Saturday, February 7, 2015

Pared Interest Rate Risk: Sold 300 JTP at $8.55, 50 CORPRA at $26.25, 100 NBB at $21.25 (Roth IRA), 50 EMQ $25.61 and Bought 2 Vanguard Natural Resources 7.875% Senior Unsecured Bond Maturing April 2020 at $86.59

Stable Vix Pattern (Bullish):
Links to SeekingAlpha Instablog, Articles and Comments:

South Gent's Instablog | Seeking Alpha

South Gent's Articles | Seeking Alpha

South Gent's Comments | Seeking Alpha


**************************
I provide a longer description of my rationale for the foregoing trades in the introduction setion to this SA Instablog:  Bought 2 Vanguard Natural Resources 7.875% Senior Unsecured Bonds Maturing 4/1/20 At 86.59 - South Gent | Seeking Alpha


1. Bought 2 Vanguard Natural Resources 7.875% Senior Unsecured Bond at 86.59 Maturing 4/1/2020 (see Disclaimer):


Snapshot of Trade:



Order Details:



The order details shows that the bond has junk ratings. The current ratings are B3 from Moody's and B from S & P.

I had to pay the seller of those two bonds accrued interest in the amount of $56.44. I will receive that amount back when Vanguard Resources makes the next semi-annual payment on 4/1/2000. The broker will include the entire semi-annual interest payment in my 1099 for this tax year, which then requires a tax accounting adjustment to reflect that I did not in fact receive $56.44 of that payment.

Many individual investors prefer buying exchange traded bonds that can be bought just like a stock due to par values generally being $25 or less, the ease of transacting in small lots, and the avoidance of an accrued interest payment to the seller. I discuss the categories of exchange traded bonds in an old post titled Exchange Traded Bonds: New Gateway Post. One category of those bonds, which I call Trust Certificates, has now been reduced to a few fixed coupon securities due to redemptions, but was a niche exchange traded bond category that provided easy and significant profits for those willing to buy in 2008-2009 due to the market's substantial and frequently bizarre mispricing of those securities.

Current Yield: 9.09% ($7.875 ÷ 86.59=9.09+%; cost is not adjusted up for the $4 commission)

Yield To Maturity: 11.329% (assumes VNR pays par value at maturity)

Security Description: This security is a $1,000 par value senior unsecured note issued by the MLP Vanguard Natural Resources (VNR).

Bond Prospectus

All of the factual statements made in that previous sentence are material.

A senior bond is going to be senior to all other securities in the capital structure other than a senior secured bond or bank loan for the collateral covered by the lien interest.

It is very important to me that this bond is senior in the capital structure to the equity preferred stocks issued by Vanguard.

Vanguard Resources has three equity preferred stocks outstanding.

Vanguard Natural Resources LLC Series A (VNRAP)
Vanguard Natural Resources LLC 7.625% Cumulative Preferred Series B (VNRBP)
Vanguard Natural Resources LLC 7.75%  Series C (VNRCP)

I find it odd that those potentially perpetual preferred stocks have lower current yields than the senior unsecured bond. This is a summary of the current yields based on last Friday's closing prices as calculated by Marketwatch:

Series A 8.12%
Series B 8.79%
Series C 8.92%

As I sometimes have to say, to each their own.  It is impossible for me to comprehend the pricing of those equity preferred stocks in relation to a senior unsecured bonds whose interest payments can not be deferred and have a superior claim to income, cash and assets both before and during a BK.

The preferred dividends are cumulative and have to be paid in full as long as VNR pays a cash distribution to the common shareholders (standard preferred dividend stopper clause). A preferred stock stopper clause can be found in the Series A Prospectus at page S-22

Once no cash is paid to the common unit owners, and any other remaining terms in the stopper clause are obeyed, VNR can defer the preferred stock dividends.

The MLP structure is a major negative for a bond owner, since capital is not being retained to grow the business, pay down debt or used as a significant rainy day fund. Money is flying out the door to the common unit owners leaving a minimal capital cushion for the bond owners.

Interest payments are paid semi-annually at the fixed coupon rate of 7.875% per annum.

Unless redeemed early, the bond matures on 4/1/2020.

Vanguard would have to pay 103.94 or $1,039.4 per $1,000 per value bond for an optional redemption after 4/1/2016, plus accrued interest to the redemption date. That premium is reduced to 101.97 for a redemption between 4/1/2017 and 4/1/18. Only par value plus accrued interest has to be paid thereafter for an optional redemption (page S-94). If energy prices and rates are favorable at some point before maturity, Vanguard could rationally exercise the call right to refinance this bond, even if the rate was only slightly lower, just to extend the maturity by several years.

There is also a change in control provision that is described starting at page S-94 of the Prospectus.

Common Unit Quote:  Vanguard Natural Resources LLC
SEC Filings for VNR


The FINRA page for this bond contains material information about it, including the trades and a chart showing the price history. This bond was trading at over $108 back in July 2014. When the crude oil price started to crater, so did the value of this bond. The percentage decline for the bond was substantially less than the 50%+ decline in the WTI crude price. There was only a brief period when the bond's price declined below 80 before quickly recovering to mostly a range bound trade between $85 and $90.

The closing trade last Friday (2/6/15) was at $87.96, slightly above my trade price earlier last week.

Another SA Contributor, Downtown Investment Advisor who is a registered investment advisor, recommended that investors "consider" purchasing this bond after doing their own due diligence. Seeking Alpha His reasons include the following: Vanguard lives within its means, has "good" hedges in 2015, and debt service is not an issue with crude in a sustained $40 price environment. There is uncertainty, however, as hedges roll off in 2016 and thereafter.

As noted in the following section, the market has a different view of risk based on the current pricing.

That observation does not mean that bond investors are correctly measuring the risks of any of these bonds. I am simply drawing a conclusion about the market's current risk assessments drawn from price and yields.


Market Disagreement With Bond Ratings: The current and YTM yields of this bond are not consistent with other B3 rated bonds. The Vanguard 2020 yield is more consistent with bonds rated CCC- to CCC+ under some distress.  The pricing of this 2020 Vanguard bond by bond investors reflects a current opinion that this bond is significantly riskier than the average B3 rated bond.

I did a search at FINRA of B rated bonds maturing in 2020 and come up with the following bonds that illustrate this differential, with YTM's based on last Friday's closing prices.  I searched only for B3 rated bonds and found a good size sample with companies whose names started with an "A". I also provide the S & P rating in parenthesis.

Acadia Healthcare 6.125%: 5.572% (B3, B-)
Accuride 9.5%: 5.811% (B3, B-)
Air Canada 8.75%: 5.786%  (B3)
Alcatel-Lucent 8.875%: 4.51% (B3, B)
America Builders and Contractors Supply 5.65%: 5.22% (B3, B)
Amsurg 5.625%: 4.68% (B3, B-)
Aramark 5.75%: 4.368%  (B3, BB)

The average yield range would probably be in the 5% to 6% range. There are some bonds perceived to be higher risk in the 7% to 9% range. An Ancestry.com, for example, had a 8.22% YTM, and the Canadian power producer Atlantic Power has a B3 rated 2020 with a 7.515% yield. I am familiar with both of those two companies.  I am surprised  that the Atlantic Power bond is priced to yield so much less than the Vanguard 2020.

It would be my opinion that the yields on those B3 rated bonds are grossly inadequate for their credit risks. Junk bond credit risk is substantially being underpriced now.

Last Earnings Report: I just took a snapshot of the recent numbers:



3Q14 Earnings Press Release


Page 3 VNR 2014 Q3 10-Q

In terms of distributable cash flow, the company reported $53M or $.63 per common unit.

As of 9/30/14, VNR had outstanding $550M of the 2020 senior unsecured note and a $1.375B draw on its senior secured credit facility. In a worse case scenario, the size of that draw will be material in a recovery scenario for the senior unsecured bonds.

The company describes its hedges between pages 13-15 and 42-45. I do not trade in the options or futures markets, and at best a limited understanding of VNR's hedging.

I simply have to accept what the company says about those hedges:

2015
Oil 70% hedged at $91.95
Gas 81% hedged at $4.32

2016:
Oil 31% at $90.6
Gas 62% at $4.37

2017:
Gas 36% at $4.21

Natural gas liquids, which account for 12-13% of revenues are hedged only at 6% this year.

Page 4 Earnings Call Transcript | Seeking Alpha

Rationale: I am balancing risks with potential rewards. With a bond, I can measure the reward precisely. If Vanguard survives to make all interest payments and pays off the principal amount at maturity on 4/1/2020, and I then own this bond, I know exactly to the penny my reward

Interest Payments: $731.06

04/1/2015: $22.31
10/1/2015: $78.75
2016: $157.5
2017: $157.5
2018: $157.5
2019: $157.5
4/1/2020: $78.75


Profit On Bond: $264.20
Cost $1,731.8 + $4 commission=$1,735.8
Principal at Maturity: $2,000

Total Return: $995.26

Total Percentage Cumulative Return Based on Total Cost = 57.33725%

The return numbers would have to be adjusted when and if Vanguard elects to redeem early.

I can not measure the downside risk in the same way since I would have to know now the unknowable including the recovery value in a bankruptcy. S & P and other rating services make estimates of a recovery value, but those estimates could be way off depending on the then existing circumstances during and at the conclusion of the BK process. One of the main unknowables is the amount of senior secured loans taken out as a firm slides into a BK filing and then the amount of secured secured DIP financing taken out before the firm emerges out of a BK, both taken in conjunction with the then existing asset values.  

In general, I would assume a recovery in the 25% to 50% range, based on par value, which assumes a variety of economic scenarios which then may not exist, including a higher price for crude compared to now and no major increase in the lien debt compared to the value of the assets. Another general rule of thumb is that the common and equity preferred stock owners will receive zilch in a bankruptcy. If I owned one of Vanguard's preferred stocks, and the firm filed for bankruptcy, I would most likely not expect to recover a penny.  

Risks: I have summarized several risks in prior sections. Ultimately the risks are dependent on future unknowable events. The risks will increase or decrease based on future energy prices, hedging, drilling costs, production rates and many other material variables.

The risks now are far less for Vanguard survival's than for a firm that is more heavily leveraged with less hedge protection.

With a recovery in crude prices to over $80, and then steadying, I would reasonably anticipate that this bond will again trade over par value. A slide from the current prices to below $40 will likely increase the downside pricing pressure.

Since I can at best just make an informed guess about material factors impacting Vanguard and this bond over the next five years, I can really only control my risks by limiting my exposure at the front end after making a decision that the yield and potential profit at maturity (or an early redemption) are worth the risks as I judge them now.    

Risks relating to the bond are described starting at page S-15 of the Prospectus.  Risks relating to VNR's operations are described starting at page S-21 and in the last VNR Annual Report starting at page  24, 10-k.

Future Buys/Sells: I am in a trading mode for junk E & P bond buys. I have already flipped three of them. After selling 2 Linn 2020 bonds, I did buy those back recently after a  decline took the price below my last entry point. Bought Back The Linn Energy 8.625% Senior Unsecured Bond Maturing In 2020 - Linn Energy, LLC (NASDAQ:LINE) | Seeking Alpha

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

The following sells have the same underlying rationale:

Rationale: The last employment report caused me to increase the odds of an interest rate rise that would cause a material price loss in leveraged bond CEFs and other securities with duration risk.


I have a more detailed discussion of the rationale in the introduction section to this Instablog:  Bought 2 Vanguard Natural Resources 7.875% Senior Unsecured Bonds Maturing 4/1/20 At 86.59 - South Gent | Seeking Alpha

Future Buys: I will need significantly lower prices to buy these securities back.



2.  Sold 100 NBB at $21.25+ Roth IRA (see Disclaimer): The Nuveen Build America Fund (NBB) is a long duration and leveraged bond CEF that declined to below $18 during the 2013 rate spike. Nuveen Build America Interactive Chart For a 100 share lot, a decline to $18 from $21.25 would cause a $325 reduction in value, or about 2.33+ years of dividends at the current monthly dividend rate of $.116 per share.

In addition, if I am able to buy back these shares at close to $18, I increase my dividend yield compared to the prior purchase at $20.1.


Snapshot of Trade:

2015 Roth IRA Sold 100 NBB at $21.25

Snapshot of Profit:

2015 Roth IRA 100 NBB +$101.7



Item # 1 Roth IRA: Added 100 NBB at $20.1

With monthly dividends, total return comes to $206.1 or 10.22% in 8+ months.

Prior Trades: My last discussion was in this post: Item # 6 Added 50 of the Bond CEF NBB at $17.76 (November 2013 Post)

Other trades are linked in this post: Item # 2 Added 50 NBB at $18.55 (6/29/13 Post). Some flips have realized to date $184.16 in profits: Sold 100 NBB at $20.13-ROTH IRA November 2011Sold 100 NBB at $20.07 November 2011Sold 50 NBB @ 19.24 in the Regular IRA December 2010.

Security Description: The Nuveen Build America Bond Fund (NBB) owns Build America Bonds which are taxable municipal bonds. The fund will terminate on or about 6/30/2020 and will then distribute the fund's assets to its shareholders.

NBB uses leverage. The sponsor reports a 27.49% effective leverage as of 12/31/14.  Funds are borrowed short term to buy longer term securities.  A rise later this year in the federal funds rate will increase the borrowing costs incurred by leveraged CEFs that borrow short term.

Closing Prices Day of Trade 2/6/15
NAV Per Share: $23.32
Market Price: $21.28
Discount: -8.75%
Average Discounts 1 and 3 Years: -9.13% and -7.59%

Sourced: CEFConnect

The fund is tilted toward "A" or better rated bonds.

NBB: Last SEC Filed Shareholder Report For Period Ending 9/30/14

I am basically trading these long duration funds. I also own them to address a low probability scenario which I usually just call the Japan Scenario. In that low possibility scenario, rates remain range bound at abnormally low levels, possibly even moving lower, due to persistent low inflation with drifts into deflationary periods. The best security to own during a deflationary period would be high quality long term bonds. Since I assign a very low probability to the Japan Scenario, I will address it with a limited number of securities and NBB is just one of them.

When I decrease the odds of a Japan Scenario for the U.S., as I have just done, this is the type of fund that I will quickly jettison.

This CEF has significant interest rate given its long duration number.

As of 12/31/14, the fund calculated the leveraged adjusted duration at 11.65 years. NBB - Holdings and Detail Tab

To calculate how a fund will react to a change in interest rates, the rule of thumb is to multiply the duration by the percentage change in interest rates for similar maturities and bonds. Get to know your bond fund: Duration | Vanguard Thus, a 2% rise in rate could generate almost about a 23+% loss in NBB's value. That is a huge amount of interest rate risk for the yield.


I tread softly with these long duration funds unless I significantly raise the odds of a Japan Scenario for the U.S.

The timing of the liquidation could be disadvantageous to shareholders, which would be the case with interest rates spiking near the liquidation date in 2024 that causes significant price deterioration in the securities just before they are sold by the fund.

3. Sold 50 EMQ at $25.61 (see Disclaimer):


Snapshot of Trade:



Snapshot of Profit:

2015 EMQ 50 Shares +$18.08 

A five year chart shows that there has not been an opportunity to capture much of a price gain. This investment grade bond has only temporarily traded below its par value for the past years and the upside appreciation is restrained to the issuer's call option at par value.

Security Description: The Entergy Mississippi Inc. 6.00% Series First Mortgage Bonds 2032 (EMQ) is a first lien bond issued by Entergy Mississippi, a wholly owned subsidiary of Entergy Corp. (ETR).   

Entergy Mississippi is engaged in the distribution and transmission of electricity that serves 440,000 or so customers in 45 of Mississippi's 82 counties. A map of its service area can be found at Entergy Mississippi - Service Area.

EMQ is a first lien bond on "substantially all" of Entergy Mississippi's property. The coupon is 6% on a $25 par value. EMQ mature on 11/1/2032, but may be called now at the $25 par value plus accrued interest. This security just went ex interest on 1/29/15 for its quarterly distribution.

Prospectus

The secured interest is described starting at page 5 of the Prospectus.

Moody's  has a A3 rating on this first lien bond.

Interest rate risk is the dominant risk.

Interest rate risk is asymmetric between the owner of this bond and its issuer. Entergy Mississippi could redeem it at anytime now when it is in its interest to do so. The reason for a redemption would be that the issuer could refinance this debt at a lower coupon rate and possibly even extend the maturity.

On the other hand, if rates rise, the owner of the security would be stuck with the two undesirable options: sell at a loss and then reinvest the proceeds into a higher yielding security or keep EMQ as the price falls and forego the increased income from another security that could have been acquired with the funds tied up in EMQ.

In this kind of heads the issuer wins, tails the owner loses, there is not much upside when buying near par value but the downside risk could be considerable with a significant spike in long term rates given the long duration of this bond.

This buy has a chance of being productive with longer term interest rates and inflation remaining about where they are now for several years. A 1% rise in long term rates would cause this security to decline significantly in value.

I would roughly estimate that a 1% increase in rates for similar quality and maturity bonds would cause about a 10% to 12% slide in EMQ's price using a Bond Calculator available at SIFMA to formulate a reasonable range. The duration is slightly more than 11 years.

The rise in rates starting in May 2013 resulted in a slide from over $26 to below $25. EMQ Interactive Chart If this bond was not subject to being called, it would likely have been trading well over the prevailing prices in May 2013 and now.

Prior Trade: Item # 2 Paired Trade: Sold 50 EMQ at $26.49 and Bought 50 EFM at $24.99-Item # 5 Roth IRA: Bought 50 EMQ at $24.83 (8/31/13 Post)

I still own 50 EMQ shares held in a Roth IRA. Item # 4 Bought Roth IRA: 50 EMQ at $25.11 (8/23/14 Post)


3.  Sold 300 JTP at $8.55 (see Disclaimer):

Snapshot of Trade:




Snapshot of Profit:

2015 JTP 300 Shares  +$95.1
Bought 300 JTP at $8.18 (1/6/2015 Post)


Security Description: The Nuveen Quality Preferred Income Fund (JTP ) is a leveraged closed end fund that invests in preferred stocks and bonds. "predominantly" in securities rated investment grade by at least one rating agency.

Sponsor's website: JTP-Nuveen Quality Preferred Income Fund (as of 11/28/14, leverage at 27.96% with an annualized cost based on the latest month of 1.01%; 211 holdings; average effective duration was 5.66 years; average leverage adjusted duration was 7.86 years).

"Duration—What an Interest Rate Hike Could Do to Your Bond Portfolio"-FINRA

The discount at the time of my purchase was -11.09%, using my purchase price of $8.18. The closing net asset value per share that day was $9.2.

Closing Data Day of Trade 2/6/15:
NAV Per share: $9.28
Market Price: $8.51
Discounts: -8.3%
Average Discounts 1, 3 and 5 Years: -9.96%, -6.45%, 5.87%

Sourced: CEFConnect

JTP Page at Morningstar (rated 2 stars; no analyst report)

The fund is weighted in investment grade securities.

The monthly distribution rate was $.052 per share through the November 2014 payment. The fund increased that rate to $.053 in December and then to $.055 for January and February 2015. Nuveen Closed-End Funds Declare Monthly Distributions The fund also paid out an additional distribution of $.0905 per share last December. Nuveen Quality Preferred Income Fun  Dividend Date & History

I have one prior round trip trade:

Sold Roth IRA: 200 JTP at $8.38 (7/5/14 Post)(snapshot of profit=$154.9 with a total return of $248.5 or 16.42%)-Bought 200 JTP at $7.53-Regular IRA (10/14/13 Post)

This fund generated substantial realized losses on investments during the Near Depression period. As of 7/31/14, the fund had a loss carryforward of $340.839+M and used $11.57+M of the loss carryforward during its F/Y ending 7/31/14 to shelter long term capital gains from taxation.

The loss carryforward is somewhat advantageous to a new owner who buys this security in a taxable account, assuming the investor views tax efficiency as a benefit. I personally do not view large capital gain distributions favorably when paid into a taxable account. The net asset value per share is adjusted down by the amount of the distribution, and I have a tax obligation even though my wealth was not increased by the distribution.

I did not own this CEF prior to a small purchase made in October 2013. I looked at the fund's portfolio prior to the Near Depression, and there was then no loss carryforwards. Instead, the fund had an unrealized gain of $21.55+M. (page 39-shareholder report for the period ending 12/31/2006). The fund had then a weighting in investment grade securities.

The problem was that many of these securities were issued by banks and REITs, and the prices of those securities were smashed in 2008 and into 2009. In many cases, the price of a $25 par value security went into single digits. If the fund had no leverage, it could have waited until the prices recovered, which happened fairly quickly thereafter. Buying those smashed securities in 2008-2009 was a major profit center for me.

However, given the magnitude of the price declines and the size of the leverage, I suspect that the fund had no choice but to sell positions at the worst possible time in order to reduce leverage. As of 12/31/2006, JTP had investments valued at $1.336+B with a cost of $1.313+B, and the last shareholder report showed that the investments were then valued at $828+M.

Whatever the cause, the foregoing history highlights risks even when the fund has a weighting in investment grade securities. During times of economic distress, those securities can be downgraded into junk status, which happened to securities issued by several financial institutions, and investors will frequently price those securities as if a bankruptcy is likely to happen when the odds are actually substantially less.

The fund summarizes risks starting at page 11 of its last SEC filed shareholder report.

I would emphasize what I call normal CEF risks. The market price is determined by the frequently irrational decisions of investors and may consequently stray a considerable distance from net asset value per share, either above or below.

It is entirely possible for a fund's net asset value per share to go up with the market price declining, or for the market price to decline at a significantly greater percentage rate than the net asset value per share during periods of market stress.

All that I can say now is that the discount to net asset value per share is significantly higher than the historical 3 and 5 year averages. I am consequently playing the possibility that the net asset value per share will increase and the discount will narrow after my purchase. The converse may actually happen, appropriately called the Double Whammy, where the discount widens after my purchase as the net asset value per share declines.

Another risk is that the FED will start to raise short term rates this year. This will increase the cost of borrowed funds for leveraged CEFs and consequently narrow the income spread between that cost and the yields generated by longer term securities bought with those borrowed funds. I do not currently expect more than a .5% increase in the federal funds rate this year, and any additional increases are likely to be slow and measured thereafter. An increase in short term borrowing costs will erode the income advantage of leveraged bond funds. They are able to generate more income for their investors than an unleveraged fund owning the same securities due to that spread.

It remains to be seen whether intermediate and longer term rates will increase or decrease during the next FED tightening cycle. Many bond investors now believe that the yield curve will flatten, as longer term rates continue to move down while short rates increase due to the FED ending ZIRP. It would obviously be unfavorable for leveraged bond funds for their short term borrowing costs to increase and for the securities bought with those borrowed funds to go down in value.


4. Sold 50 CORPRA at $26.25 (Equity REIT Common and Preferred Stock Basket)(see Disclaimer):

Snapshot of Trade:




Snapshot of Profit:

2015 CORPRA 50 Shares +$101.58
Item # 2 Bought 50 CORPRA at $23.9 (3/3/14)

Quarterly Dividends ($22.66 for 50 Shares/4 Periods)=$90.4

Total Return: $191.98 or 15.96% in 11+ months
 
Security Description: The Coresite Realty Corp. 7.25% Cumulative Preferred Series A (COR.PA) is an equity preferred stock issued by the REIT CoreSite Realty which owns data centers.

This security pays non-qualified and cumulative dividends at the fixed coupon rate of 7.25% on a $25 par value.

The prospectus contains dividend stopper (S-22) and change of controls provisions.

Prospectus


The dividends are cumulative.

The REIT has to pay cash dividends to the common shareholders when it has net income in order to maintain its tax status. The preferred stock owner has to be paid in full as long as the common shareholders receive any cash dividend, irrespective of the amount.

Unlike Mortgage REITs, equity REITs own property that will generally have a market value significantly above the total outstanding debt. In a BK, assuming no forced liquidation at the worst possible time (e.g. a depression), the common shareholders may get their equity wiped out, but there still may be something left for the preferred shareholders.

The liquidation preference clause, found at page S-7, gives the preferred shareholder a "liquidation" preference over the common share owners.

If a Mortgage REIT or a bank holding company went into BK, I would anticipate that their preferred stocks would become worthless, as their debt will far exceed the equity.

An Equity REIT that owns property may have some value for the preferred shareholder even in a BK, so the downside risk may not be zero, with the recoverable value in a BK ultimately dependent of course on the circumstances then existing which are not known now and may never come to pass in my lifetime anyway.

Risks relating to the preferred stock are discussed by the company starting at page S-12. Coresite discusses risks incident to its operations starting at page 17 of its recently filed 2013 Annual Report, SEC Form 10-K

Interest rate and volatility risks are probably the most important risks at the moment. Volatility can be caused by concerns or fears relating primarily to interest rates or creditworthiness or both.

This preferred stock was trading largely between $26-$27 in April/May 2013, same as now. COR.PA Stock Chart

The price hit $22.5 in December 2013. 

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

Bought Roth IRA: GE at $23.86 and the ETF VEU (Commission Free at Vanguard) at $46.96/Added to IEUR at $44.17 (Commission Free at Fidelity)

Stable Vix Pattern (Bullish):
Links to SeekingAlpha Instablog, Articles and Comments:

South Gent's Instablog | Seeking Alpha

South Gent's Articles | Seeking Alpha

South Gent's Comments | Seeking Alpha

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


1. Bought 30 GE at $23.86-Roth IRA (see Disclaimer): I discuss this trade in a recent SeekingAlpha Instablog:


Bought General Electric In Roth IRA At $23.86 - South Gent | Seeking Alpha

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Since I am buying ETFs in my brokerage accounts that are available commission free depending on the broker, I will buy anywhere from 5 to 20 shares whenever the spirt moves me. I am mostly averaging down on the foreign stock ETFs that have declined due to the strength of the dollar rather than the performance of the ordinary shares priced in local currencies. Since I do not know when the foreign currency declines will cease, I just nibble here and there, mostly on a random basis, thinking the brain dead dart throwing approach might work as well as the LB crunching a million variables and then reaching a decision sometime next year.  

2. Added 5 VEU at $46.96-Roth IRA (see Disclaimer): I have been adding low cost Vanguard international stock ETFs in my Roth IRA with cash flow. The parabolic rise in the USD has caused foreign securities priced in most major foreign currencies to plummet in value since May 2014. The ordinary shares prices in Euros, Canadian or Australian Dollars or British Pounds may have gone up in value, but the close to 20% across the bond currency declines against the USD would have overwhelmed gains and made share price losses in local currencies far worse. It is just a known peril of international investing.

I will generally step up my purchases of foreign securities after a parabolic rise in the USD, using my strong currency to buy assets that have depreciated in value in local currencies. That is what I am doing with these two ETF purchases in this blog, as well as several recent foreign stock purchases.

ETF Description: The Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (VEU) is a low cost and broad international stock ETF.

The expense ratio is low at just .15%. Vanguard I can buy the fund in my Vanguard brokerage account without paying a commission.

As of 12/31/14, the fund owned 2,463 stocks.




The geographic allocation is shown in this pie chart:


The 6.8% North America exposure shown in that pie chart is to Canada. The big 3 in Switzerland will invariably be weighted in the top 5 when the selection process is based on market capitalization. The market capitalization of Nestle, for example, is about CHF 230B (NESN:SWL) and Novartis is currently around CHF244B, (NOVN:SWL). I own the ADRs for both companies.

Compared to an ETF for the total U.S. stock market (VTI), VEU has performed miserably since its inception in 2007 and has substantially underperformed VTI over the past 1, 3, and 5 years.

Total Annualized Returns 3 and 5 years Based on NAV:

   
Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (VEU): 6.45% and  5.4%


Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI): 17.34% and 15.51

Without harping on the obvious, a 10%+ annualized difference over five years is just huge. I am glad that I have traded in and out of VEU.

Many investors would look at those numbers and simply avoid the poor performer and load up more on the best performing fund. Based on my experience, the outperformance of a broad stock index over a relatively long period of time is followed by lengthy period of underperformance. The past is frequently not prologue for the future. Over the next five years, international stocks could easily outperform the U..S. stock market just by shredding some of their existing problems and catching up in the valuation department.

Being naturally contrarian, I am drawn to underperforming asset classes and industry sectors. I am not exactly jumping off a cliff with my eyes closed with my current small adds in low cost foreign stock ETFs.

I do not believe that I have been discussing the small incremental adds in this ETF.


Prior Trades: I have discussed some more substantial trades here. The first round trip was part of the large sector rotation out of stocks in 2007 as previously described in this blog with snapshots.

2007 VEU 100 Shares +401.91

2010 VEU 100 Shares $862.98 

2011 VEU 100 Shares +$144.55

2013 VEU 50 Shares +$204.95
For this ETF, which has performed poorly compared to U.S. stocks since March 2009, trading has been the best option, but may not be going forward.

Total Realized Gains: $1,614.39

Rationale: The rationale is relatively simple. International stocks have substantially underperformed U.S. stocks over the past five years and are consequently less expensive in the aggregate.

When owned by a fund priced in USDs, those stocks have declined substantially in value just due to the parabolic rise in the USD, clipping close to 20% in price just on the currency exchange. Currency moves can last for several years, but recent up and down movements have been relatively short lived as shown in a ten year EUR/USD Chart

Unlike the ETF discussed below, VEU gives me broad exposure to all international stock markets including a significant allocation to emerging markets.


I achieve some worldwide diversification with this ETF and the one discussed below.

3.  Added 5 IEUR at $44.17-Commission Free in Fidelity Taxable Account (see Disclaimer): My last purchase was at $48.24 last September. The Euro has declined since that purchase on 9/9/14, going from about 1.2932 to 1.13 or 14.52% which will flow through into the values of Euro priced shares owned by a fund priced in USDs. So, that is a good lick just on the EURO currency devaluation.

Snapshot of Trade: 



Fidelity's confirmation contains the caveat that I must own these shares for 30 days before selling or I will be retroactively charged a commission:



Security Description: The iShares Core MSCI Europe ETF (IEUR) attempts to track an index composed of large, mid and small capitalization European equities.

The fact sheet shows that the three large Swiss firms are in the 1-3 largest weighted positions, with Nestle being the largest weighting at 2.67%. Since this index has a large number of holdings, the top ten positions represent only 18.62% of the index weighting as of 1/30/15.

Others in the top 10 include Novartis at 2.44%, Roche at 2.06%, SNY, GSK, SAN, HSBC, BP, TOT, and RDS (weighted at 2.13% when both share classes are totaled)

iShares Core MSCI Europe ETF | IEUR (expense ratio .14%; 983 holdings as of 1/30/15)

Index Data Sheet From MSCI  (as of 12/31/14: Dividend Yield 3.22%/Forward P/E 14.01)

TOP 25 Holdings:



Rationale and Risks: There are a number of reasons to go easy on a European stock ETF priced in USDs. I will just briefly discuss the risks first. Best to look down before engaging in star gazing, imagining what I will do with all of the riches bestowed upon me by an investment before I even achieve my first dollar in unrealized gains.

1. Currency Risk Is Front and Center Now: The European Central Bank has adopted monetary policies intended to drive the Euro down in value against the USD and other major currencies. So far, that campaign has been successful. EUR/USD Currency Conversion Chart A European stock ETF will also have securities priced in British Pounds, which has also been losing ground recently to the USD. GBP/USD Currency Conversion Chart There will also be some exposure to other European currencies including Norway's Krone and the Swiss Franc. The Swiss France did rise in value against the USD after the Swiss National Bank dropped its €1.2 peg.

In attempting to deal with this kind of risk, I chop my potential 200 share position into multiple small lots and will add to the position during price dips.

The decline in the Euro is a two edge sword. There are benefits to European companies that may offset the currency caused stock decline that will happen to a USD priced security that owns European securities priced in depreciating currencies. The currency decline will give many European exporters a price advantage compared to their competitors located in stronger currency nations and could consequently improve their revenues and profits.

2. Sluggish Growth Even During Recoveries/Increasing Odds of More Frequent Recessions: Most developed nations have a slew of long term structural problems. Europe has more than the U.S. and probably less than Japan. I would anticipate sluggish growth during the best of times and more frequent slippages into recession than in the past.

While growth in European markets will remain challenged, many of the large European companies are multinationals and derive an increasing percentage of their revenues and profits from faster growing markets.

The Prospectus contains the usual discussion of the "principal" risks starting at page S-3. Country risks are rising (moves toward country break-ups, increasing regulation, socialist tendencies). A break-up of the EU and the abandonment of the EURO as a common currency are also a risks.

The rationale for buying this security is primarily diversification, which is achieved at a very low cost given the negligible expense ratio and the ability to buy shares commission free at Fidelity.

Over the long term, I would expect that multinationals in Europe and the U.S. to benefit from growth opportunities in emerging markets, so I want some exposure to those large European multinationals, going beyond Unilever, Nestle and Novartis which I already own. The dividend yield is higher than SPY too.

The recent 20% or so devaluation in the Euro will give European multinationals an earnings and revenue lift when converting sales in stronger currencies back into the devalued Euro for reporting purposes. Those who manufacture product in a weak currency have a competitive advantage over those producing goods or services in a strong currency like the USD now.

Future Buys: With this ETF, I will simply be looking for an opportunity to average down in small lots, assuming that I can buy those lots commission free. I am currently substantially underweight Europe, and small adds to this ETF will not change that positioning.

In my Vanguard Roth IRA, I will be adding 5 share lots in their low cost European stock ETF, using cash flow and profits from my bonds as funding sources. I can buy Vanguard ETFs commission free in my Vanguard brokerage accounts. I am anticipating a recovery at some point in the Euro and British Pound that will create a tailwind rather than the current headwind.

I will be buying small lots (5 or 10 shares) of these Vanguard ETFs in my Roth IRA:

International:
Vanguard FTSE Europe (VGK)(expense ratio .12%)
Vanguard FTSE World ex-US (VEU)(expense ratio .15%)
Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO)(expense ratio .15%)

Sometime during the market day, I took a snapshot of my current Roth IRA positions in these three Vanguard ETFs, which are being bought with cash flow:




While I am substantially underweight in European stocks, I am overweighted in Switzerland.

Monday, February 2, 2015

Bought 50 SNY at $46.69/Added to the ETF ADRU at $22.54

Stable Vix Pattern (Bullish):
Links to SeekingAlpha Instablog, Articles and Comments:

South Gent's Instablog | Seeking Alpha

South Gent's Articles | Seeking Alpha

South Gent's Comments | Seeking Alpha

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

Recent Developments: 

The official manufacturing PMI for China fell into contraction territory with a January reading of 49.8. That was the first dip below 50 since September 2012.

The official services PMI for China was reported at 53.7 down from December's 54.1  The importance of services has been growing in China's economy and accounting for approximately 48.2% of China's economy last year.

The ECB's loan officer survey for the 4th quarter showed a healthy demand for loans in the Euro areas (see page ECB Bank Lending Survey 2014 4th Quarter)

The ISM manufacturing PMI slid to 53.5 in January from 55.1 in December. There does appear to be a slowdown starting late last year.

During economic expansions, the manufacturing PMI will bob up and down, usually between 50 to 55 after the initial burst coming out of a recession.  ISM Manufacturing-St. Louis Fed

In the initial stages of a recovery from a recession, the manufacturing PMI will be a leading indicator of a recovery. An investor will see a surge in the new order component as I pointed out in several posts during the 2009 spring.

Fast Recovery of New Orders Before Recession Ended

The manufacturing PMI will burst from a very low reading, possibly in the 30s to the high 50s and then settle back in that 50 to 55 range with occasional bursts to over 55 or even temporary downdrafts below 50.  


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

1. Bought 50 SNY at $46.69 (see Disclaimer):

This purchase qualifies under my Dividend Growth Strategy, but not my Large Cap Valuation Strategy due to the currently elevated P/E.

Item # 6 Common Stock Dividend Growth vs. Long Term Investment Grade Bonds (3/22/2010 Post)
Item # 3 Large Cap Valuation Strategy (5/29/2010 Post); 
Snapshot of Trade: 

Add caption
I bought the ADR traded in the U.S. and priced in USDs. The ADR closed at $46.6 on 1/27/15.

1 ADR=.5 ordinary shares  Sanofi shares 

The ordinary shares are traded in Paris: SAN.PA

To arrive at a price for the ADR, the current ordinary share price needs to be converted into USDs and dividend by two. 


Company Description: Sanofi ADS (SNY) is a large pharmaceutical company based in France. The company focuses on diabetes, vaccines, oncology, rare diseases, multiple sclerosis, consumer and animal health care.

Sanofi Website
Bloomberg Page for € Shares (dividend yield=3.41%; five year dividend growth of 4.94% as of 1/30/15 closing price)

Key Developments Page at Reuters

SNY SEC Filings

Several of the current products were developed at Genzyme that Sanofi acquired in 2011:



About Genzyme

Genzyme.com-Research and Development Pipeline

Sanofi has a number of diabetes products, with the biggest seller being Lantus, which generated sales of about $7.78B  in 2013. Unfortunately, U.S. patent protection expires this month and the EU patent expires shortly thereafter in May.

A generic version may not launch until the summer of 2016 due to a lawsuit filed by Sanofi against Eli Lilly that had developed a "biosimilar" drug.

Sanofi claims to have a new diabetes drug, Toujeo (U300), that works better than Lantus. Phase 3 Results.pdfReuters

The FDA accepted SNY's filing for review back in July 2014, but no decision has been reached yet by that agency. SNY believes that it will receive marketing approval in the first half. It would be a huge setback for the FDA to reject the application.

Another potential blockbuster drug waiting for the FDA's approval is Praluent with estimated 2020 sales of over $2B.

Regeneron and Sanofi announced late last month that the FDA had accepted the Praluent license application for priority review.

The recently FDA approved products for multiple sclerosis (Lemtrada and Aubagio), have the potential to reach blockbuster status according to some analysts.  Genzyme’s Lemtrada Approved by the FDAPress Announcements- FDA approves new multiple sclerosis treatment Aubagio


Consumer healthcare products were acquired when Sanofi bought Chattem in 2010. Those products include Gold Bond (skin lotions and powder), IcyHot, Selsun Blue (shampoo), Unisom (sleep aid), Kaopectate, Cortizone, Nasacort allergy products, and ACT mouthwash. Chattem Of those products, I use only the ACT mouthwash, which is just what my dentist recommended to me.


Chattem in turn had acquired many of those brands as cast-offs by the likes of JNJ and Abbott. The products acquired from JNJ were in turn acquired by JNJ from Pfizer.

In 2013, Sanofi's Chattem acquired the Rolaids brand from JNJ.


When Sanofi's Allegra product went off patent, Chattem launched that former allergy prescription medicine for over-the-counter sales. Like a lot of drugs sold by major pharmaceutical companies, Allegra (fexofenadine) was not developed by Sanofi, but by a company formerly known as Sepracor (now part of a Japanese drug company). Sepracor sold the development rights to another company who was then acquired by SNY. 

I view the foregoing product histories to be important since it gives me a feel on whether the drug company is developing product in-house or is paying up for product through expensive acquisitions. I have noted in the past that the current valuation of Pfizer is less than the amount paid by that company for acquisitions starting with Warner Lambert in 2000 ($112B cost) that brought Lipitor to Pfizer. Two subsequent large acquisitions were Pharmacia (2003-$60B) and Wyeth (2009-$68B): Item # 3 Bought 100 PFE at $28.7 (8/14/13 Post)Pfizer: Wyeth acquisition as more proof of Pfizer's failures (1/25/09 Post) Excluding the costs of a panoply of other deals, including King Pharmaceuticals, Innopharma, Coley Pharmaceuticals, and Vicuron Pharmaceuticals, the cost of those three acquisitions totaled about $240B vs. the 1/30/15 market cap of $197B.

Many investors were unhappy after SNY fired its chief executive Chris Viehbacher. That last link is to an article published in Fortune that explains in detail why that executive had to be fired, and it had nothing to do with his success at turning SNY around, or the warning about diabetes sales in the U.S. Another financial journalist viewed the firing as a huge mistake

Prior Trades: I have two minor prior trades that were apparently flips. I have no current memory of why I sold. I probably was just harvesting a trading profit on a small position. That seems to be confirmed in my discussion of the second small buy in 2010: "I sold those shares on a pop after the payment of the dividend." Bought 50 SNY at $34.21 

I did realize a small profit after harvesting a dividend payment. 
2009 SNY 50 Shares +$83.46 

I held the shares long enough to receive the annual dividend ($71.95): 

2009 SNY Dividend Payment $71.95

Total Return: $155.41 (11.72% annualized-holding period 3 months)

I would have been better off just keeping the shares rather than attempting what appears to be a dividend harvesting trading strategy.

SNY shares have not kept pace with the total returns of SPY since I first bought shares on 4/1/2009. SNY's total annual return from 4/1/2009 through 1/31/15 was 14.07% compared to 18.96% for SPY.

DRIP Returns Calculator-Dividend Channel

If I ended that calculation on 9/22/14, shortly before the decline in SNY shares after the company fired its CEO and cautioned about slowing growth in its diabetes division, the total annual return would improve to 19.71% compared to SPY's 20.16%.

Dividend History: I could only find information going back to 2004. Dividends are paid semi-annually in Euros. The ordinary share rate has been increased every year since 2004, going from €1.2 to €2.8 in 2013. The 2014 dividend has not yet been set but will go ex dividend in the spring.


To arrive at the dividend rate payable to the ADR share owner, the preceding Euro rates would need to be dividend by two and then I would have to have the conversion rates from Euros to USDs for each payment. I do not have that data.

With the plunge in the Euros, the next dividend payment will buy fewer USDs than the rate prevailing last year.

Assuming for purposes of illustration only a €2.8 conversion on 1/30/14 and on 1/30/15. The per share ADR payment would be $1.587 in 2015 and $1.9122 last year, or a 17% dividend cut due to the Euros recent devaluation with the dividend remaining constant at €2.8 divided by two for the ADR.

The flip side is that the shares are worth less in USDs; and the buyer now could receive a dividend increase with the Euro gaining in value after the purchase, with the amount of the increase dependent on the exchange rate at the time of conversion.

Assuming a 1/30/15 exchange rate and a €1.4 dividend payment (=$1.587 per share), the yield would be about 3.36% at a total cost of $46.69 per SNY ADR share.

However, if I assumed the same dividend at the 1/30/14 exchange rate, the yield then becomes about 4.1%.

EUR/USD Interactive Chart 

Whatever the dividend yield turns out to be in 2015, one things is for certain. It will be higher than the .95% yield on the German 30 year treasury bond as of last Friday. German Government Bonds- Bloomberg

Foreign Dividend Tax Withholding: The Deloitte International site notes that France has a 15% withholding tax. That is the amount withheld in the past when I owned the security in a Fidelity and Vanguard accounts. Both of those brokers made mass "relief at source" filings with France's tax authorities that reduced the tax from 30% to 15%. TD Ameritrade and Schwab did not perform that ministerial task and a 30% tax was levied by France on the dividend payment. I have not held a French dividend paying company in those later two brokerage since 2012, and I consequently do not know whether their unwillingness to perform that service persists to the current time. 

This link to a Depository Trust Company notice, regarding the Sanofi 2014 dividend, explains the procedure for securing "relief at source" that lowers the withholding from 30% to 15%. globetax.com/pdf That link may not work after a period of time, but can be found with a google search  There is a fee of $.005 per ADR associated with that filing which Fidelity will subtract from the dividend payment. For 50 shares, the fee will be $.25.  


Chart: The one year chart, comparing the prices of the ADR and the ordinary shares priced in Euros, highlights the currency risk. 



Initially during this one year period, SNY was outperforming the ordinary shares due to the Euro gaining slightly in value against the USD. That abruptly changed in late August when the Euro started to lose considerable value against the USD. 

The end result after the one year period was that the ADR had declined in value by 5.75% and the ordinary shares had risen by 12.64%. That 18.39% differential is attributable to the decline in the Euros value that flows through into the USD priced ADRs.   

Last Earnings Report: For the 2014 third quarter, Sanofi reported that net income increased 9.4% to €1.935B (constant currencies).

Non-GAAP E.P.S. was reported  €1.47 per share, up from €1.36 in the 2013 third quarter.

Sanofi calls its non-GAAP numbers "Business Income". That number would exclude, for example, the after tax impact of amortization of intangible assets, impairment of intangible assets, and restructuring costs (see page 17 of the earnings release) Including those items, E.P.S. was at €.92 and €2.32 for the first nine months. (page 20)

The most important item in the earnings report was the CEO's comment at page 1 that SNY has "recently seen a more challenging U.S. diabetes price environment which will impact our sales throughout 2015". That warning was probably the cause of SNY's price decline from $52.42 (10/27/14) to $48.07 on the next day. The shares fell again after the CEO was fired.


Sanofi provided in this report a breakdown of revenues by product category and geographic region. Rather than summarizing those details, I took snapshots of the relevant data that provides a clearer picture than a long discourse in words. I will just include the major product categories, and the diabetes snapshot highlights the importance of Lantus to the company.

Diabetes Sales: 

Diabetes Revenues
Genzyme Product Sales: 





Generics and Vaccine Sales:



Other "Innovative" Products:




Emerging market sales are growing at a rapid clip.

Sales by Region: 



Rationale:  Due to  the innovation originating from Genzyme, along with SNY's collaborations with another innovative company Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN), SNY looks to me to be well positioned with its pipeline product over the next several years, assuming no major hiccups in approvals.

The decline in the Euro has made the ADR cheaper to a new buyer now. The value of the Euro is near a ten year low.

While it is impossible to know now how much downside risk remains in the currency conversion, I suspect that there will come a time within the next two to five year when the Euro will return to 1.4 from its current perch around 1.13.

In other words, a lot of the currency risk associated with owning the USD priced ADR has already been removed by the approximate 20% devaluation that had already occurred when I bought the shares. (USD/EUR: 1.393 on 5/6/14 and 1.1248 on 1/27/15, or 19.25%) That 19.25 currency loss in the USD priced shares has at least been avoided by buying on 1/27/15 rather than on 5/6/14.

There is some dividend support as noted above.

The pipeline is probably the best or close to it for a major pharmaceutical company. (Morningstar 2014 Big Pharma Pipeline Rankings) The pipeline potential is a major reason for selecting a pharmaceutical stock. 

Risks: The currency risk is always omnipresent whenever a U.S. investor buys a foreign security. The impact on SNY's price, shown in the chart above, highlights the significance of currency exchange on share price.

While I do not see any near term problems involving FDA approval of key pipeline drugs, the FDA has been known to do the unexpected and delay approval or worst decline approval. If that happens to a major new drug, the negative impact on the share price will be both severe and fast. I would also note that I have no medical training and have not reviewed the literature relating to the trials.

It remains to be seen whether Lantus and the new pipeline diabetes drugs will allow SNY to continue its dominance in their field.

Future Buys: When I buy 50 shares, I am contemplating the possibility of averaging down with another 50 shares. I will not average up with this stock and will consider averaging down only after the FDA gives a green light to SNY's next generation diabetes drug.

2. Added to the ETF ADRU at $22.54 (see disclaimer):

Snapshot of Trade:

2015 Added 30 ADRU at $22.54

Snapshot of Most Recent Purchases: I have not sold any shares and have been reinvesting the dividend. I have not bought any shares in the open market since 2009. I bought 40 shares in August 2009 at $20.01 and 30 shares at $15.12 in April 2009:



Security Description: The BLDRS Europe 100 ADS Index Fund Fund  (ADRU) is an ETF that currently owns 80 European ADRs. It is not a popular fund, as shown by its current low market cap of $21M+.  When I initially purchased some shares, I simply viewed it as an alternative to buying European ADRs.

Top Ten Holdings as of 1/31/15: The fund has been hurt recently by its exposure to the large cap European energy companies BP, Royal Dutch and Total. Hopefully, most of the downside is already in those share prices.


The exposure to RDS is actually higher. The 3.62% weighting shown in the snapshot is for RDS/A. The fund also owns RDS/B with a 2.35% weighting. Unilever would be in the top ten by combining the 2.24% UN and 1.59% UL weightings.

The fund has also lost ground recently due to the decline in the Euro and British Pound against the USD. Those declines flow through into the pricing of the ADRs. Again, hopefully, most of the currency risk has already occurred when I added this small 30 share lot.

The European financial weighted was 21.62% as of 1/31/15 and those stocks have been a drag for some time. Hopefully, the worm will turn for them. The second largest financial weighting is in SAN which took a tumble recently after slashing its dividend.

Needless to say, I am not taking much of a risk with a 30 share add to a turnaround in any of the problems impacting the performance of the stocks owned by this ETF.

The sponsor's website has a description of the risks: ADRU-Product Detail A more detailed description of the risks can be found starting at page 2 of the Prospectus.

The prospectus contains one of the better fund descriptions of currency risks:



The sponsor states that the 12 month yield was 5.61% as of 1/31/15. Dividend support is one reason for adding shares at this time.


The net expense ratio after a fund waiver is currently .3%. Before the waiver, the expense ratio is .58%.

Holdings

Anyone buying European stocks is making a contrarian play. There is certainly no solace to be found when focusing on the present. But, it is all about the future now. The past is already baked into the poor performance of this ETF.

For the most part, my position in this ETF has been out of sight, out of mind for about six years now.