now that the price of oil has fallen so much over the last year, leveraged players are under increasing risk if things surprisingly and abruptly turn around. Daily average volume is a solid 1.8 million shares, but as with its share price, its asset base can be very volatile. (click to enlarge) source: YahooFinance PowerShares DB Crude Oil Short ETN (NYSEARCA: SZO ) Since SZO doesn’t use leverage, it is probably one of the safer instruments in this space, if the term ‘safe’ can be applied. It offers inverse exposure to WTI crude, tracking the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index, which covers how well a group of oil futures contracts are performing. Over the last three months it is up about 30 percent, and has an expense ratio of 0.75 percent. It trades far less than DWTI, with a 3-month daily average of approximately 35,000 shares. Not nearly as popular as DWTI, it only has net assets of about $28.59 million. (click to enlarge) source: YahooFinance ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil ETF (NYSEARCA: SCO ) My final short to look at is SCO; its goal is to attempt to provide double the daily inverse return of the performance of the Bloomberg WTI Crude Oil Subindex. Over the last three months it has generated a return of about 56 percent. Total expenses amount to 95 basis points. I wanted to highlight SCO because it has been one of the top performing ETFs this year, and yet over $175 million has been removed from assets, according to Bloomberg. That points to growing skittishness over the uncertainty the price of oil is going to go. (click to enlarge) source: YahooFinance The United States Oil ETF (NYSEARCA: USO ) Since USO is a long play on oil it is included to confirm there is a lot of money moving in and out of the long and short ETFs, and not all of it is intuitive. With USO, it has enjoyed near $2.75 billion in new cash investment, even though it has lost over 50 percent of its value so far in the last twelve months. There is no doubt this represents investors believing there is going to be a rebound in oil prices; at least in the short term. This, combined with the outflows from SZO, reiterate concerns over the risk associated with using leverage to short oil, and having no visibility on where the price of oil is going. (click to enlarge) source: YahooFinance Conclusion Shorting oil using ETFs has been very lucrative this year, and my thought is there is a more room to make money for those shorting oil within a limited time frame. For myself, I wouldn’t use leverage any longer because of the low visibility factor concerning oil prices, and I wouldn’t stay in longer than a day. I’m primarily speaking to retail investors here, although until there is more clarity in the short term, larger investors will likely play by similar rules, if they continue to use a shorting strategy in oil at all. My final thought concerning oil is a lot of the headlines are misleading because of the fact OPEC know larger shale producers can put production on hold if the price of oil continues to fall, and if it rebounds, can quickly respond within less than a month with its DUC wells. So the idea it can shut down a competitor like it has in the past, in my opinion, is a misguided one. Shale oil isn’t Russian oil or other types of oil that may take a lot of time to get back into production once it has been shut down. Companies with shale exposure can simply bide their time and wait until the price of oil moves up, and they can almost immediately start production. OPEC can do nothing to stop the larger shale companies. And even if the smaller capitalized companies go out of business, it doesn’t take away the fact the oil is still there. Larger companies will acquire the assets. OPEC has signaled it will continue to produce oil in order to maintain market share. While that has resulted in U.S. companies cutting back on production, there is so much supply out there, it will take a lot more to provide support for oil prices. There is a message being sent, but OPEC doesn’t have the teeth it had before shale, and going forward it has to deal with the fact that once production is lowered and prices start going up, shale companies will simply ramp up production and the cycle will continue. That means eventually OPEC will have to lower production if oil price are to increase at sustainable levels. With Russia so dependent on its oil for revenue, it’s not going to do so, which means this is a long-term trend that at this time, doesn’t have an answer outside of OPEC losing market share. For that reason these ETFs built to take advantage of low oil prices, will make money for those willing to take the risk and holding for very short periods of time. 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.

Abengoa Yield PLC: Diversified Global YieldCo With Attractive Dividend And Upside Potential

Summary Attractive sustainable current dividend yield of over 8 percent; expected to increase by 31 percent next year. YieldCo sponsored by global engineering giant with a substantial pipeline of attractive acquisition opportunities. Solid diversified asset portfolio with stable cash flow and global exposure. Last week we brought readers an interesting opportunity with a renewable energy focused YieldCo in NextEra Energy Partners (NYSE: NEP ). With this article, we’re focusing on another YieldCo with substantial upside potential, along with a strong sustainable high yield dividend. This time, however, the company is more nuanced and has, in our view, a different risk profile than NextEra Energy Partners. However, we believe the potential upside with this company is significant and offers a great source of low cost diversification to an income focused portfolio. Abengoa Yield PLC (NASDAQ: ABY ) is a United Kingdom registered company that trades primarily on the NASDAQ. Abengoa Yield follows the typical YieldCo model for project developers: its sponsor, Abengoa SA (NASDAQ: ABGB ), wins contracts, develops projects and then the Yieldco has the opportunity to be the first bidder on these projects as they’re sold. The sponsor benefits by freeing up capital to pursue more development opportunities and investors in the Yieldco benefit by holding onto long-term stable cash flow generating assets that can be levered to produce a high dividend yield. The sponsor, Abengoa SA, is a global engineering company based in Spain whose expertise is primarily in the development of power projects. Its market capitalization is approximately $1 billion, with 2014 revenues of over €7 billion. As of the second quarter of 2015, the sponsor held a 51.1 percent interest in Abengoa Yield, though the company is targeting this to be reduced over time to a 40 percent interest. Unfortunately for Abengoa Yield, there are conflicting views on the financial health of the sponsor, with a recent upgrade by Standard & Poor’s in July offset by the news that Moody’s has put the company on credit watch in early August. Abengoa Yield PLC does enjoy a higher credit rating from Moody’s than the sponsor, indicating limited concern about the impact of a default or bankruptcy of Abengoa SA on the YieldCo’s immediate financial situation. However, there is no doubt that a default of the sponsor would have a considerable impact on the future project pipeline that the YieldCo has access to, and we believe that this risk is captured in Abengoa Yield’s lower valuation and higher yield. With the YieldCo business model, questions around governance are common. In the case of Abengoa Yield, we believe there are adequate governance controls in place to protect the interests of its shareholders. First, a majority of its Board of Directors are independent directors, independent of both management and of the sponsor company. The board must vote on any acquisition of assets from the sponsor and determine that the terms are set “no less favorable than terms generally available to an unaffiliated third-party under the same or similar circumstances.” These terms would be determined based on a market analysis of what similar projects would be priced at in the market. While the risk remains that the board could be swayed by influence of the sponsor, it would be at great legal risk to the independent directors and so we believe that this level of control is adequate. Further, there is an inherent control in the business model as the sustained ability for the YieldCo to raise equity in the market is based upon its ability to generate attractive cash flow returns. A poorly priced deal could hamper the YieldCo’s ability to attract equity financing in the future, harming the very purpose of the fund for the sponsor. Finally, in the case of Abengoa Yield, the sponsor does plan to dilute its interest over time to only 40 percent of the outstanding shares, handing majority shareholder ownership over to the public. In terms of its asset portfolio, Abengoa Yield is a highly diversified YieldCo, with assets ranging beyond just renewable energy on long-term contracts. In addition to solar and wind generation assets, the company also owns a conventional 300 megawatt gas plant, 1,100 miles of electric transmission lines and two water treatment facilities, along with a financial interest in a Brazilian electricity transmission project. The diversified nature of its assets is attractive, with many other YieldCo type models more focused on generation specific projects. All of these assets are backed by long-term contracts, most with investment grade counterparties, allowing Abengoa Yield to apply a significant degree of leverage through project financing. The average remaining contract life for the assets is 23 years. (click to enlarge) Source: Abengoa Yield PLC’s June 2015 Investor Presentation Along with the long-term, stable cash flow contracts, Abengoa Yield has also locked down O&M costs for all of its assets. This has generally been done through long-term inflation linked O&M agreements, primarily with Abengoa SA as the contractor. This provides cost certainty not only on the revenue side but also on the cost side, offloading operating and maintenance risks to the O&M services provider. This is a common practice in the YieldCo space, and Abengoa SA certainly has the skills and global reputation to be a strong operator of these assets. Abengoa Yield is still exposed to capital maintenance expenditures for its assets, however, and increasing capital maintenance costs could pose a risk down the line. In the medium term, however, we review this risk as small as most of the assets are fairly new in vintage and won’t be facing substantial overhauls for decades. In many cases, much of the return on and return of capital for a project is captured in its initial contract term, making maintenance and renewal of future contracts an option that the company can decide, or not, to exploit down the road depending on market conditions. Beyond the diversification in the types of assets of the company, the firm is also significantly geographically diversified. Its solar projects are split between the United States, Spain and South Africa, while its wind generation is located in Uruguay, its gas generation is in Mexico and its transmission assets are in Peru and Chile. Finally, the firm’s water treatment projects are in Algeria. Some of these jurisdictions certainly add risk to the company’s profile, but we also find the diversification to be encouraging in an industry where political and regulatory risk threaten companies with over-concentrated positions. We would expect further diversification of the company’s assets geographically due to the nature of potential push down projects from the parent, which truly operates in every corner of the globe. The firm’s assets are generally supported by long-term contracted cash flow arrangements. This enables the company to pay both a high dividend and maintain a significant amount of leverage. The firm’s cash flows are based 61 percent on availability, rather than production, and 93 percent of the cash flows are in US dollars, or hedged to US dollars through a swap arrangement with the sponsor. Further, less than 4 percent of contracted cash flow is from counterparties that have less than an investment grade rating. The combination of these factors provides a very stable cash flow base from which the company can support its high payout ratio dividend. In terms of future projections, the company has published some attractive but well supported numbers, with a projected 2016 exit dividend of $2.10-2.15 per share annualized. This would be a significant increase from the $1.60 per share paid today. The company then projects ongoing growth at 12-15 percent per year based primarily upon further acquisitions of Abengoa SA projects, potential third-party acquisitions and efficiencies. We think the long-term trend might be on the aggressive side of attainable and we reflect that in our valuation analysis further on this report. Source: Abengoa Yield PLC’s June 2015 Investor Presentation The YieldCo’s primary source of expansion projects is completed projects with contracted cash flows purchased from the sponsor. The firm has a Right of First Offer on all projects that Abengoa SA offers for sale, giving it the opportunity to participate in any potential acquisition from Abengoa’s substantial project list. The sponsor had a backlog of €8.8 billion, according to its first half 2015 presentation, with significant power and infrastructure projects under development that would be ideal assets for inclusion in Abengoa Yield PLC’s portfolio down the road. Previous asset sales occurred at a 15 percent IRR, which is a significant discount to Abengoa Yield PLC’s current return on equity as calculated in our valuation, offering the potential for accretive acquisitions at its current price. Positives Diversified Geographical Exposure: The variety of geographical locations represented in Abengoa Yield’s holdings is an attractive feature for a company of this nature. Having a variety of jurisdictional exposure limits the impact of any one country’s political or regulatory changes, which can have a significant impact on these types of assets. Despite the geographic diversification, the contracted cash flows for the company are primarily in US dollars or are hedged to US dollars and therefore the firm has limited foreign exchange exposure risk. Diversified Portfolio of Asset Types: The variety of assets held by Abengoa Yield is attractive for investors. We believe that the lower risk conventional gas generation and electric transmission assets act to reduce required equity returns for the firm overall and underpin the company’s stable cash flow profile. The renewable assets are well diversified themselves with a split between solar and wind projects of varying sizes. ROFO Agreement with Abengoa SA: The firm’s Right of First Offer arrangement with Abengoa SA is highly attractive on the basis that the sponsor has a significant pipeline of developed and in development projects that could be sold down to the YieldCo at an attractive price. We expect that Abengoa SA will overcome its liquidity crunch in the medium term and this project pipeline will be realized at its full value for the YieldCo. Conservative Leverage at Hold Co Level: The firm currently reports a net debt to cash flow available for distribution of 1.8x versus its target level of 3x. This offers some ability for the company to finance future acquisitions through additional debt, rather than the dilutive equity offerings which are too common in the YieldCo space. Risks Many Assets in Higher Risk Jurisdictions: Many of Abengoa Yield PLC’s assets are located in jurisdictions that pose higher business risks than assets in North America or Western Europe. While a concentration of assets in any one high-risk jurisdiction may pose a concern for us, having small exposures to numerous jurisdictions seems to offer a higher potential return, with minimal incremental risk on a portfolio basis. That said, if future acquisitions continue to build exposure in an existing asset location, or if the risk profile of future asset locations was significantly higher, this would materially impact our required equity return and valuation. Financial Health of the Sponsor: The conflicting views on the financial health of the sponsor, Abengoa SA, are certainly weighing on this stock. We believe that Abengoa SA has taken steps to address its financial situation but the outcome of this is uncertain. Further deterioration in the financial health of the sponsor may have a material impact on the availability of projects for Abengoa Yield to acquire through the ROFO agreement. Valuation One attractive aspect of a company that is primarily driven by its dividend and distributes nearly all available cash to shareholders is the ease in analyzing and comparing its relative value along with assessing its implied cost of equity capital. In the case of Abengoa Yield, our baseline assumptions are the lower end of 2016 dividend guidance of $2.10 per share, a 90 percent payout ratio and an 11 percent annual growth rate. Why do we reduce the expected growth rate below the guidance provided by the company? Our concerns about the sponsor’s financial health are not insignificant and any major liquidity crunches at the sponsor could impact the available project pipeline for future acquisitions by the YieldCo. We do believe that the higher growth rate could be obtainable, as demonstrated by the company’s ability to beat that growth rate in 2016, if the sponsor company can maintain an adequate pipeline of projects at a reasonable cost. Into the details of the valuation, based on the September 18 share price of $19.34, these dividend, payout ratio and growth assumptions produce an implied cost of equity of 23 percent on a free cash flow to equity basis, nearly on par with the equity cost of capital determined in our analysis of NextEra Energy Partners, but still significantly higher than Brookfield Renewable’s (NYSE: BEP ) 16 percent cost of equity. Importantly, this is also a significant discount to the typical sale price of these types of assets, with the recent purchases from the sponsor occurring at a 15 percent IRR. This is reflected in Abengoa Yield PLC’s current price to book of 0.88. Arguably, the lower risk transmission assets held by this YieldCo should reduce its cost of equity compared to a firm like NextEra Energy Partners, who has a more concentrated asset exposure. Over the longer term, we believe that these YieldCos will trend towards a more reasonable 15-18 percent return on equity. This is the basis of our base case scenario for Abengoa Yield PLC of $30.00 per share (at an 18 percent return on equity). This would represent an even 7 percent dividend yield in 2016, which is much more generous than the yield on the firm’s stock earlier in 2015, illustrating significant upside potential beyond our projection. Summary Overall, we believe that Abengoa Yield offers an attractive valuation and potential upside for a set of high quality power and infrastructure assets located in geographically diverse locations. Current drag from the financial situation of its sponsor has weighed on this price but we do believe that this simply offers an attractive entry point for long-term investors. We view Abengoa Yield as having a unique risk and return profile and offsetting highly attractive qualities that together make for a bargain priced addition to a diversified portfolio. Disclosure: I am/we are long ABY, NEP. (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.