Scalper1 News
Summary The Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF does everything right. If investors could only hold one bond ETF, this one would be a very strong contender for that spot. The fund offers solid income, a low expense ratio, and negative correlation to most major equity classes. If you don’t like this ETF, tell me why, because I do not see a single weakness here. This is a great ETF. There are only a few ETFs that really catch my eye as I’m researching them. This is one that immediately stands out for being absolutely exceptional. It has pretty much everything an investor could want for a bond ETF. I’ve shown a strong preference for funds that I can trade without commissions from my Schwab account because it makes frequent rebalancing more appealing. I would love to see this fund show up on there, but I don’t expect Vanguard funds to show up on the Schwab list at any point. For investors that have access to free trading on Vanguard ETFs, look into using the Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF (NYSEARCA: BLV ). This ETF comes with everything I want (except free trading) and nothing I don’t want. Let’s go through the fund. Expense Ratio The expense ratio is only .10%. That is beautiful. Just try to find a way to complain about a long term bond fund with over 2000 different holdings and an expense ratio of .10%. This is ideal. Characteristics The fund is offering a fairly respectable yield to maturity of 4.2%. In the last decade investors may have scoffed at the idea of 4.2%, but in the new normal this is great. Some investors may expect yields to increase, but I doubt the Federal Reserve can pull that rabbit out of the hat when other countries have lower rates. An increase in domestic rates would result in a surge of cash inflows to the U.S. as foreign investors would seek dollars to buy up the higher yielding treasury securities. The resulting appreciation of the dollar would slam domestic employment and contradict one of the two dual mandates of the Federal Reserve. Until we see some major changes in the world economy, 4.2% is a fairly reasonable yield. Types of Bonds The Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF is structured precisely how I would want it to be structured. The holdings include some foreign exposure without a very large allocation and a mix between industrial bonds and treasury bonds. Despite a strong allocation to treasury securities, there are no Agency MBS or Commercial MBS. Investors wanting access to those securities can acquire them on leveraged basis at a substantial discount to book value by buying mREITs. I see no reason to pay book value, but I would like a long term bond ETF with a heavy emphasis on high quality debts. Credit Quality The holdings are all solid. This is investment grade debt with a significant portion being treasury debt. This is a very solid ETF to have in your portfolio if the market starts tanking. I put together a demonstration of the role BLV plays in a sample portfolio. Building the Portfolio The sample portfolio I ran for this assessment is one that came out feeling a bit awkward. I’ve had some requests to include biotechnology ETFs and I decided it would be wise to also include a the related field of health care for a comparison. Since I wanted to create quite a bit of diversification, I put in 9 ETFs plus the S&P 500. The resulting portfolio is one that I think turned out to be too risky for most investors and certainly too risky for older investors. Despite that weakness, I opted to go with highlighting these ETFs in this manner because I think it is useful to show investors what it looks like when the allocations result in a suboptimal allocation. The weightings for each ETF in the portfolio are a simple 10% which results in 20% of the portfolio going to the combined Health Care and Biotechnology sectors. Outside of that we have one spot each for REITs, high yield bonds, TIPS, emerging market consumer staples, domestic consumer staples, foreign large capitalization firms, and long term bonds. The first thing I want to point out about these allocations are that for any older investor, running only 30% in bonds with 10% of that being high yield bonds is putting yourself in a fairly dangerous position. I will be highlighting the individual ETFs, but I would not endorse this portfolio as a whole. 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. Because a substantial portion of the yield from this portfolio comes from REITs and interest, I would favor this portfolio as a tax exempt strategy even if the investor was frequently rebalancing by adding new capital. The portfolio allocations can be seen below along with the dividend yields from each investment. Name Ticker Portfolio Weight Yield SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY 10.00% 2.11% Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF XLV 10.00% 1.40% SPDR Biotech ETF XBI 10.00% 1.54% iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF IYR 10.00% 3.83% PowerShares Fundamental High Yield Corporate Bond Portfolio ETF PHB 10.00% 4.51% FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index ETF TDTT 10.00% 0.16% EGShares Emerging Markets Consumer ETF ECON 10.00% 1.34% Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF FSTA 10.00% 2.99% iShares MSCI EAFE ETF EFA 10.00% 2.89% Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF BLV 10.00% 4.02% Portfolio 100.00% 2.48% The next chart shows the annualized volatility and beta of the portfolio since October of 2013. (click to enlarge) Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. You can see immediately since this is a simple “equal weight” portfolio that XBI is by far the most risky ETF from the perspective of what it does to the portfolio’s volatility. You can also see that BLV has a negative total risk impact on the portfolio. When you see negative risk contributions in this kind of assessment it generally means that there will be significantly negative correlations with other asset classes in the portfolio. The position in TDTT is also unique for having a risk contribution of almost nothing. Unfortunately, it also provides a weak yield and weak return with little opportunity for that to change unless yields on TIPS improve substantially. If that happened, it would create a significant loss before the position would start generating meaningful levels of income. A quick rundown of the portfolio I put together the following chart that really simplifies the role of each investment: Name Ticker Role in Portfolio SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY Core of Portfolio Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF XLV Hedge Risk of Higher Costs SPDR Biotech ETF XBI Increase Expected Return iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF IYR Diversify Domestic Risk PowerShares Fundamental High Yield Corporate Bond Portfolio ETF PHB Strong Yields on Bond Investments FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index ETF TDTT Very Low Volatility EGShares Emerging Markets Consumer ETF ECON Enhance Foreign Exposure Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF FSTA Reduce Portfolio Risk iShares MSCI EAFE ETF EFA Enhance Foreign Exposure Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF BLV Negative Correlation, Strong Yield Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio. 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) Conclusion BLV offers a clear negative correlation with each asset except for short term TIPS (no surprise, high credit quality) and equity REITs. The equity REITs in IYR have a slight positive correlation with BLV which is caused at least in part by the fact that BLV is holding some high credit quality non-Agency debt. Since a substantial portion of the debt is still corporate in origin, it has a higher correlation with equity REITs than it would if it were pure treasuries. Despite that, the ETF still has a very clear negative correlation with other equity assets classes. Normally that kind of negative correlation requires midterm or longer treasury securities, but most of those funds have very limited yields. That isn’t any surprise either since the demand for extremely high quality debt (treasury securities) has pushed the yields to extremely low levels. By incorporating investment grade corporate debt the total portfolio for BLV is able to offer a respectable return so that the fund offers investors a material amount of income along with a negative correlation that results in total portfolio risk being materially reduced. This is what a bond fund should look like. Vanguard is known for high quality and low cost funds, but this fund is downright exceptional. Scalper1 News
Scalper1 News