Tag Archives: yahoo

SCHH: A Little Too Much SPG, But I’m Still Using It

Summary SCHH is a great REIT ETF with a very low expense ratio. The holdings are little too heavy on SPG and the retail REIT sector in general. When considered within a portfolio the diversification benefits of SCHH are less important when the portfolio already has a large bond holding. Investors should treat SCHH as an optional replacement for a combination of equity and bonds. If I could make a modification to the SCHH portfolio, it would be to decrease retail REITs and increase residential REITs in lower income markets with higher capitalization rates. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. I’m working on building a new portfolio and I’m going to be analyzing several of the ETFs that I am considering for my personal portfolio. One of the funds that I’m considering is the Schwab U.S. REIT ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHH ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. Expense Ratio SCHH has an expense ratio of .07%. The expense ratio is great for equity REIT ETF options. This is one of the holdings I’ve been adding to whenever I saw it dip. Largest Holdings I love what a REIT index does for diversifying a portfolio. However, when I look at the internal holdings of the ETF, I wish there was a little more diversification. Namely, I would like to see a cap on exposure to any individual REIT at about 5% to 6% of holdings. The holdings are shown below: (click to enlarge) Nothing against Simon Property Group, Inc. (NYSE: SPG ), I just don’t want to see 10% of my index fund invested in a single company. Types of REITs (click to enlarge) When we look at the type of REIT holdings by sector, I get the feeling that I would prefer to see retail REITs with a lower weights and residential REITs with a higher weight. I suppose that comes back to my issue with having over 10% of the portfolio in SPG. Drop that down and put the capital into a heavier weight on residential REITs and I’d be very happy with the overall portfolio composition. Building the Portfolio I put together a hypothetical portfolio using only ETFs that fall under the “free to trade” category for Charles Schwab accounts. My bias towards these ETFs is simple, I have my solo 401k there and recently moved my IRA accounts there as well. When I’m building a list of ETFs to consider I want to focus on things I can trade freely so that I can keep making small transactions to buy more when the market falls. Within the hypothetical portfolio there are no expense ratios higher than .18%. Just like trading costs, I want to be frugal with expense ratios. The portfolio is fairly aggressive. Only 30% of the total is allocated to bonds and I would consider that the weakest area in the portfolio. I’d like to see more bond options (with very low expense ratios) show up on the “One Source” list for free trading. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio The Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHD ) is a dividend index. The Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHB ) is a broad market index. The Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHX ) is focused on blended large cap exposure. The Schwab International Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHF ) is developed international equity. The Schwab Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHE ) is emerging market equity. The Schwab International Small-Cap Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHC ) is developed small capitalization equity. is domestic equity REITs. The Schwab U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHZ ) is a remarkably complete bond fund. The SPDR Barclays Long Term Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: TLO ) is a long term treasury ETF. The PIMCO 25+ Year Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury Index ETF (NYSEARCA: ZROZ ) is an extremely long term treasury ETF. Notice that the 3 international equity ETFs have only been weighted at 5% while the broad market index has been weighted at 25%. I find heavy exposure to international equity to bring more risk than expected returns so I try to keep my international exposure low. I prefer no more than 20% in international equity. Plenty of domestic companies already have enormous international operations so the benefit of international diversification is not as strong as it would be if the markets were isolated from each other. Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. When TLO and ZROZ post negative risk contribution it is because the negative correlation to most of the equity holdings results in the long term treasury ETFs reducing the total portfolio risk. In my opinion, this is the best argument for including them in the portfolio. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio and with the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ). Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. (click to enlarge) The Role of SCHH REIT ETFs can perform a couple roles within a portfolio. One major use of REITs is to boost the income yield from the portfolio, but SCHH doesn’t pay out as high of a dividend yield as some of the other equity REIT index funds. In my book, that makes it more useful for investors that are not concerned about distributions for decades. Since I’m holding the ETF in a tax advantaged account, I won’t have to worry about capital gains taxes either. Since SCHH is not offering a high current yield for investors, it is useful to look at the diversification benefits because SCHH runs between .70 and .60 on correlation with all of the other equity ETFs in the portfolio. The only real weakness for holding a large allocation in equity REITs is the correlation with bonds is not as favorable as it is for the other equity ETFs. If an investor wants to completely avoid using bond exposure in their portfolio, as I’ve been doing, then equity REIT indexes are absolutely critical in reducing the risk level. When the portfolio is including a substantial allocation to bonds it will reduce the optimal allocation for equity REITs. Conclusion SCHH may not offer a high dividend yield, but for long term investors looking to build an optimal portfolio it makes sense as a solid index fund with a very low expense ratio. When investors increase their allocation to equity REIT indexes it may be appropriate to fund the portfolio by selling both domestic equity and bond ETFs. If the investor sells out of their position in REITs, the most intelligent allocation strategy would be to split the proceeds between bonds and equity. With the domestic equity REIT space, SCHH is a very attractive ETF for having a very low expense ratio. The biggest thing I would like to see changed is moving some the retail REIT exposure to residential REIT exposure. If I were to get even more specific, I would love to see the residential REIT exposure focused on markets with higher capitalization rates and lower value properties that would be expected to do better in a recession. If I were adding individual equity REITs to my portfolio to compliment SCHH, I’d start with looking for ones that operated low income properties. Disclosure: I am/we are long SCHB, SCHD, SCHF, SCHH. (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: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.

PFF: A Quick Way To Get Your Preferred Stock Exposure

Summary There are two issues with the ETF, one is a high expense ratio and the other is sector concentration. The geography exposure is not a problem for me, but I wouldn’t mind seeing a little more diversification. The fund offers negative correlation with at least one treasury ETF while delivering a beta of around .22. Many investors build their portfolio without any meaningful positions in preferred stock. The iShares U.S. Preferred Stock ETF (NYSEARCA: PFF ) is one quick solution to that problem. Expense Ratio The expense ratio on the ETF is .47%. I’d really prefer to see a lower expense ratio with long term holdings since the nature of preferred stock suggests positions would not need to be changed frequently. When I pulled up the turnover ratio for the portfolio, it was coming up as 13%. That is higher than I would have expected but not high enough that I would expect the high expense ratio to be necessary. This may simply be a case of an ETF in a niche market having a long track record (established in 2007) and high volume (over 3 million shares per day) being a position where it can demand a higher expense ratio. Largest Holdings The largest holdings of the ETF show a heavy concentration towards the financial sectors. It isn’t just the top 10 though, as you’ll see in the next section. The sector exposure for PFF is heavily concentrated on banks and “Diversified Financials.” Sector The sector exposure is extremely concentrated and that would be an area of concern for me. Since my goals in using preferred shares within a portfolio would be to diversify the risk factors for the portfolio, I would prefer to only need one ETF of preferred stock and to have that ETF bring in a substantially lower level of concentration. I don’t know what would cause the sector to tumble, but very heavy sector exposure leaves investors hoping no black swans appear. This is a risk I would prefer to avoid if possible. Since black swan events by their very nature are unpredictable, the most effective defense is simply to include substantial diversification. Geography The map below shows the geographic distribution of the holdings. I don’t see any problems here. It is interesting that the U.K. was showing up as more than 12% of the portfolio, but diversification is exactly what I was wanting. I’d be interested in seeing even more diversification here, but doubt it will happen. That could make PFF an interesting fit with an international bond portfolio. Building the Portfolio This hypothetical portfolio has a slightly aggressive allocation for the middle aged investor. Only 30% of the total portfolio value is placed in bonds and a third of that bond allocation is given to emerging market bonds. However, another 10% of the portfolio is given to preferred shares and 10% is given to a minimum volatility fund that has proven to be fairly stable. Within the bond portfolio, the portion of bonds that are not from emerging markets are high quality medium term treasury securities that show a negative correlation to most equity assets. The result is a portfolio that is substantially less volatile than what most investors would build for themselves. For a younger investor with a high risk tolerance this may be significantly more conservative than they would need. The portfolio assumes frequent rebalancing which would be a problem for short term trading outside of tax advantaged accounts unless the investor was going to rebalance by adding to their positions on a regular basis and allocating the majority of the capital towards whichever portions of the portfolio had been underperforming recently. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio The two bond funds in the portfolio are the iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: EMB ) for higher yielding debt from emerging markets and the iShares 7-10 Year Treasury Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: IEF ) for medium term treasury debt. IEF should be useful for the highly negative correlation it provides relative to the equity positions. EMB on the other hand is attempting to produce more current income with less duration risk by taking on some risk from investing in emerging markets. The position in the iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility ETF (NYSEARCA: USMV ) offers investors substantially lower volatility with a beta of only .7 which makes the fund an excellent fit for many investors. It won’t climb as fast as the rest of the market, but it also does better at resisting drawdowns. It may not be “exciting,” but there are plenty of other areas to find excitement in life. Wondering if your retirement account is going to implode should not be a source of excitement. The position in the PowerShares Buyback Achievers Portfolio ETF (NYSEARCA: PKW ) makes the portfolio overweight on companies that are performing buybacks. The strategy has produced surprisingly solid returns over the sample period. I wouldn’t normally consider this as a necessary exposure for investors, but it seemed like an interesting one to include and with a very high correlation to SPY and similar levels of volatility it has little impact on the numbers for the rest of the portfolio. The core of the portfolio comes from simple exposure to the S&P 500 via the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ), though I would suggest that investors creating a new portfolio and not tied into an ETF for that large domestic position should consider the alternative by Vanguard, the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, (NYSEARCA: VOO ) which offers similar holdings and a lower expense ratio. I have yet to see any good argument for not using or another very similar fund as the core of a portfolio. In this piece I’m using SPY because some investors with a very long history of selling SPY may not want to trigger the capital gains tax on selling the position and thus choose to continue holding SPY rather than the alternatives with lower expense ratios. Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. To make it easier to analyze how risky each holding would be in the context of the portfolio, I have most of these holdings weighted at a simple 10%. Because of IEF’s heavy negative correlation, it receives a weighting of 20%. Since SPY is used as the core of the portfolio, it merits a weighting of 40%. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio and with the S&P 500 . Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. Conclusion PFF has a positive correlation with each of the hypothetical holdings except for the treasury ETF which is interesting. Since PFF should have more duration exposure than IEF, but also more credit risk, there is some fairly solid diversification benefits here. The beta of only .22% is also excellent for indicating that PFF will fit very well within a portfolio. While EMB (emerging market bonds) also have a very low beta, PFF is has done it without having a positive correlation with treasury ETFs. That makes it a great fit for the more conservative investor that is holding more treasuries in the portfolio and less equity. The distribution yield on PFF is over 6%, so this is an option for solid income while maintaining a favorable risk profile. Ideally an investor would be able to combine this with a position in an emerging bond fund like EMB to avoid concentration of risk and then toss some higher dividend yielding ETFs in at the core position and offset the equity risk with some long term treasury exposure. In short, I’m not thrilled with the expense ratio but the fund fits very well within a portfolio. I would love to see more preferred share ETFs coming out to drive up competition and drive down expense ratios. 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: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.

SCHF: My Portfolio Needs A Little More Of This Low Cost International ETF

Summary SCHF has excellent internal diversification and a low expense ratio. I’m holding SCHF already but I think I will add to the allocation. SCHF has only moderate correlations with domestic equities but shares their negative correlation with long term treasury ETFs. Holding SCHF as a major piece of the portfolio would be too risky, but it is great for being a small international allocation. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. I’m working on building a new portfolio and I’m going to be analyzing several of the ETFs that I am considering for my personal portfolio. One of the funds that I’m considering is the Schwab International Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHF ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. Largest Holdings The diversification within SCHF isn’t too bad. By the 6th holding the allocations are less than 1% and there are over 1200 holdings in total. Put simply, SCHF is what I would look for as the centerpiece of an international allocation. The holdings are shown below: (click to enlarge) Expense Ratio The expense ratio on SCHF is only .08%. There is no way to complain about an expense ratio of .08% on international equity. Combined with it showing reasonable levels of volatility for an international equity investment in regression testing, I decided to use it as one of my international equity holdings. I’m already long SCHF, but there is a significant chance that I will be increasing my allocation since it is currently less than 2% of my portfolio. Building the Portfolio I put together a hypothetical portfolio using only ETFs that fall under the “free to trade” category for Charles Schwab accounts. My bias towards these ETFs is simple, I have my solo 401k there and recently moved my IRA accounts there as well. When I’m building a list of ETFs to consider I want to focus on things I can trade freely so that I can keep making small transactions to buy more when the market falls. Within the hypothetical portfolio there are no expense ratios higher than .18%. Just like trading costs, I want to be frugal with expense ratios. The portfolio is fairly aggressive. Only 30% of the total is allocated to bonds and I would consider that the weakest area in the portfolio. I’d like to see more bond options (with very low expense ratios) show up on the “One Source” list for free trading. (click to enlarge) A quick rundown of the portfolio The Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHD ) is a dividend index. The Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHB ) is a broad market index. The Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHX ) is focused on blended large cap exposure. The Schwab Emerging Markets ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHE ) is emerging market equity. The Schwab International Small-Cap Equity ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHC ) is developed small capitalization equity. The Schwab U.S. REIT ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHH ) is domestic equity REITs. The Schwab U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: SCHZ ) is a remarkably complete bond fund. The SPDR Barclays Long Term Treasury ETF (NYSEARCA: TLO ) is a long term treasury ETF. The PIMCO 25+ Year Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury Index ETF (NYSEARCA: ZROZ ) is an extremely long term treasury ETF. Notice that the 3 international equity ETFs have only been weighted at 5% while the broad market index has been weighted at 25%. I find heavy exposure to international equity to bring more risk than expected returns so I try to keep my international exposure low. I prefer no more than 20% in international equity. Plenty of domestic companies already have enormous international operations so the benefit of international diversification is not as strong as it would be if the markets were isolated from each other. Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. When TLO and ZROZ post negative risk contribution it is because the negative correlation to most of the equity holdings results in the long term treasury ETFs reducing the total portfolio risk. In my opinion, this is the best argument for including them in the portfolio. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio and with the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ). Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. (click to enlarge) Holding SCHF SCHF is still a fairly volatile equity investment so investors should be planning on balancing their portfolio occasionally to ensure that their allocations don’t drift too far away from the intended allocations. I’m thinking that I will want to add some SCHC to my portfolio as well to round out my international exposure. While SCHF is holding larger and more stable international investments the portfolio for SCHC is even more diversified and focusing on holding smaller companies. In designing a long term portfolio strategy I see mixing SCHF and SCHC as a solid way to enhance my portfolio exposure and ensure that I am allocating more of my money to whichever ETF is out of favor. You may notice from the chart that ZROZ is excellent for diversification with SCHF. The correlation comes in at a negative .47 which is great for the diversification benefits. I could use TLO instead because it is less volatile than ZROZ, but my intent is to bring in high volatility on the allocation that will have a negative correlation to almost everything else in my portfolio. It may sound like risk seeking behavior to intentionally pick the more volatile investment but the high volatility combined with the low correlation means I can use a smaller allocation within the portfolio to achieve the desired level of diversification. When it comes to the bond allocations, I’m focused on the diversification benefits more than on their ability to generate income. Realistically, bonds just don’t pay a reasonable interest rate in the current macroeconomic environment. The logical reason to hold the bond ETF is to provide some stability at the portfolio level and ZROZ is doing that very well. I think my portfolio would stand to benefit from having a little more SCHF in my strategy and adding some long duration bonds. Conclusion I don’t see anything to dislike about SCHF. The expense ratio is low and the holdings are highly diversified. The ETF adds diversification benefits to the standard domestic equity exposure and it still maintains a very negative correlation with the same bond funds that I would want to use for their negative correlation with domestic equities. Simply put SCHF just fits well within the portfolio. In my opinion, an allocation greater than 20% would be dangerous to the health of the portfolio, but for an allocation between 5% and 10%, I think SCHF looks very nice. Disclosure: I am/we are long SCHF, SCHB, SCHD, SCHH. (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: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.