Showing posts with label IGD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IGD. Show all posts

Saturday, September 13, 2014

Performance Numbers Year to Date/JZJ and MetroPCS Bond Calls/Sold 100 MPW at $14-Regular IRA/Sold: 200 CGI:CA at C$20.66, 471+ IGD at $9.77/Bought Taxable Accounts: 50 APO AT $23.46, 100 GDO at $18.44, 50 RFTA at $25/Bought 30 APO at $23.39-Roth IRA/

Last Friday's Closing Prices:
S & P 500 1,985.54 -11.91 (-0.60%)
Russell 2000:  1,160.62 -11.73 (-1.00%)-Russell 2000 Index Chart

VNQ: $73.86 -2.34 (-3.07%) : Vanguard REIT ETF
XLU: $42.28 -0.75 (-1.75%) : SPDR Select Sector Fund Utility
TLT: 113.38 -1.20 (-1.05%) : iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF
KRE: $40.01 +0.17 (+0.44%) : SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF

Commodities and Currencies: 
U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) Interactive Index Chart (USD very strong)
SLV: $17.89 -0.07 (-0.38%) : iShares Silver Trust
GLD: $118.38 -1.09 (-0.91%) : SPDR Gold Trust 
FXC: 89.63 -0.37 (-0.41%) Canadian Dollar ETF
CAD/USD Currency Conversion Chart
AUD/USD Currency Conversion Chart
EUR/USD Currency Conversion Chart
iPath Dow Jones UBS Commodity Chart
iShares GSCI Commodity-Indexed ETF Chart
XLE: $93.54 -$1.44 (-1.52%) : SPDR Select Sector Fund - Energy

Big Picture Synopsis: 

Stocks:

Stable Vix Pattern: Bullish
Short Term: Market Needs a 15% Correction
Intermediate Term: Slightly Bullish (2013 to Date Gains Borrow from the Future)
Long Term: Bullish

I am continuing to pare my stock allocation. Starting with the securities discussed in my 6/14/14 Post through this one, the net reduction is about $71,000. Most of the chopping has been in stock funds. I started to add back to the allocation during the past week, with a few stock fund buys and some dividend paying contrarian stock selections which will be discussed in next week's post.

Given my age, and current and anticipated future financial condition, it is not necessary for me to swing for the fences or to push the envelope. My primary goals are capital preservation and income generation.

Needless to say, I would prefer a money market rate of 4% rather than .01% for my cash allocation, but I will not let the current abnormally low rate for cash and cash alternatives dissuade me from those two primary objectives taking into account the huge gains realized already over the past five plus years.    

Virtually every week now, I read some missive from Professor Shiller warning about the market's valuation.

Shortly after the publication of my last weekly post, I read an article published at Business Insider where Shiller gave another stark warning. That article was simply summarizing an interview conducted by another publication-This is Money-that contains the usual Shiller admonitions.

The frustration expressed by President Truman, who wanted a one handed economist rather than one with two hands, is easily understood simply by listening to a typical Shiller interview. The general thrust of a Shiller interview is to scare the daylights out of the average individual investor, while giving his supporters enough cushion to argue that he really was not predicting a crash. It is consequently okay that stocks continued to soar for years after one of these chicken little type interviews.

A long term chart of the Shiller P/E can be found at that article and is updated regularly in Doug Short's blog.

As of 9/5/14, the Shiller P/E was at 26.3, and the Professor noted that it had been higher only on three other occasions since 1881. Those three other times were just before the great crash in 1929, in 2000 and in 2007. In all three of those examples, the market crashed shortly thereafter. It is not difficult to catch his drift, even with the constant equivocations and caveats, or to predict how many individual investors will react.

The Shiller P/E is clearly at very high levels. As I noted when discussing this P/E ratio in earlier blogs, this backward looking P/E, using the prior ten years of inflation adjusted earnings, will keep investors out of the market most of the time.

In fact, the market has been below the mean number less than 2% of the time since 1990 when the S & P was around 350, now near 2000. Bloomberg

{see also: Lord Abbett Publication Titled-"Is the Shiller P/E Overrated?" and ValueWalk article titled: "Shiller PE: Problems Behind The Broken CAPE Tool"}

Judging from what I have read over the years at SeekingAlpha and other financial websites, Professor Shiller has been successful in scaring investors out of stocks for a very long time. He was sounding cautious when interviewed in February 2009, just before the S & P 500 started its epic 200% run Business Insider I happened to see that February 2009 article and several other interviews with the Professor throughout early 2009. I thought that many individuals would stay out of stocks after listening to him, and many of them sold out of stocks at the worst possible time shortly after Lehman's failure.

Notwithstanding the caution expressed by Shiller in early 2009, the S & P 500 has managed to gain almost 200% since the Professor's warnings (see third chart in Doug Short's blog)

It is far from an intelligent observation to note that the market is no longer at 2009 levels, so the Professor is more likely to be omniscient now than he actually was in early 2009. All P/E measures are elevated and stretched beyond recent historical norms.

And, Mebane Faber, one of Shiller's acolytes, has come up with a list showing how other valuation measures confirm that the U.S. stock market is one of the most highly valued ones worldwide. Meb Faber Research He uses a CAPE type calculation and substitutes book value, dividends and cash flow for earnings. The U.S. market is at #41 out of 43 among the world's stock markets, using the standard Shiller P/E, and in the high 30s using the other three.

I would just note that those other ratios also use cyclically adjusted numbers for the past ten years. That kind of analysis could mean that all of the markets listed are undervalued, fairly valued or overvalued, or that some are less undervalued than others or some are undervalued while others are fairly valued, and so on. And, we are to believe that Greek stocks, #1 on Faber's list, have the same or even better future growth prospects as the major U.S. companies.

As an aside, it is amazing how easy it is to become a stock market guru, no insight or particular skills are required as long as one is a disciple of some other person who has a devoted following of True Believers such as Shiller (who basically borrowed from Ben Graham in developing the Shiller CAPE: Robert Shiller’s CAPE, so it is not even original with Shiller) Another means to financial guru status is to appear on CNBC frequently and to make a lot of predictions. Making lots of predictions improves the chances of being right on one of them. Saying the market is about to crash is one way to stardom. When one prediction hits the mark, then the guru in waiting calls every financial publication to tout their financial prowess, provides a link  to the relevant CNBC video interview, and then reinforces their deserved status as a guru by issuing press releases humbly mentioning that one success while of course ignoring the many failures. Guru status once bestowed by financial news outlets can not be lost by being dead wrong for years thereafter.

A more sensible evaluation about the current market's valuation is given by the well regarded manager of T. Rowe Price's Capital Appreciation Fund in that fund's recently released semi-annual report, which I read last weekend. I would agree with his assessment. individual.troweprice.com.pdf I was particularly impressed with that fund's performance in 2000-2002, when it gained 22.17% in 2000, 10.26% in 2011, and .54% in 2002. The S & P 500 declined 49.1% during that period. The Four Totally Bad Bears

The major problem with any cyclically adjusted valuation metric that uses historical data is really easy to comprehend. The market is more concerned with the future than the past, let alone a mean established by data going back to the 1870s. The past only provides some guidance about the future and a value can be assigned to existing plant, products and services, and net cash on the balance sheet.

The market is trying to assess future earnings when valuing companies, including the present value of future net income, an angst filled and perpetually problematic endeavor.

Consequently investors fall back on the present and the past as crutches, and one measure of past performance is the Shiller P/E. The relevance of establishing a mean with data going back to the 1870s is another issue which is just per se asinine, in my opinion.

So, that brings me to the point in this section. What is a reasonable prediction about the future?

Is it reasonable to predict another meltdown in the world's financial system within the next ten years that devastated earnings and has resulted in an abnormally slow recovery?

In their book "This Time is Different", written by Professors Reinhart and Rogoff, the historical parallels suggested that it takes on average of around 8 years to recover to pre-crisis levels of income, with the median at 6.5 years. {The Big Picture-contains a recent 2014 paper from the duo on the historically slow recoveries from a financial crisis) Those who rely on the Shiller CAPE ratio with religious zeal have to be assigning a near 100% likelihood that such an event will occur again soon.

It is possible that another Near Depression will occur within ten years, but I would not view that as likely. My current guess would be less than a 5% possibility. The more likely possibility is a garden variety recession lasting a few months followed by a quick recovery. If an investor believes in that type of forecast, why is current valuation being heavily influenced by a historically rare and past occurrence?

An alternative future scenario is one recently outlined by a Morgan Stanley strategist and economist and outlined in last week's Barron's. In their view, the past five year's has been part of a "repair phase" following a deep recession caused by a financial crisis. Only now is the U.S. economy about to enter an expansion phase which could take the S & P 500 up to 3,000 after five years or so, based on 6% earnings growth and a P/E multiple of 17. So if MS is right about the next five years, then will that be more important than the past ten? I would think so.

The question, as always, is whether that future prediction is rational, supported by the preponderance of the evidence and more likely than not to happen with some variance that would not meaningfully impact the outcome. Make your best guess is all that mere mortals can do.


Bonds:
Short to Long Term: Slightly Bearish Based on Interest Rate Normalization
The Difficult Path to Interest Rate Normalization

I will make future predictions. Unfortunately, that is necessary in order to manage my portfolio in the present.

I have consistently been saying that the long term secular bull market in bonds, which started in 1982, ended in July 2012 when the ten year treasury closed at a 1.43% yield. The precise date was 7/25/12: (daily closes at research.stlouisfed.org). Kaput. I sold out of my ten year TIPs back then when the buyer paid such a high price that their current yield was almost a NEGATIVE 1%. Stocks, Bonds & Politics: Sold 3 TIP Bonds Maturing in 2019 at 120.45 I viewed that to be the bond market equivalent of stocks in 1999. The overall trend will be toward higher rates with intermittent rallies going forward.

The last long term bond bear market started around 1949 and lasted until 1982. For about 15 years, it was more like a series of paper cuts to bond investors before the real carnage and bloodletting started in the late 1960s, with the coup d' grace administered in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Can't have a repeat? Why not? History has a way of repeating over and over again, as fallible humans fail to learn much of anything from the past.

The 1949-1982 bond bear market started out really slow. I am sure than many bond investors during the 1950s still viewed the market favorably and may have even called it a continuation of the long term secular bull market in highly rated credits like treasuries that had started in the wake of the 1929 stock market crash. However, while those investors may have believed that they were still in a long term bull phase back in the 1950s, that clearly was not the case: Long Interest Rates, 1790 to Present | The Big Picture It may have taken a decade before the consensus rolled around to believing that there was something seriously wrong in Bond Land.

My outlook forecast assumes that the market is correctly forecasting the average annual CPI rate over the next ten years. If inflation expectations start to trend higher, then I will become more bearish about bonds. Bond losses due to higher inflation on top of losses resulting simply from rate normalization will not be pretty.

That forecast is known as the break-even spread, the average annual rate of inflation for the owner of the 10 year TIP to break even with the owner of the non-inflation protected treasury.

The break-even spread is calculated by subtracting the yield of the TIP
Daily Treasury Real Yield Curve Rates

From the Yield of the Non-inflation protected treasury
Daily Treasury Yield Curve Rates

Bond yields drifted higher last week. REITs, which have been positively correlated with bonds recently, moved down in price and up in yield last week, thereby maintaining their relatively tight positive correlation with bonds. I have pared my REIT allocation by selling some positions into the bond rally, as previously noted, and have added to my regional banks, which have been showing negative correlation to bonds. I sold 300 Artis last Friday and MPW at $14 discussed below, adding to the overall previous paring. It will be a couple of weeks before I discuss the Artis disposition.

What is causing those correlations?

Many investors have been buying REITs as bond substitutes. While the correlation with bonds has been tight for that reason, there will be days when a REIT stocks act more like a regular stock than a bond substitute and the correlation may break temporarily. That could happen for example when bonds rise during a strong down move in stocks.

Overall REITs have been demonstrating positive correlation with bonds. Bonds and REITs tanked in tandem last year when rates started to rise and then both started to rise this year when rates started to fall. Now, with rates rising over the past week or so, REITs have declined in price as shown by the recent action in VNQ. Vanguard REIT ETF Chart Yesterday, VNQ had a particularly bad day. VNQ: $73.86 -$2.34 (-3.07%)

As for regional banks, investors generally believe that they will be helped by a rise in intermediate and longer term rates, at least when short term rates remained artificially anchored near zero and the banks have to pay their depositors almost nothing for use of their funds. In addition, when rates are rising due to investor's perceptions about an improving economy, then regional banks will likely make more loans and suffer fewer defaults.

Consequently, when rates were rising last year, regional banks had a robust rally (KRE up over 40% in 2013), and I sold into that rally. I plowed some of the proceeds into REITs which I started to buy in September 2013. Over the past several weeks, I have been a net seller of REIT common and preferred shares and have added to my regional bank basket. All of the foregoing is tied to my opinions about the movement in interest rates and relative valuations.

With their robust rally this year, REITs became slightly overvalued as an asset class, though there are exceptions. Generally, in making that kind of determination, I am keying off the average P/FFO historical valuation for REITs as an asset class and I acquire that information from Lazard's quarterly reports that can be found on the internet. (July 2014 Report: USRealEstateIndicatorsReport pdf) According to Lazard, the historical average is 15.7 and the REIT class valuation was at 17.5 times in July.

As another aside, I would note that I am becoming less likely to sell my 300 shares of HLP-UN.TO: 14.10 -0.01 (-0.07%) which is in the process of being acquired by Health Care REIT for C$14.2. Assuming that deal is completed, my CAD profit would be close to C$1,200 based on my recent purchases this year at C$10.2 and at C$10.17. I am anticipating losing this stock one way or the other and have already partially counted it toward my REIT allocation reduction after substituting already 200 NWH_UN:CA at C$10.16 for that 300 unit HLP lot.

I am reluctant to sell the HLP lot now for several reasons. While my profit in CADs is locked due to the C$14.2 cash tender, my reportable USD profit for tax purposes is declining due to the CAD/USD exchange rate. Consequently my taxable profit is being reduced while my potential CAD profit remains the same. I view that trend favorably provided it continues. In addition, my dividend yield is over 8%, paid monthly, so I am receiving decent compensation to wait for the C$14.2 deal price to be paid, rather than to incur a C$19 commission and a lower sale's price now. The danger is that the deal may fall through and I lose my profit and then some depending on the reason. I do not expect that to happen. To avoid that remote outcome, based on what I know now, I may elect to sell soon provided the CAD continues to fall in value and I am entitled to receive one or maybe two more dividends. "Based on what I know now", recognizing of course that what I do not know can and will wreck havoc from time to time.

**********************************
Performance Numbers YTD Calculated by Fidelity: 

I took a snapshot of the performance numbers YTD for my 4 Fidelity accounts. The calculation is made by Fidelity and is current through 8/31/14. The first two numbers are taxable accounts and the last two are a regular and Roth IRA. The largest taxable account, listed first, had close to an average 25% cash allocation during August.


Fidelity also provides returns for other indexes which can be used as yardsticks for the investor's performance numbers. Given the rally in stocks during August, my large cash allocation earning nothing, and my bond allocation, it is not surprising that I started to fall behind the S & P 500 during August. I am surprised about the outperformance of the IRAs which are free of common stocks other than a few REITs and BDCs.


I have to compute my number for my Vanguard accounts. The Vanguard Roth IRA was up 11.18% Y-T-D through 8/31/14. That is surprising to me also since it is managed in the same way as the two Fidelity IRAs.

The Vanguard Mutual fund accounts continued to be led by the outperformance of the Vanguard Health fund which was up 19% Y-T-D through 8/31/14: Vanguard - Health Care Fund Investor Shares - Price & Performance My position in the Vanguard Equity Income Fund, the largest in this grouping, was up +8.69%; while the second largest position, Vanguard Star was up 7.03%. A small position in the Vanguard Capital Appreciation Fund had the second best YTD percentage gain at +13.25% through 8/31/14. I invested in that fund when it temporarily opened to new investors, just to get my foot in the door. Initiated Position in VHCOX (4/9/13 Post)

Performance numbers through May 2014 were published in this post: Performance Numbers YTD

Other performance updates include the following:

Portfolio Management Goals-Snapshots of Performance Numbers: YTD and 5 Year Cumulative (April 2014)

Main Taxable and Regular IRA Accounts Performance Numbers Calculated by Broker: 1, 3 and 5 Years (12/13/11Post)

I will take more risks in my taxable accounts than in my IRAs. Even in the taxable accounts, preservation of capital and income generation are the primary goals. I am not swinging for the fences.

As previously noted, the portfolio design is intended to avoid 75% of a greater than 1% daily decline in the market.

****************************

Recent Developments:  

The government reported that seasonally adjusted retail sales rose .6% in August. Excluding autos, sales increased by .3%. gov/retail.pdf The government revised the July number to show a .3% gain from unchanged. June sales were revised up to .4% from .2%.

The Fed's recently released survey of consumer finances for the period 2010-2013 provides more evidence of the growing income disparity. federalreserve.gov/pdf During the period, median family income fell 5%. The top 3% of the families collected 30.5% of all income in 2013, up from 27.7% in 2010. The top 3% owned 54.4% of the wealth, up from 44.8% in 1989 (pages 10-11 and Figure B at page 11). The percentage of families that directly owned stock fell to 13.8%.

Before Tax Median and Mean Family Income
Mean income is the amount obtained by dividing the aggregate income of a group by the number of units in that group, whereas the median is the amount that divides the income into two equal groups, half having income above the median and the other half below. The mean or average household income gain between 2010-2013 was 4% but that was generated by surging incomes at the very top. Mean income per family rose to $87,200 while the median household income fell 5% to $46,700.

Overall debt burdens declined, with only 8.2% of households devoting in excess of 40% of income to debt payments, the lowest rate since the mid-1990s.

The ration of deb to income fell to 104.6%in 2013 from 124.7% in 2010 (Table 5 at page 29).



The Census Bureau has income data, dividend into quintiles, going back to 1967. The data also adjusts for inflation. Historical Income Tables - Households - U.S Census Bureau The pertinent file is "Table H-3 All Races". The "mean" middle quintile's income was $51,179 in 2012 $51,715 in 1989 adjusted for inflation.

******************************
General Electric (own):

GE agreed to sell its appliance business to Electrolux for $3.3B. The transaction will generate an approximate after tax gain of $.05 to $.07 per share at closing which is expected in 2015.

************************
Notice of Redemption: MetroPCS Wireless (own 1 senior bond): 

In a recurring routine, I received last week a notice that MetroPCS will be redeeming its 7.875% senior unsecured bond, maturing in 2018, on 10/6/14. The notice states that the redemption price will be 103.938 or $1,039.38 for one $1,000 par value bond. I will also be paid accrued interest to the redemption date:



Final Prospectus Supplement (optional redemption price at page S-31)

MetroPCS was acquired by T-Mobile (TMUS) on 5/1/13. T-Mobile just sold $1.3B in 6% senior notes maturing in 2023 and $1.7B in 6.375% senior notes maturing in 2025. Prospectus One purpose of that offering was to redeem the 2018 MetroPCS note, see page S-19.

Bought 1 MetroPCS 7.875% Senior Bond Maturing 9/1/2018 at 98 (8/26/11 Post)

******************************
Unilever (Own Both UN an UL):

My UL shares were acquired in March 2009 at $18. I recently bought the UN shares in a satellite taxable account. Item # 2 Bought 100 Unilever at $38.10+ (9/21/13 Post) I included in that last linked post some snapshots of some trading gains in UN shares.

The Unilever group, Unilever PLC and Unilever NV, is a large consumer staples company operating in 190 countries.

Unilever has two sets of common shareholders that originate from its history. Unilever PLC is based in the UK and Unilever NV is from the Netherlands.

{A similar type of situation and history exists for Royal Dutch Shell with its RDS/A and RDS/B shares Difference between A and B shares - Shell Global}

Unilever NV (UN) Profile at Reuters

There is a unity of shareholder's rights agreement that makes the Unilever PLC and Unilever NV shares equivalent.

Understanding NV & PLC shares | Unilever Global

However, there are some important differences.

The U.K. does not withhold a tax from UL's dividend:

UL Dividend: No Tax Withheld 
The Netherlands does withhold a tax from UN's dividend (which occurred even when I instructed the broker to reinvest the dividend):

UN Dividend $39.04 (15% tax withheld=$5.85)
Some individual investors have claimed that no dividends are withheld when it is reinvested to buy more shares, which has not been the case for me. I have bought UL in a tax advantaged account, rather than UN, due to that tax withholding difference. A U.S. investor can not recover a foreign dividend tax when that dividend is paid into a retirement account, so 15% of the UN dividend would just be lost forever when that share class is held in an IRA.

Another important difference is the UL ordinary shares are traded in London and are price in British pounds, whereas the UN shares are priced in Euros. The NYSE shares will track the ordinary price converted into U.S. dollars. That will create a variable causing differences in the prices, as will the disparity in foreign withholding, even though each share class has the same claim on earnings and dividends.

Recently, both the Euro and the British Pound have been weak against the USD for different reasons. The ECB has embarked on a deliberate effort to weaken the Euro whereas the pound has suffered some due to the uncertainty about the upcoming vote on Scotland's independence.

GBP/USD Currency Conversion Chart

EUR/USD Currency Conversion Chart

The recent decline in both of those currencies have had a negative impact on the NYSE listed UN and UL.

Closing Prices Last Friday:
UN: $41.32 +0.02 (+0.05%)
UL: $43.75 +0.14 (+0.32%)


************************
Notice of Full Redemption: JZJ

The owner of the call warrant has given notice of its intention to redeem JZJ at its $25 par value plus accrued interest of $.5269+ per trust certificate. Notice of CONDITIONAL PARTIAL Redemption Corporate Backed Trust Certificates, AT&T Note-Backed Series 2003-18 Trust 960,000 $25 Par ($24,000,000 Certificate Principal Amount) Class A-1 Certificates Due November 15, 2031 CUSIP No. 21988K503* (NYSE: JZJ), $24,000,000 Notional Amount Class A-2 Certificates Due November 15, 2031 CUSIP No. 21988KAE7*

Prior to this full call, the owner of the call warrant had partially called the JZJ trust certificates on two prior occasions.

2014 JZJ Partial Call 94 Shares +$488.17

2010 JZJ Partial Call 82 Shares +$567.44
I also lost the functionally equivalent JZE to a full call (100 shares +$1,242.), as shown in the preceding snapshot.

I received the redemption proceeds today, plus the accrued interest payment:



************************

1. Sold 471+ IGD at $9.7743 (See Disclaimer): This underperforming stock CEF was selected for elimination due to poor performance and to meet my ongoing stock allocation reduction goals.

Snapshot of Trade:

2014 Sold 471+ IGD at $9.77+
Snapshot of Position Before Trade: 


While the profit reportable on a 1099 will be over $500, as shown in the preceding snapshot, the monthly dividend payments were supported in large part by a return of capital. Consequently, there was a significant downward adjustment in my cost basis.

I did not calculate a total return number due to the difficulty associated with ROC. I can not simply add the dividend received to the profit. An approximate total return number can be calculated using the performance numbers shown below.

Security Description: The ING Global Equity Dividend & Premium Opportunity Fund (IGD) is a buy-write worldwide stock CEF. 

Data on Date of Trade: 8/27/14
Closing Net Asset Value Per Share: $10.09
Closing Market Price: $9.78
Discount: -3.07%

CEFConnect Page for IGD

IGD Page at Morningstar (rated 2 stars at the time of disposition, rated 4 stars at the time of my last purchase)

Performance Numbers as of 8/27/14-Based on Net Asset Value
Total Return
YTD 5.98%
1 Yr 13.71%
Total Return Annualized
3 Yr. 11.62%
5 Yr. 8.32%
Last SEC Filed Shareholder Report: Period Ending 2/28/14

The current monthly dividend, supported mostly by ROC, is $..076 per share.

Prior Trades: Links to Posts Discussing IGD Purchases: Item # 3 Added 100 of the Stock CEF IGD at $8.91 (1/9/13 Post)Added 50 IGD at $8.78 (December 2011)Bought 100 IGD at $10.94 (August 2010)

Rationale: The fund was fired due to underperformance. 

Future Buys: Highly Unlikely. I now have a very negative view of this fund.

Closing Price Last Friday: IGD: $9.45 -0.04 (-0.42%) 

2. Added 100 GDO at $18.44 (see Disclaimer): Bond CEFs declined last week, so I would have been better off waiting to add to GDO.

Snapshot of Trade:

2014 Added 100 GDO at $18.44

Security Description: The Western Asset Global Corp Defined Opportunity Fund (GDO) is a leveraged world closed end bond fund. GDO will liquidate on or about 12/2/2024. This gives the fund one of the characteristics of an individual bond, the promise to return an investor's money at a time certain. However, unlike an individual bond, there is no promise to pay a fixed sum (i.e. par value). The investor in GDO will simply receive their pro-rata share of the liquidation proceeds, which may be more or less than the current net asset value per share. The current discount to net asset value does provide some cushion.

The current monthly distribution is $.1135 per share, with the next ex dividend date on 9/17/14. Distributions for the Months of September, October and November 2014

Portfolio Composition as of June 30, 2014

Credit Quality: While the fund is weighted in investment grade bonds, it has a substantial exposure to junk rated securities, mostly rated BB or B.



Data as of date of trade 8/29/14
Closing Net Asset Value Per Share: $20.62
Closing Market Price: $18.48
Discount: -10.38%

On the day prior to my trade, the closing market price was $18.52, with the NAV at $20.61, creating a discount at that time of -10.14%.

CEFConnect Page for GDO

Sponsor's website:  Overview (after clicking the "portfolio" tab, I see the average effective duration at 3.96 years with 291 holdings as of 6/30/14)

Last SEC Filed Shareholder Report: WA Global Corporate Defined Opportunity Fund Inc

EDGAR Filings for GDO

Prior Trades: I have frequently bought and sold this leveraged bond CEF for small gains after harvesting its monthly dividends. I liquidated my entire position early in 2013 and started to buy shares back later in the year and into 2014.

Completed Round Trip Transactions:

Bought 100 of the CEF GDO at $18.6 March 2010; Bought 70 of the CEF GDO in Regular IRA at $18.61 March 2010; Bought 200 of the CEF GDO at 18.63 and 18.53 (100 in Roth and 100 Taxable Account respectively) March 2010; Bought 200 of the CEF GDO at 18.63 and 18.53 (100 in Roth and 100 Taxable Account respectively) March 2010;  Bought 100 GDO at $18.57 April 2010; Bought Back 50 shares of GDO at 17.8 in the Roth IRA previously sold at $19.24 December 2010; Sold 100 GDO at $18.72 January 2012Sold 200 GDO at $19.18 June 2012; Sold Remaining GDO in Taxable Account at $19.69 July 2012Bought 100 Shares of GDO at $18.9 November 2012Sold 100 GDO at $20.79 December 2012; Sold 120 GDO at $20.73 (February 2013)Sold 102+ GDO at $18.79-Regular IRA (July 2014)(some snapshots of realized GDO trading gains=+701.62)

With this last purchase, I currently own shares. Item # 4 Added 100 GDO at $18.06 (2/25/14 Post)Item # 7 Bought 50 GDO at $18.03 (11/19/13 Post)Item # 7 Bought 100 GDO at $17.79-Regular IRA (10/24/13 Post); Item # 4 Added 50 GDO at $17.58-Roth IRA (6/29/13)

Rationale and Risks: I am generally comfortable with this fund. Dividends are paid monthly at the current rate of $.1135 per share. At that rate, the yield would be about 7.39% at a total cost of $18.44 per share.  Over the past year, the monthly dividend was first cut from $.12 to $.115 before being raised to $.116 and then cut to $.1135.

As noted above, I liquidated my position in early 2013.  All of the shares previously sold were bought at higher prices, with the exception of one 50 share lot, than my recent buys of shares that are currently owned.

Like other bond CEFs, GDO was hurt by the rise in rates starting in May 2013 and lasting until year end, which caused a decline in net asset value. One known risk for CEFs is that the discount has a tendency to expand during periods of market declines for owned assets, as individual investors flee. The use of leverage aggravates the decline.

On 5/1/13, the net asset value per share was $21.07 and the discount was at -4.79%. The market price close that day was $20.06. From 5/1/13 through this month, the fund has paid $1.158 per share in dividends. The discount has expanded by 6.45% between 5/1/13 and 2/13/14, which is largely responsible for the market price decline.

I discuss other risks in the previously linked posts.

Closing Price Last Friday:  GDO: $18.34 -0.04 (-0.22%)

3. Bought 50 RFTA at $25 (see Disclaimer): This one declined last week as bonds weakened in price and rose in yield. I view the issuer as being a high credit risk.

Snapshot of Trade:

2014 Bought 50 RFTA at $25
Security Description: The RAIT Financial Trust 7.125% Sr. Notes 2019 (RFTA) is a new senior unsecured Exchange Traded Bond issue by RAIT Financial Trust (RAS).

RFTA is scheduled to make quarterly interest payments at the per annum rate of 7.125% on a $25 par value. The bond may be called at the issuer's option on or after 8/30/17.

Prospectus Supplement

This bond is not rated.

If it was rated, it would be in junk territory. I did a FINRA search for bonds maturing in 2019-2020 that had a 7%-7.25% yield. A bond issued by Ruby Tuesday's fell into that range and was rated Caa1 by Moody's and B- by S & P. Bonds Detail Ruby Tuesday 7.625% Maturing 5/15/2020

The first interest payment goes ex interest on 11/12/14 at the penny rate of $.5294 according to Fidelity:


That includes more than one quarter and the yield information shown in that snapshot is obviously incorrect. The quarterly rate will be $.445312 per share. At that rate, the yield at a total cost of $25 per share would be the coupon rate of 7.125%.

EDGAR Filings for RAIT Financial

Prior Trades: None

Related Trades: I recently bought the common stock as a Lotto. Bought as LT: 40 RAS at $7.63 (8/25/14 Post) I also recently bought another RAIT exchange traded bond with a 7.625% coupon maturing in 2024. Bought Roth IRA: 50 RFT at $24.28 (August 23, 2014 Post)

Rationale and Risks: I discuss these issues in the preceding linked post. Rather than buying more of the bond maturing in 2024, I decided to accept about .5% less with a senior bond maturing about five years earlier which mitigates interest rate significantly. While the credit risk will be the same for the two bonds over the next five years, the likelihood of a BK in 5 to 10 years is greater than one in 1 to 5. Credit risk is the main risk with this five year senior bond.

Closing Price Last Friday: RFTA: $24.37 +0.07 (+0.31%)

4. Sold 200 CGI:CA at C$20.66 (Canadian Dollar (CAD) Strategy)(see Disclaimer): This disposition was part of my ongoing stock allocation reduction. I also realized a larger profit in CADs than the broker will report after converting the purchase cost and sale's proceeds into USDs.

Snapshot of Trade:

2014 Sold 200 CGI:CA at C$20.66

Snapshot of Position Before Trade:

Unrealized Gain: C$911 or USD$549.29
Snapshot of Profit:

2014 CGI:CA Reportable Profit USD$532.55
Bought 100 of the CEF CGI:CA at 15.78 CAD-Toronto ExchangeAdded 100 of the Canadian Stock CEF CGI at C$16.03

Reportable Dividends Received: $239.93

Total Taxable Return: $789.22  

CAD Dividends Received Before 15% Withholding: $258
Profit in CADs: C$894
Total Return in CADs: C$1,152

Security Description: The Canadian General Investments (CGI:TOR) is a Canadian stock CEF.

Sponsor's Webpage: Canadian General Investments

Data on Date of Trade 9/2/14:

Net Asset Value: C$29.27
Market Price: C$20.66
Discount: -29.42%

This CEF's market price generally stays near a 30% discount to net asset value per share. There is really no effort made to narrow the discount through an active and significant stock repurchase program. The CEF is also sitting on a large pile of unrealized gains. A more consistent harvesting of profits, resulting in larger than traditional long term capital gain distributions, might narrow the discount. There would obviously be a large gain when and if some determined person or entity forced a conversion into an open end fund selling at net asset value which sometimes happens in the CEF universe.

Rationale: While I am continuing to be a net seller of stocks, my primary reasons for selling this CEF were profit taking and the current weakness in the CAD/USD exchange rate causing a much lower U.S. tax liability than the tax liability at a higher exchange rate.

In the Canadian Dollar strategy, I am interested in increasing my CAD stash for diversification purposes.

I will favor selling a security for a $1000 CAD profit,  but at a $600 USD reportable long term capital gain taxed at 15% due to the decline in the CAD during my ownership period.

I would not want to sell for a CAD loss and a reportable USD tax profit, due to a rise in the CAD/USD exchange rate.

Future Buys/Sells: I may buy this one back after a 15%+ correction in the market price.

Closing Price Last Friday:  CGI.TO: C$20.70 -0.02 (-0.10%)

5. Bought 30 APO at $23.39-Roth IRA and 50 in Taxable Account at $23.46 (see Disclaimer): I noticed that this security was at a 52 week low so I nibbled in a Roth IRA. APO Interactive Chart This is a contrarian value play.

The chart does indicates some souring by institutional investors. WFC downgraded the stock to market perform in mid-August.

Snapshot of  Roth IRA Trade:

2014 Roth IRA Bought 30 APO at $23.39
Snapshot of Taxable Account Trade:



Security Description: Apollo Global Management LLC Cl A (APO) is a global alternative asset manager. Operations are divided into several segments including private equity and credit segments.

List of Private Equity Holdings as of 12/31/13: Page 12,  APO-12.31.2013-10-K

Description of Apollo's Credit Platform: Pages 13-14

A complicated chart showing how APO fits within the Apollo organization structure can be found at page 64.

APO Page at Morningstar (Rated 4 Stars at time of purchase with a consider to buy at $24 or lower and a fair value estimate of $40)

Bloomberg Page for APO (at time of purchase,  2014 Estimated P/E= 10.27; P/B=1.53)

APO Profile Page at Reuters

Apollo Global Management, LLC (APO) Dividend History

EDGAR Filings for APO

Recent Earnings Report: For the 2014 second quarter, APO reported GAAP net income of $72M, up from $59M in the 2013 second quarter. "Total Economic Net Income" was $.52 per share and the company declared a $.46 per share second quarter dividend per class A share. The $.46 per share dividend consisted of a $.15 regular dividend and $.31 "attributable to additional carried interest earned by Apollo funds through realizations and Management Business earnings".  Total assets under management was $167.5B as of 6/30/14. APO Earnings Release 2Q-14

Economic net income is defined at page 67: APO-12.31.2013-10-K

As noted in that press release, Apollo intends to "distribute to its shareholders on a quarterly basis substantially all of its distributable earnings after taxes and related payables in excess of amounts determined by its manager to be necessary or appropriate to provide for the conduct of its business." There is no guarantee or assurance that any dividend will be payable.

APO-6.30.2014-10Q

Rationale: The primary rationale is income generation and secondarily potential capital appreciation. The Morningstar analyst believes that there is potential for capital appreciation.

The "earnings" estimates made by analysts may be based on the economic net income number rather than the lower GAAP number. I suspect that is the case. The consensus for 2014 is $2.36 per share and $2.54 in 2015. APO Analyst Estimates Based on the 2015 estimate, the P/E is around 9.21 at a total cost of $23.39 per share.

APO Key Statistics

Risks: The company describes risks incident to its business starting at page 22 of its 2013 Annual Report: APO-12.31.2013-10-K

The primary reason for investing in this stock is to generate income, but the dividends will be erratic in amounts depending on income realization.

The objective in the IRA is achieve a 8% to 10% annualized total return.

Closing Price Last Friday: APO: $23.60 -0.08 (-0.34%)

6. Sold 100 MPW at $14-Regular IRA (see Disclaimer): As noted above, I have been paring my REIT allocation.

Snapshot of Trade:



Snapshot of Profit:

2014 Regular IRA Sold 100 MPW +$108.27
Dividend: $21
Total Return: $129.27 or 10% (holding period 5 months)

Item # 2 Bought Regular IRA-100 MPW at $12.76 (4/18/14 Post)

Security Description: Medical Properties Trust MPW) is an equity REIT that owns net-leased healthcare facilities. As of 6/30/14/28/14, MPW's portfolio consisted of 118 properties (56 acute care hospitals, 23 long term acute care hospitals, 31 in-patient rehabilitation hospitals; 2 medical office buildings; and six "wellness centers". 10-Q at page 36

Key Developments at Reuters

Company Website: Medical Properties Trust

Last March, MPW sold 7.7M shares at $13.05, excluding up to 1,245,000 shares in the over-allotment option: Form 8-K, Press ReleaseProspectus.

MPW is currently paying a $.21 per share quarterly dividend, which was raised from $.2 in the 2013 4th quarter. Medical Properties Trust, Inc. (MPW) Dividend Date & History - NASDAQ.com

The $.20 per share quarterly rate was in effect since the 2008 4th quarter when it was reduced from $.27. I view that dividend negatively for two basis reasons: (1) the dividend was cut 25.9% and (2) after being slashed, it was kept at a constant amount for 5 years before being raised by a penny. Assuming a continuation of that dividend growth rate, I will not live to see a doubling and may not live to see the quarterly rate return to the pre-slash level of $.27.

2013 Annual Report: 10-K

Last Quarterly Report: 10-Q
Debt: $1.64+B, page 17
Medical Properties Trust, Inc. - Press Release

EDGAR Filings for MPW

Brad Thomas published an article about this REIT back in February at Seeking Alpha.

Prior trades: I bought and sold this stock once in an IRA. I was fortunate to buy it at a more favorable price that allowed me to realize a decent percentage profit. Item # 3 Bought 100 MPW at $9.9-ROTH IRA (2/13/12 Post)-Item # 6 Sold 100 MPW at $12.25 (1/3/13 Post)(snapshot of profit=$221.08 & total return of $321.08).

Rationale: I am satisfied with a 10% annualized return achieved in five months. Profit taking in an account where preservation of capital is the prime objective is routine when my objective is hit for a particular security.

Given the dividend history described above, MPW is on a short leash.

Future Buys/Sells: I will consider buying 100 shares back in an IRA at a lower price than my last purchase. That would be less than $12.76. My first purchase, as noted above, was at $9.9 in early 2012.

The shares hit $2.91 in early March 2009: {MPW Interactive Chart; closed at $2.91 on 3/9/09,  MPW Historical Prices)

Closing Price Last Friday: MPW: $13.15 -0.43 (-3.17%)

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Sold 100 of 150 of the TC IPB at $26.82/Are Americans Going Broke?/Bought 200 of the Canadian Bond ETF XFR at 20.13 CADs/Bought 50 of the Floating Rate Bond ETF BKLN at $25.05/ Added 100 of the Stock CEF IGD at $8.91/ Sold 1 U.S. Steel 7.5% Bond Maturing 2022 at 106.5-Roth IRA

Big Picture Synopsis

Stocks:
Stable Vix Pattern
Vix Asset Allocation Model Explained Simply
Mark Hulbert and the Use of the VIX as a Timing Model
Short Term: Neutral
Intermediate and Long Term: Bullish

Bonds:
Short Term: Neutral
Intermediate Term: Slightly Bearish
Long Term: Extremely Bearish

****

This site provides the U.S. historical tax rates starting in 1913 and also adjusts those rates for inflation: U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2011 (Nominal and Inflation-Adjusted Brackets) | Tax Foundation  

It is interesting to go back in time and see how much you would have paid in taxes at your income level. Say you had a taxable income of $100,000 in 2011. The highest marginal rate is shown as 25%.

Let's go back to the halcyon days of 1954, remember The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet when everything was supposedly much better when Eisenhower was President. The nominal marginal rate was 89% at $100,000 which does not sound as good as the 2011 rate of 25% on that amount. The inflation adjusted number would be a 43% marginal rate for someone making in 1954 the equivalent of $100,000 in today's dollars (1954 bracket: $12,000 to $14,000)

The inflation adjusted income for the 89% tax bracket in 1954 was calculated by the TaxFoundation at $834,125. If you really want to hear someone squeal now, try implementing that 89% rate on $834,125+ level now.

I raised this point in a comment to an article written by the perpetual bear Alan Abelson in this week's Barron's. Those who write comments to Alan's columns are kindred spirits. One gentleman, Brian, called my point a "bit deceptive", because I did not take into account the ratio of the federal budget to GDP. What does that really have to do with the relative tax burden of households in the 1950s and now?

Brian sounded like a real scholar to the RB, a rather typical perpetual pessimist who spin tells of death and destruction in our near future and has probably been doing so for decades and will continue doing so until their last breath. There are similar in that respect to cult members who predict the end of the world on a certain day and do not change their beliefs after the world survives their future forecast.

Why would any nitwit focus on the actual reality of a household's tax burden in the 1950s and the checks that they wrote to the federal government to pay taxes rather than the ratio of the budget to GDP which any right thinking person would do?

I can almost hear my father, sitting at his desk on April 15, 1955, looking at both his household and business tax returns, writing checks which lowers his wealth number, and then saying "well, I am sure glad that the federal budget to GDP ratio is sound, that is almost like having money in the bank to grow the business and to spend on my family". Ridiculous and asinine are two words that come into mind when I read this pessimist's typical condescending retort in Barron's.

Back in the 1950s, long before the job destroying, private equity parasites came into being, the real Job Creators managed to produce really good results in the 1950s and early 1960s before inflation started to fester in a major way.

The WWII generation who came of age during the Great Depression, however, were not whiners and cry babies, a fair description of so many today.

Did they pay higher or lower taxes compared to today? Those positive results produced a long term secular bull market that generated substantial annualized returns. And their tax burdens were higher during that period compared to now without question.

There are far more powerful forces at work, in both the up and down cycles, than taxes and political parties. And those forces explain more than tax policy.

Another important point is that the American people have shown their ability to adapt to whatever the knuckleheads in Washington throw their way.

The S & P 500 returned an annualized 14.4% after inflation between 1/1/49 and 1/1/66:




Annualized Returns of the S&P 500

It is odd, as Bruce Bartlett pointed out in his NYT column this week, that there is hard long term data showing that "sharp tax increases in the stock market have often followed big tax increases".  Now, isn't that a hoot. How is that even possible? His observation does support my point that the world is more complex and is not explained by simplistic GOP dogma.

**************

I have been reading a lot of articles and comments published at SeekingAlpha. The LB has gone from about 4 comments to 300 in about a month.

A few articles and fewer comments are actually intelligent and well informed. True Believers are present in abundance, people who have never made any effort to secure relevant and material information before forming a judgment. Their political beliefs and ideologies govern their investment approach. Well informed, unbiased, objective and intelligent people can have a rational disagreements. It is impossible to have a rational disagreement with an irrational person.  

Another theme comes from investors who sound like failed investors. Just from their verbiage, LB drew a rational hypothesis that they are expert practitioners of "error creep" and nothing else. ERROR CREEP and the INVESTING PROCESS; Item # 3 Making Decisions with Incomplete InformationAcquiring Relevant Information; BlackJack and Stock Investing: Lessons Learned & Applied Those folks try to convince everyone to avoid stocks altogether. 

A sub-group claims that Financial Armageddon is just around the corner, due either to the much hated Obama of course, whose policies would be despised even when embodying GOP principles, or the monetary policies of the Federal Reserve. Possibly, some of those people have acquired bits an pieces of information consistent with their pre-existing beliefs, while dismissing all inconsistent evidence, assuming of course they made any effort to acquire that information in the first place which is doubtful.

As a general rule, these uninformed and hopelessly dogmatic people will become indignant or angry whenever inconsistent reliable information is pointed out to them and will even go so far as calling the dispenser of that accurate information a liar. While their approach is fine for them when discussing politics, not much harm can come of it other than electing a few hundred kindred spirit Know Nothings to Congress, it is a disastrous approach when applied to investing. Actually, some harm can come of it. 

There are a huge number of perpetual pessimists at SeekingAlpha. Those folks will never be successful at investing. If someone had followed Alan Abelson's advice since 1982, they would have been out of stocks for the S & P move from 120 to 1450.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Is his pithy sarcasm far worse, to the nth degree, than worse than worthless to the nth degree?

I can not recall a single instance when Abelson has been positive about stocks. He reached ridiculous a long time ago.

Perhaps those investors, who have failed, buying in October 2007 and selling in October 2008, have psychological issues about missing the S & P 500 surge from the 676.53 close on March 9, 2009 and that explains why they are now forecasting the end of the world. If it does not end this year, then for sure it will be 2014.

It is natural for humans to blame their own failures on others, or on events outside their control, even though they had never even taken a baby step along the long and difficult road toward becoming a successful investor. 

For the few people who have balance and are interested in forming opinions based on the best available evidence, it is best to just ignore the opinions of the perpetual pessimists and simply refuse to be influenced by their warped views about just about everything.

Nothing will convince them to change. It is important, however, to at least digest the material and relevant facts underlying the bear case. Bear this in mind however. The perpetual bears will not mention evidence inconsistent with their beliefs or will disparage that evidence as unworthy of any consideration. Frequently, their summary of facts will be skewed in obvious ways to conform to their beliefs. They call that analysis.  

I recently read two articles written by a young man and published by Seeking Alpha. In one of those article, he claimed that Americans are broke. Seeking Alpha That was just asinine, but consistent with the author's view of the world.  

I could not help myself, so I left some comments knowing that I was wasting my time. 

First I pointed out that the Census Bureau estimates that 32% of American households own their homes free and clear of any mortgage. I am one of those broke people. U.S. Census Bureau Releases Detailed Information on Nation's Housing; Monthly Housing Costs Reach $1,000 for Homeowners - Housing - Newsroom - U.S. Census Bureau

You would think that fact would be a least a small chink in the author's thesis, but you would be wrong in making that assumption. The perpetual pessimists will ignore any data that undermines their belief, always have and always will. 

I thought then that I would just highlight some charts that show the long term success of Americans in growing wealth. He did not like those charts either. 

Real Disposable Income
Real GDP
For anyone who wishes to open their eyes, the wealth creation is all around. It can be found on the American stock exchanges with the new companies formed just in my lifetime that now dominate new industries that did not exist when I was born.

America has been and will continue to be a wealth creation machine.

I see the wealth creation everyday when I drive around Nashville, just looking at the commercial and residential structures and remembering what the city looked like 10 years ago. The difference is just stunning when I recall the 1950s or the 1960s. None of the above are even viewed as relevant. 

I next produced data showing the American consumer is now in the best shape since the early 1980s based on the Federal Reserve's Debt Service Obligations (DSR) and Financial Obligation Ratio (FOR).
I pointed out where anyone can find that data at the Federal Reserve. Household Debt Service and Financial Obligations Ratios

Anyone can see that both ratios have returned to the levels prevalent before the Consumer Age of Leverage started in the mid-1980s. No doubt, that would be important information to anyone interested in facts about Americans going broke, or so you would think. More disposal income and less debt would seem inconsistent with the going broke thesis. 

For those who are not willing to look at tables containing numbers, I referenced this chart for those who like to look at pictures:






Neither the FOR or the DSR show any inclination to stop their downward slides. 

Doesn't that data for both the FOR and DSR ratios show that U.S. consumers have become liquified and now have more money to spend and save? That is the conclusion that I would draw since it is the both obvious and the only rational conclusion to draw. 

Now, the author of the article about Americans going broke did not like my picture chart above, so he devoted another article to dismissing it. Seeking Alpha All of his followers thought that the article was insightful and well researched. He claimed in essence that these lower ratios were bad and consistent with his thesis since the "data" shows that all of those lower debt ratios were due to foreclosures. I could barely contain myself and left a long comment in response.

First, with millions of households refinancing at lower rates, and consequently lowering their debt service ratios, it is just ridiculous to assert that the lower ratios are due solely to foreclosures.

Under water homeowners are using the federal HARP program to refinance at lower rates. Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP) FHA reported in December that 790,169 mortgages were refinanced under HARP between January 2012 through October 2012. Altogether, FHA reported that 1.8M has been refinanced since inception with 81,000 of those in October 2012. fhfa.gov Refinance.pdf

With updates recently installed in automated underwriting systems at the GSCs, the pace is picking up.  SFGate

But, that is not even important to the SA author, and his long article is just proof of how far pessimists will go to justify their position. Of course, lower debt service ratios mean Americans have more money to spend and to save. If I had a 30 year mortgage at 8% and refinance it today at 3.5%, am I better off or worse off. Silly question! End of discussion.

It does not matter how Americans got to a historically low Debt Service Ratio. If a heavily indebted consumer takes a bankruptcy, and sheds those debts, that consumer has more disposable income to save or to spend, just like that homeowner who has their mortgage payments lowered by refinancing. The SA article was just proof of a pessimists mind set to me. The author just went off in a totally irrelevant tangent, much enjoyed by his like minded readers, who were simply looking for confirmations of their inbred pessimism.

If I mention DSR and FOR ratios to a perpetual pessimist, the reaction will be similar to putting worms in their head. Their brains, ossified possibly at birth, can simply not handle information inconsistent with their cherished beliefs that have greater force for them than the 10 Commandments have for evangelicals.

When an investor looks at these long term cycles, the here and now loses its relevance. It does not matter what happens in the stock market over the next ten minutes, or even the next year. These cycles and the forces underlying them last for over a decade and returns need to measured in those time increments rather than minutes, days and months. 

********

I no longer own FPCPRA, a 7.1% coupon trust preferred originally issued by Florida Progress and now a Duke Energy obligation as a result of two subsequent mergers. I believed that the security would be called by Duke after its finalized its acquisition of Progress Energy. Sold 100 FPCPRA at $25.9 As expected, Duke Energy will redeem this security at its $25 par value plus accrued interest of $.374722 per share.

***********

According to the Labor Department, the U.S. economy added 1.9 million private jobs in 2012, while governments shed 63,000, marking the 4th consecutive yearly decline. In December, employers added 155,000 jobs. The number of unemployed persons stood at 12.2 million. Employment Situation Summary The labor participation rate was 63.6%. The average workweek increased by .1 of an hour. Average hourly earnings rose by 7 cents to $23.72. The U-6 number remained at 14.4%. Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

This is a long term chart of average hourly earnings of private production and nonsupervisory employees:




The chart for all private employees would show a higher average hourly wage: Average Hourly Earnings of All Employees: Total Private

*****

An interesting tidbit from Forbes magazine is that German automakers produced twice as many vehicles in 2010 as their counterparts in the U.S. while being paid twice as much.

Goldman is bullish on China in 2013.

Somewhere in the comments to the blog, I mentioned to a reader that I had sold my position in Nordea Bank. That was an error. I found the shares this morning:



***********

I will not be posting any further comments at SiliconInvestor, nor will I be visiting that site again.

**********

I suppose that Notre Dame learned a thing or two about SEC football last Monday. I am glad that Vandy did not  play Alabama in 2012. In one of the most surprising turnarounds in football history, the Commodores were 9 and 4 in 2012, beating North Carolina State convincingly in the Music City Bowl and winning five games against SEC opponents, smashing Tennessee, and beating Kentucky, Mississippi, Auburn and Missouri. Vandy finished the year ranked at 20 in the USA Coaches poll. I would rank them at 15, and simply recognize that it will take time to garner some respect, particularly when a typical season in the past was 2 and 9 or 3 and 8. The new coach James Franklin probably deserves the Noble Prize for Football, taking the Commodores to two straight bowl games, the first such occurrence in history, in his first two years as head coach.

While Vandy does not play BAMA next year, they do play Texas A & M, Georgia and Florida. Winning one of those would be a miracle.

*********

An article about Nashville's economy appears on the front page of the NYT's today. NYTimes.com When looking at Nashville's success, I call it a City State to separate it from Tennessee when analysing its economy.  Sure, the economy is impacted by what is happening elsewhere but the primary drivers are found within the four corners of this City State. There are several growing satellite cities whose economies are closely tied to Nashville's success, but also have their own unique beneficial characteristics. Two of those growing cities are in Williamson County, a short drive from downturn Nashville. One is where HQ is located and is known as Brentwood and the other is Franklin, both cities have "AAA" credit ratings. The two other main satellites are Murfreesboro and Gallatin. In effect, the economy of the Nashville City State encompasses most of Middle Tennessee.


1. Sold 100 of 150 of the Trust Certificate IPB at $26.82 ROTH IRA (see Disclaimer):

2013 ROTH IRA Sold 100 IPB at $26.82

Security Description: IPB is an Exchange Traded Bond in the Trust Certificate form of ownership.

Unlike other trust certificates that represent a beneficial interest in a bond from one issuer, the Merrill Lynch Depositor Inc. 6.0518% Index Plus Trust Series 2003-1 (IPB) has as its underlying securities 15 long term corporate bonds with make whole provisions and U.S. treasury strips. There is no call warrant attached to the Trust Certificate. Prospectus The treasury strips do not pay any cash interest which reduces the current yield of this TC. The current coupon is 6.0518% on a $25 par value.  As the bonds mature, the trustee will pay out the proceeds to the IPB owners and the interest coupon would decline as a result.

I recently received the semi-annual


IPB Interest Payment $113.47

I  bought 100 of those shares at $16.99 (August 2009). I also bought shares at higher prices. Bought 50 of the TC IPB at $21.3Bought: 50 of the TC IPB at $23.11 in IRA (October 2010). I have previously pared 50 of the higher cost shares.

Rationale: (1) Profit Taking:

I  bought 100 of those shares at $16.99 (August 2009).

ROTH IRA IPB Holdings as of 1/3/13

I also bought shares at higher prices. Bought 50 of the TC IPB at $21.3Bought: 50 of the TC IPB at $23.11 in IRA (October 2010). I have previously pared 50 of the higher cost shares. I am now down to 50 shares owned in the ROTH IRA

(2) Profit Taking Juxtaposed Against Interest Rate Risk: At a $26.82 price, the current yield of this TC is around 5.64%. IPB Stock Quote

2013 ROTH IRA Realized Gain 100 IPB $968.23

My primary concern has been expressed in this blog many times. In his January newsletter Bill Gross cautioned bond investors about the potential inflationary impacts of the Fed's money printing machine, recommending that investors avoid long term bonds and focus instead on shorter/intermediate terms. PIMCO | Investment Outlook - Money for Nothin’ Writing Checks for Free

I am in general agreement with Bill Gross on this subject, as noted in a recent comment left at SiliconInvestor: Income Investing Message Board - Msg: 28641926 Goldman Sachs apparently told investors to sell bonds. Dump Bonds Now-CNBC

I have the FINRA links to the corporate bonds owned by this trust in an earlier post. Calculations On How to Recreate Trust Certificate IPB Those long term bonds include ones issued by Verizon, Goldman Sachs, Boeing, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, GE Capital, Time Warner, Boeing and JNJ.

It is also important to keep the current low interest rates in perspective and recognize that the long term bull market in bonds started in 1982. Unless anyone has forgotten or did not know, we have just started 2013.

I discussed the importance of perspective in another SiliconInvestor post: Income Investing Message Board - Msg: 28642336

This perspective can be easily acquired simply by looking at some charts:

5-Year Treasury Inflation-Indexed Security, Constant Maturity (DFII5) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

10-Year Treasury Inflation-Indexed Security, Constant Maturity (DFII10) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

10-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Rate (DGS10) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

30-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Rate (DGS30) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

5-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Rate (GS5) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

3-Month Treasury Constant Maturity Rate (DGS3MO) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

BofA Merrill Lynch US Corporate BBB Effective Yield (BAMLC0A4CBBBEY) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

BofA Merrill Lynch US High Yield Master II Effective Yield (BAMLH0A0HYM2EY) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

30-Year Conventional Mortgage Rate (WRMORTG) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

15-Year Fixed Rate Mortgage Average in the United States (MORTGAGE15US) - FRED - St. Louis Fed

Bond bear markets have long cycles.

While others would disagree, I would go back to around 1941 as the start for the last long term secular bond bear market. I would end that cycle in 1982. Call it 40 years or thereabouts, obviously a longer cycle than the average stock cycle.

As with all long term bear cycles, there will be a series of shorter term bull cyclical moves within the context of a dominant downtrend. Investors will be drawn into those cycles, failing to recognize that the move up in price will only be temporary. Sell the rips is the trading motto in long term secular bear markets too. That sell the rip and buy the dips trading approach may have worked successfully until around 1965, when the best approach would have been to take a 17 year vacation from the bond  market.

See Long Term CPI Data:

Consumer Price Index, 1913- | The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

Annual Percentage Increases in CPI 1966-1982:


2.  Bought 50 of the Floating Rate Bond ETF BKLN at $25.05 (see Disclaimer)

Security Description: The PowerShares Senior Loan Portfolio (BKLN) is a floating rate bond ETF. This particular fund owns mostly junk rated senior secured bank loans.

On the date of my purchase, only 4% of the portfolio had a Baa rating from Moody's and the rest were rated in junk territory with 7% at Caa. There are other ETFs that own investment grade floaters but there yields are close to or even less than 1%.

This particular sector of the bond ETF market is discussed in the following articles:

Floating Rate Bond ETF? - Zacks.com

Floating-Rate Bank Loan Fund - Seeking Alpha

Bond ETFs In A Bond-Eroding Economy

ETF Trends

Sponsor's website: BKLN | Senior Loan Portfolio

BKLN Holdings:  PowerShares Exchange-Traded Funds | BKLN - Senior Loan Portfolio Holdings

The fund pays a monthly dividend at a variable rate: BKLN

The holdings list had 141 names. I would anticipate a few bankruptcies since these companies are highly leveraged due in most cases to leveraged buyouts by private equity firms. Many of those firms are now private while others, such as HCA, have already gone public again after a leveraged buyout. I recognized a few names in that list that have already declared bankruptcy. First lien creditors will be in a best position to recover, but the losses for them after a default could still be severe which is why many of the bank first lien loans are deeply rated into junk.

The total expense ratio is shown at .76%

The current 12 month yield is around 4.8%.

Prior Trades: NONE. This 50 share purchase is just a starter position. will add another 50 if and when the price approaches $24.

Rationale: (1) Floating Rate Securities Mitigate Interest Rate Risk: These bank loans will generally have a Libor float provision. As a short term rate rises, such as the 3 month Libor rate, the yield will increase which gives these loans some interest rate protection. There will be a point, however, when the rise in rates would cause a significant increase in the credit risk. The impact of rising rates on credit risk will vary from company to company. A countervailing force would be a rise in rates due to an improving economy which hopefully would be increasing the firm's profits and thereby reducing the credit risk.  In other words, a mixed bag of variables that probably are weighted on the positive side provided the rise in rates is largely offset by higher profits.

(2) Potential for Higher Income Generation When Short Rates Start to Return to Normal Levels 

Risks (1) Credit Risks: Even with senior secured first lien loans, there are substantial credit risks involved in the securities owned by this fund. The owned loans are almost all junk rated, due in  to the excessive leverage used by the borrowers. That leverage would be traceable in significant part to leveraged buyouts where the acquired company is loaded up with debt as part of its acquisition by a private equity firm (some called them leeches). Frequently, a solvent company is placed on the edge of survival by this process, unable to pay down debt with cash flow and constantly in need of debt refinancings.

The prospectuses discusses the abundant risks starting at page 77-80: invescopowershares.com/pdf Investors need to read the risk sections contained in prospectuses.

The risks are somewhat mitigated by the diversity of the portfolio, the number of holdings, and the first lien status of the loans.

Future Buys: I will add another 50 if and when the price falls below $24. I will not buy more than 100 due to the risks.

I am more likely to buy more shares of a U.S. investment grade fund, but only when I am convinced that the FED is about to embark on one of its long interest rate increase cycles.

There are several floating rate ETFs that own investment grade bonds:

Market Vectors® Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR)

iShares Floating Rate Note Fund (FLOT)

FLRN - SPDR Barclays Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF

As noted below, I went ahead and bought a Canadian floating rate bond fund with better credit quality and a higher yield.


3. Added 100 of the Stock CEF IGD at $8.91 (see Disclaimer):

2013 Bought 100 IGD at $8.91

Security Description: The ING Global Equity Dividend & Premium Opportunity Fund (IGD) is a buy-write worldwide stock closed end fund.

SEC Filed Shareholder Report for the Period ending 8/31/12: SEC

Sponsor's webpage: ING Global Equity Dividend and Premium Opportunity Fund - Fund Profile - Overview

IGD page at the CEFA

IGD Page at Morningstar (rated 4 stars: average three year discount 1.75%; dividend supported by a return of capital)

This fund currently pays a monthly dividend of $.084 per share, down from $.093 in September 2012.  Distributions I would not count on that distribution remaining at that level given that it is being supported by a return of capital. Assuming it was continued for one year, the dividend yield would be about 11.31% at a total cost of $8.91 per share.

Prior Trades: While I have earned a good income from this CEF, it has not yet been a successful investment for me. Hopefully, the European equities will become a bonus rather than a drag in the coming years, as suggested in a recent Barron's cover story. Barrons

I can find only two references to prior purchases in the blog.

Added 50 IGD at $8.78 (December 2011)

Bought 100 IGD at $10.94 (August 2010)

Rationale: (1) Income Generation With Appreciation Potential: The dividend yield is around 11.31% at  a total cost of $8.91. Performance has been weak for the past five years due largely to matters outside of the fund's control due to owning stocks worldwide. What may have been a drag for the past five years may turn into a tailwind over the next five. This would be entirely possible with IGD's European equities.

(1) Selling at A Larger Than Average Discount to Net Asset Value: While I prefer to buy stock CEFs at greater than 10% discount to net asset value, I will make an exception when the fund is selling at a much higher discount than its three year average and the discount is close to 10%. The average three year discount for IGD is 1.75% and the shares were trading at a 8.81% discount to net asset value.

Data Day Prior to Purchase 1/3/13
Closing Net Asset Value Per Share: $9.71
Market Price: $8.82
Discount: -9.17%

Data Day of Purchase 1/4/2013
Closing Net Asset Value Per Share: $9.76
Market Price: $8.89
Discount: -8.81%

Risks and Disadvantages (1) Subpar Performance: The five year performance number is a -.79%. Performance I would give that a poor rating. I am making allowances now since the fund is a worldwide fund with significant exposure to Europe which would be a drag leading to unsatisfactory past results overall.

(2) The Normal Sundry List of Risks: The normal risks of buy-write stock CEFs that invest worldwide are also present, which include of course currency risk, stock risk, country risk, risks associated with a buy write strategy and the risks generally applicable to CEFs including an expansion of the discount to par value.

Future Buys: I am not going to make anymore open market purchases. I am going to start reinvesting the dividend, making an exception to my rule requiring a greater than 10% discount to net asset value, since IGD is close to that number and the discount is currently substantially above IGD's average three year discount to net asset value of 1.75%.


4. Bought 200 of the Canadian Bond ETF XFR at 20.13 CADs (Canadian Dollar (CAD) Strategy)(see disclaimer):

2013: Bought 200 XFR:CA at 20.13 CADs

As noted above, the settlement currency was in Canadian dollars that I already own. I presently have a surplus of CADs earning nothing.

This will be a low yielding security. I am not likely to be able to pay my nursing home expenses with the dividends paid by this fund. When rates start to go up in Canada, and eventually that will happen, I will be paid more than now. The current dividend yield at a total cost of $20.13 CADs is around 1.6% according to Marketwatch. I did not add up the variable monthly dividends to verify that number. I already know that it is low.

Security Description: The iShares DEX Floating Rate Note Index Fund (XFR) owns high quality floating rate Canadian bonds.

Sponsor's Website: XFR Overview - iShares ETFs (EXPENSE RATIO= .2%; holdings 44 )

Sponsor's Fact Sheet: ‎ca.ishares.com .pdf

Holdings: XFR Holdings

Current Credit Ratings:



Monthly Distributions: XFR Distributions

Top Ten Holdings:


The Canada Housing Trust (CHT) is a special purpose entity created and managed by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) which is an agency of Canada's government. CMHC guarantees the timely payment of interest and principal on the bonds issued by CHT. The obligations of CMHC constitute direct and unconditional obligations of the Government of Canada. Hence, the Canada Housing Trust bonds will carry the same rating as Canada which is AAA.

(see discussion at ‎www.td.com.pdf)


Prior Trades: None

Rationale: (1) High Quality Bonds and Interest Rate Risk Mitigation:  The attractiveness of this security is that it has high quality securities (preservation of capital), pays me something which is better than nothing, and will pay me more when rates go up. Unlike a fixed coupon bond, this fund mitigates interest rate risk due because the bonds will increase their coupons as short term rates increase.

Risk: (1) Current Probable Negative Real Interest Rates: Well, this is true. But, I am earning more of a negative real rate of return with my CAD stash which earns nothing.

(2) Artificially Low Short Term Rates Likely to Persist: Short term rates are being held artificially low by central banks around the world now. Short term rates would be much higher based on future inflation expectations. The ten year TIP break-even is currently 2.5% which is the market's estimate of the average inflation rate in the U.S. over the next ten years. I do not have the Canadian break-even rate. Due to financial repression of the responsible members of developed nations around the world by central bankers, I am not now receiving the benefits from this security that would otherwise be available in a free interest rate market, and that is unfavorable.

(3) Currency Risks: I am a long term holder of Canadian dollars. From my viewpoint, I do not face any currency risk for my CAD stash since I have no intention of converting those CADs back into USDs unless it would be insane not to do it. (e.g. 1 CAD buys 1.5 USD in a spike down that makes no long term sense).  However, anyone who is not similarly situated faces currency risk. It would not take much of a decline in the CAD/USD exchange rate to wipe out the negligible annual dividend yield.

The Canadian Dollar strategy is designed to increase my CAD position with dividends and some profit taking over a long period of time. The following snapshots are recent dividend payments made in CADs:




5. Sold Remaining U.S. Steel 7.5% Senior Bond Maturing in 2022 at 106.5-ROTH IRA (see Disclaimer):

2013 Sold 
I bought this bond in September 2012. I was satisfied with total return so I sold it. Item # 1 Bought 1 U.S. Steel 7.5% Senior Bond Maturing 3/15/22 at 99


This post is already long enough. I will discuss another trade from yesterday in next week's post since it involves another play on the emerging market "super cycle" thesis.

Politics & Etc:

1. Marsha Blackburn: Among the many True Believers in the House of Representatives is the Congresswoman from the Seventh Congressional District in Tennessee. Marsha is the kind of person that would gladly cause a debt default by the U.S. government unless the Democrats agreed to slash entitlement spending and programs for the poor while of course giving more tax breaks to the wealthiest of Americans.

I am not going to mince words on this subject. Any politician who refuses to vote for a debt increase has committed an act equivalent to treason against this nation. The repercussions from a first ever U.S. default would be far more damaging to the nation's interests than all of the acts of treason committed against U.S.

She opposed the recent fiscal cliff deal preferring to let tax rates go up for all Americans unless the rich also received an extension of the Bush tax cuts. She would have allowed the United States to fall into the financial abyss in 2008 rather than support TARP or any program designed to avert a Great Depression other than the granting of more tax breaks to the Job Creators.

She supported Ryan's voucher plan for Medicare in 2011 that would have substantially raised the Medicare costs for her constituents who were then younger than 55 which plan granted more tax breaks to the rich. Item # 1 GOP's Plan To Bankrupt the Middle Class (data taken from the CBO and the Kaiser Foundation, www.kff.org/medicare/.pdf) In short, she is a True Believer, a fanatic and zealot of the worst kind.

Marsha joined 66 other Republicans as the only no votes that would grant FEMA more money for Sandy flood relief. Congressional Bills and Votes - NYTimes.com Many of those same GOP members, including Marsha, voted for legislation that provided funding for disasters in their own districts but not for the Sandy victims. The zealot and Ayn Rand devotee Paul Ryan was another no vote.

Is that vote un-American? In my book, an unwillingness to support disaster victims with federal aid, unless some other program is first cut, is contrary to core American values. I remember Eric Cantor  wanted to condition aid to the Joplin tornado victims on spending cuts in other areas.

Jon Stewart skewered Cantor's position on Joplin: Cantor Won't?

Having made the foregoing comments, I would also blame Obama and the Democrats for a debt default unless they offer some serious spending cuts and at least offer to take a baby step in changing entitlement spending on a long term basis. The baby step would be using chained CPI as the inflation adjustment.

2. Chained CPI: For decades, it has been known that chained CPI provides a more accurate way to measure cost of living than traditional CPI. Since traditional CPI yields a larger number for its cost of living adjustments for federal programs and tax brackets, it is favored by the American voters and the politicians who cater to their desires to have more benefits that are paid with borrowed money. The use of chained CPI would save about $300 billion over ten years. FactCheck.org

An article published by PolitiFact shows that neither republicans nor democrats want to support that sensible change for the usual and obvious political reason. It would be viewed negatively by the current recipients of SS who vote in large numbers.

3. Guns For Teachers in Tennessee: As expected the GOP in Tennessee has taken up the NRA clarion call to put armed guards in every school in America. Of course, when a nut case guard with a gun starts shooting, it will not be instructive to them in any way. The GOP is taking the recommendations of the NRA further, with proposed legislation to arm teachers provided they undergo some kind of training.  Well, I remember my teachers from school, and I can not recall a single one who would be capable of handling a firearm in a competent manner.

I do recall an assistant football coach in Alabama who taught history in 9th grade and knew nothing of course about the subject. He was a gun enthusiast but probably not some one you would want packing in the classroom. I recall vividly his defense of the Vietnam war: "people get killed in car wrecks everyday and we don't stop driving cars, do we?". The LB was of course already well versed on matters and lashed into this idiot in full cross examination mode.

Guns in bars? This was the most important priority of Tennessee state republicans and was accomplished by them first, followed by guns in parks and children's playgrounds; and now grade school teachers will be packing soon enough.

I recall the justification for guns in parks. A bear came out of nowhere once and caused a little girl to get scared. No one was hurt as I recall. If the adults had been packing, they could have shot the bear, made it really mad, so that it would have killed the little girl. When a person's brain is ossified at birth, reasoning will generally not be one of that person's stronger qualities.

A few years ago, I saw a simulation where a group of students were in a classroom. Those students knew what was about to happen. A gunman was going to walk into the classroom and shoot the teacher and then point the laser gun at the students. A trained police officer was seating in the back. As the first shot rang out, the students scattered all over. The police officer would take out his laser gun and start firing. Who did he hit? He hit the fleeing students and the shooter more often than not successfully shot the officer. In those situations, even trained people have trouble processing information and it would be even more difficult when the situation is real. As I recall, and I may be wrong about this facet of the simulation, there was an army Ranger who took out the shooter with one shot and missed the students. Very few people could remain calm enough, process all of the information under stress and then react quickly with accuracy. I understand that those advocating arming teachers are running their own simulations now to show that the teachers can handle the matter.

4. Bill Gross on Fed Bond Buying: Bill Gross was quoted by a reporter at  CNBC that the Fed was buying "80% of everything the Treasury issues right now". Okay, I understand what is propping up the treasuries at ridiculously low levels. My question is not whether this is good policy or not. I am starting to wonder whether it is sane or insane?