Category: Value Investing

Why Buy Convertible Bonds?

Why Buy Convertible Bonds?

I sometimes answer questions for those at Klout.com that ask basic investing questions. ?Usually I point to old articles of mine, but this time someone asked a question that I have not answered before, and here it is:

What’s a convertible note? I’ve Googled for the answer but can’t find a simple answer. Why would one take a note when investing rather than equity?

Some people want the best of both worlds. ?I want upside potential, but I want a guaranteed downside where I still make money. ?That’s a convertible bond (or note, same thing). ?The convertible bond promises to pay you income though interest payments, but allows for the possibility that you will want to exchange the bond for a fixed number of shares in the company. ?When would you want to do such an exchange? ?You would exchange when the stock price rises to the point where the bond is worth more converted into stock.

Let’s look at this question from the other side for a moment. ?Why would a company issue a convertible bond? ?There are several reasons:

  • Typically, companies that issue convertible bonds have credit ratings that are junk or low investment grade. ?They want a low interest payment for a company of their credit quality, and so they trade potential issuance of more stock at a time where it would hurt, for lower current interest payments.
  • Often, the companies that offer convertible bonds are growth companies that need capital, but they might have a hard time doing an ordinary junk bond. ?Convertible bonds have a ready buyer base.
  • Convertible bonds can be the “financing of last resort” for companies that are in financial trouble. ?(Article one, article two)

Now, many convertible bonds are issued by companies that subsequently don’t do well, and the bonds get bought by junk bond managers who buy them as junk bonds — they are called “busted converts.” ?They trade as if there is no conversion option, and some clever junk bond managers buy them, knowing that if a few of them have stocks that rally significantly, they will make enough extra money to aid their performance.

For what it is worth, the same ideas apply to convertible preferred stock, except that is bought primarily by individuals, while the bonds are bought by institutional investors. ?Also note that preferred stock has weaker credit quality than bonds. ?In liquidation, bonds get paid before preferred stock.

Final Notes

Convertible bonds changed when hedge funds emerged to invest in cheap convertible bonds, because the conversion option was frequently undervalued. ?As they became a larger force in the market convertible bonds rose in value, until they were largely not attractively priced.

Prior to that era convertible bond funds regularly outpaced other bond funds. ?They behaved kind of like a funny type of balanced fund.

As an investment grade corporate bond manager, I bought a convertible bond once, where it was “busted,” and was attractive just for the income alone. ?As it was, after I left the firm, the stock rallied to the point where converting to stock made sense.

This is tough: convertible bonds make sense for those that want the possibility of extra income if the stock price rises, but are willing to take a lower income on the convertible bond versus straight debt.

Oh, one more thing, again, generally only lower rated companies issue convertible debt, so you have to live with a higher level of default risk. ?Yes, convertible bonds offer the best of both worlds… so long as the issuer doesn’t default.

Sorted Weekly Tweets

Sorted Weekly Tweets

Japan

?

  • Japan World-Beating Stocks Seen Repeating Gains in 2014 http://t.co/v5QR4nVKd3 Analysts follow trends; they r wrong at turning points $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Abenomics Drives Japan Hedge Funds to World?s Top Performers http://t.co/fDmMBWIxgL Let’s c if Japan can survive the increase in debts $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Asia: From baby boom to bust http://t.co/eaDLDS3oAL Watch Japan 4a preview of what will happen across all of Asia; it won’t b pretty $$ Dec 28, 2013

?

China

 

  • China Confronts Workforce Drop With Retirement-Age Delay http://t.co/TdsDKG1p5u China gets to the problem very late & way too small $$ $FXI Dec 26, 2013
  • China is so worried about its cash crunch that it banned the term http://t.co/y0eN3A58iB Worry when central bankers care about language $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • China Credit Squeeze Eases as Central Bank Resumes Using Regular Cash-Injection Tool http://t.co/D5UNiQuQSv Papers over solvency issues $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • China’s Pain Points http://t.co/Ry2XaZHYT8 underfunded health&pension systems; environment probs; water shortages; corruption; rigged courts Dec 26, 2013
  • China Promise Clashes With Clampdown on Foreign Business http://t.co/ycKPAWqGa2 They want the best of both worlds, and can’t get both $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • PBOC?s Opacity Leaves Markets Guessing Amid Cash Crunch http://t.co/TsgynBHdo6 No guess what PBOC policy will b, makin’ it up as they go $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • China Cash Crunch Pushes Up Short-Term Rates http://t.co/MgWmHwdQuC The fragility of the Chinese financial system comes into view $$ $FXI Dec 23, 2013
  • Was 2013 the Year We Lost China? http://t.co/Fmz3RixLW7 It’s difficult 2 say whether we ever “had” China, it pursues its own goals $$ $FXI Dec 23, 2013

 

PPACA / Obamacare

?

  • Obamacare Hits Snag in States as US Site Finds Footing http://t.co/3q1SnLxu59 Surprised that some of the states would do worse than Feds $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Obamacare’s Web site Exchange Woes Trace to Cato’s Michael Cannon http://t.co/SDhb9sdATZ One Q is whether the natl exchange can subsidize $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • What to Do When ObamaCare Unravels http://t.co/w2iNS1HhWd Cute alternative 2 PPACA, but I think it could b even more expensive than PPACA $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Rule Change on Health Insurance Rattles Industry http://t.co/Fyntbs0rjS The lowball estimate of what Obamacare would cost comes back2bite $$ Dec 23, 2013
  • Obama Repeals ObamaCare http://t.co/0RerlzDqA2 It was bad enough under Bush, y does Congress tolerate a president behaving like a king? $$ Dec 23, 2013

?

Rest of the World

?

  • Thai General Refuses to Rule Out Coup as Unrest Drags On http://t.co/PfqhKwIpSD A Thai friend of mine said military is needed in politics $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • BlackRock Buys Turkey Shares After Turmoil Spooks Markets http://t.co/bbcxmWIXHM $TUR down >26% in 2013 http://t.co/cHkL6E2TUd; $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Iranians Pile Into Stocks as Nuclear Deal Spurs 133% Gain http://t.co/mZ7J47vnPp Wall Street getting slow; no $IRAN ETF available yet $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Even in Straitened Times, Portugal Loves Its Bimby Cooking Robots http://t.co/j8a732IuKA Y isn’t this sold in the US? It does it all $$ $SPY Dec 26, 2013
  • Jihadists in Syria Draw Children of Muslims Who Settled in Europe http://t.co/r5suj7cZ6l Romantic youths want their lives 2b more than $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • UN to nearly double peace-keepers in South Sudan as violence explodes http://t.co/X9Z94O0mXF UN always increases malfeasance, bad 4 all $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Ukraine Upheaval Spurred by 28% Rates Limiting Buyers http://t.co/5VFiYvnpRk Capital flees when civil disturbances arise, thus high rates $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • US Plans to Ask UN for More Troops in Turbulent South Sudan http://t.co/I60iRC1Nmb UN is not a lot of help in situations like this $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Swiss Banks Employ Army of Advisers for US Amnesty Plan http://t.co/qRLXTt1JS7 Differing strategies as US exposure & reporting varies $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • South Sudan Refugees Swell As Americans Are Evacuated http://t.co/Iq2VxuFYNz Throw a bunch of warlords together, call it a govt & u get? $$ Dec 23, 2013
  • Russia Crisis Haunts Deutsche Bank?s Smith Seeing China Bust http://t.co/nRm4PPTlvA Suspect a China debt crisis would not affect US $$ Dec 23, 2013
  • Venezuela Devalues Bolivar for Tourist Dollars by 44% http://t.co/rOdpVu4xRd Almost 2 the point where the dollar will replace the bolivar $$ Dec 23, 2013

?

NSA

 

  • Report on NSA ‘secret’ payments to RSA fuels encryption controversy http://t.co/1YTaHu4mfK Put in a backdoor so that NSA could access $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Edward Snowden, after months of NSA revelations, says his mission?s accomplished http://t.co/MdMFbSKaYK His life’s work is complete @ 29 $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • The One Big Question About RSA and Its Relationship With the NSA http://t.co/vR7GCsCa38 RSA builds “backdoor” 4 NSA 2 use, gets secret $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • NSA Struggles to Make Sense of Flood of Surveillance Data http://t.co/0gjztWYMSM Inside look at how data surveillance got out of control $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Finnish Security Researcher Cancels RSA Talk in Protest http://t.co/v0hsM2y548 RSA deliberately built faulty random number generator 4NSA $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Snowden Criticizes US Panel Overseeing Surveillance http://t.co/kLI7XmeKlN Panel exists 2whitewash bad behavior of intelgnc establishment $$ Dec 23, 2013

 

Market Impact

?

  • A Fund That Invests Like Buffett http://t.co/u9duSaR9oA I’m impressed; I’m putting their firm on my 13F list to track them quarterly $$ $SPY Dec 28, 2013
  • Our Outlook for the Stock Market http://t.co/N1IV6w32dj Morningstar gives their relatively bullish view of what 2014 will hold 4 stocks $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Muniland?s ?Best of 2013? http://t.co/KhaiAVmjzg @catelong is one of the best on municipal bonds & here is her summary of 2013 $$ $MUB Dec 28, 2013
  • 40% of fund managers surveyed r overweight euro-area equities http://t.co/vPYGQFvagC Bull Calls United in Europe, Strategists C 12% Gain $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • So, I’m skeptical of the article in the last tweet, unless the managers r long term investors & value players b/c flexible $$ runs in crises Dec 26, 2013
  • Half & Half: Why Rowing Works http://t.co/h46bRNMLAR A 50-50 mix of stocks & bonds w/rebalancing outperforms 100% stocks in choppy mkts $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • You Too Can Invest Like Warren Buffett?Maybe http://t.co/FU6MZzsmyj U would have to able to predict moats & not lever up too much $$ #tricky Dec 26, 2013
  • Investment Strategy Rises From Obscurity http://t.co/O8yIIqjTpZ US Govt loses $7B/yr on MLPs; Article features $IEP $CVR $CVRR $KMP $ETP $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Wall Street Landlord Loses Round 1 in Ohio School Tax Fight http://t.co/FgKOrnq283 Maybe school district should pass landlord profits tax $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Companies Binge on Share Buybacks http://t.co/JyW5QaRRP4 2% divs +3% buybacks ~5% shareholder yield. Is that enough reward 4 equity risk? $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • The TSC Streetside Chat: Robert Wilson, Part 2 http://t.co/IzzNlzE776 13 years old but prescient; he died in a suicide yesterday $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Financial Scammers Increasingly Target Elderly Americans http://t.co/raIvTr0B9a Tonight’s topic @ Aleph Blog – watch out 4 older friends $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • How Investigators Untangled the ‘Wolf of Wall Street’ Scandal http://t.co/AJwcx4XONC Penny stocks, overtrading, market manipulation $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • The Buyback Rally http://t.co/ZkBJsWBpe4 From @eddyelfenbein : 2% dividend yield + 3% buyback yield = 5% total yield on the market $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Hunt for Returns Prompts IPO Renaissance as US Leads Way http://t.co/dVURwoYGkn Capital will b deployed unproductively as the rally ends $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Secret Handshakes Greet Frat Brothers on Wall Street http://t.co/0t2zWLzL1A Part of what led to the crisis- connections&no smarts $$ $MS $GS Dec 23, 2013
  • Junk Loans Top ?08 Record as Safeguards Stripped http://t.co/9uZAwYeEaN Amazing how much biz u can do if u just leave aside risk control $$ Dec 23, 2013
  • The lavish lifestyles of placement agents http://t.co/0NU8cD5yl0 With pension monies, there is almost never a reason to pay commissions $$ Dec 22, 2013

?

Companies & Industries

 

  • Twitter Posts Biggest-Ever Decline After Macquarie Downgrade http://t.co/zopyq0AKeb $TWTR needs 2show real income to validate valuation $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Twitter?s Ballooning Market Cap http://t.co/vm1xl8MRwb Every sell is a good sell. At worst, wait for relative strength to shift $TWTR $$ Dec 27, 2013
  • GM Robo-Glove to Meat Hook Smooth Human-Machine Teamwork http://t.co/G0dbUgbXIc The future of manufacturing: human-robot teams $$ $SPY $TLT Dec 26, 2013
  • $AMZN Makes Up to Customers After Backup Hits $UPS http://t.co/UUNGKJVJvI It is possible to overload the shipping system; $20 giftcards $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Panasonic Debt Goes to First From Worst on Revamp http://t.co/MsBhqKmMee Amazing what can happen when a mgmt team rationalizes businesses $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Bug Bites Cut Florida Orange Crop to Lowest in 2 Decades http://t.co/0muOIlUFmI Fortunately Brazil is having a good crop; citrus greening $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Reactors on Slow Road to Demolition http://t.co/jd3sbJiMHk Much hangs on creating a long-term site for storing nuclear waste $$ $D $EXC $ETR Dec 26, 2013
  • Twitter?s Ballooning Market Cap http://t.co/mhik2Xp8Nn The price discounts more than the future, it discounts the hereafter $$ $TWTR $SPY Dec 26, 2013
  • If Cadillac Keeps Growing Like This, It’ll Be America’s Bestselling Luxury Car http://t.co/YnijUf5SiC We r talking $GM; they will fail $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Wind Farms in Maine Stir a Power Struggle http://t.co/lhpmyeD75l I’m sorry, most people know that they don’t own their view, give it up $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • V.F. Corporation Common Stock Stock Chart http://t.co/5zEipUBEWf; Interesting 2c @Bloomberg & @yahoofinance mess up on $VFC ‘s 4 for 1 split $$ Dec 23, 2013

 

Financial Sector

 

  • Banking Needs a New Regulatory Structure http://t.co/tgx7X4lSrq Rather, end interstate branching, & hand bank regulation back2 the states $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Will the Regulatory Screws Loosen in 2014? http://t.co/vxkuqAUCe9 Both sides r dreaming. Neither the regulators or banks r giving up $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • FDIC Recommendations to Curb Interest Rate Risk http://t.co/uRJw5tTcNS But will they bifurcate repo 2reveal the interest rate risk inside $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Examiners-in-Residence Should Be Pulled Out of Megabanks http://t.co/UcrvNoAmzu They will resist pressure better if they work together $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • How Thomas Curry Is Trying to Redeem the OCC http://t.co/iIbFR7Lqqv U can get a lot done in DC if u don’t care who gets the credit $$ $TLT Dec 26, 2013
  • Target?s Redcard Proves Less Vulnerable to Data Breach Than Bank Cards http://t.co/GDBN5KHvsK Added security makes the card harder2hack $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Angry Bart Takes His Parting Shot http://t.co/Wi5YChLExh How Wall St fights regulation: Direct kill; defund; exemptions; litigate $$ $GS $MS Dec 26, 2013
  • Why the US Leaves Its Credit-Card System Vulnerable to Fraud http://t.co/QN4egphZ8c Expensive to add more security & change hardware $$ Dec 23, 2013

 

Politics & Policy

 

  • Deaton on US inequality and the Pareto criterion http://t.co/pdhMXzehju Hard to equalize; rich families have more resources 4 their kids $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Moguls Rent South Dakota Addresses to Dodge Taxes Forever http://t.co/4IYvqqrr66 Our own tax haven in Black Hills; set up a trust in SD $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Government Pulls in Reins On Disability Judges http://t.co/psmXNK7fXZ Disability Trust fund goes bust in 2016, judges urged 2b stricter $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Five Lessons of 2013, Guaranteed to Be Forgotten http://t.co/dCXEniOv8U I like # 3. The law of the land is subject to executive action. $$ Dec 26, 2013

 

Other

  • The marriage gap: Think again, men http://t.co/T45sDRYDFC People who r single rely on government more, v. married who rely on each other $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Two trends I’m watching next year http://t.co/Cx1gKdLaSR Cultural changes may limit HH formation & much capital formation is intangible $$ Dec 28, 2013
  • Detroit Wins $55M in Concessions From 2 Banks http://t.co/wOEsceACAR Derivatives around munis usually have something crooked w/them $$ $MUB Dec 26, 2013
  • The LEET Pure PC – A PS4 And Xbox One Killer For Your Entertainment Room http://t.co/3mDBrtTHb0 Pretty cool. Powerful, flexible & stylish $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • White Chocolate, a Blank Slate for Flavor, Wins Converts http://t.co/WflwRKYYJg A platform to allow other flavors to show their stuff $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Colleges Trim Staffing Bloat http://t.co/bRtEMsnfqG Finally the bloat of making college into “country clubs” starts to decline $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Most Twitter User Have Few Followers – Study http://t.co/ghZfDqVjUJ U have 2get2 over 2000 followers b4u can b certain that any1 listens $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • A Pill to Cure Addiction? http://t.co/ORYsOeoNXN “huge amount of progress understanding what drives alcoholism & makes it difficult2stop” $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Are Cranberries a Better Way to Long Life? http://t.co/o0YJDa0Uhy The antioxidants in cranberries may prolong your life $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Fake Knee Surgery as Good as Real Procedure Study Finds http://t.co/Ucvi50nsqW Result Likely2Fuel Debate Over Common Orthopedic Operation $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Study: Eating Nuts in Pregnancy May Lower Child’s Allergy Risk http://t.co/X2IQwj1QfN Something new 4 children 2 blame their mothers over $$ Dec 24, 2013
  • Almond Spike Hits Germany’s Markets http://t.co/DpEJXxwWir Bad weather in California & Spain & demand in China push prices 2 record highs $$ Dec 23, 2013
  • Unwanted Memories Erased in Electroconvulsive Therapy Experiment http://t.co/nfo3lDmHDH Great. Another way to remove humanity from people $$ Dec 23, 2013

 

Wrong, Etc.

?

  • Wrong: The Air of Unreality in NSA Reform http://t.co/8psN0iSI1r Being a free country means we have 2 allow 4 possibility of bad events $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Disagree:Snowden Says Surveillance Is Worse Than Orwell Envisioned http://t.co/2AEb3tNk0G It may b more pervasive but it is low intensity $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • Central Error: that inflation & real growth are positively correlated [1970s] http://t.co/yLXk2UnQWu Dec 23, 2013
  • Wrong: GOP lawmaker: NSA spying in US could have prevented 9/11 http://t.co/cHAnKSOsqY At best, fighting the last war; live free or die $$ Dec 23, 2013

?

?

Comments, Retweets & Replies

 

  • Commented on The Economist | The 2016 election: Flight of the Huckabees http://t.co/Yh3tym96OO Dec 27, 2013
  • ‘ @SonofGodMovie The 2nd Commandment says it’s wrong to portray God. Your movie makes Jesus a mere man; you can’t portray his divinity $$ Dec 26, 2013
  • @ReformedBroker Nailed it. Dec 25, 2013
  • RT @minefornothing: The economy of Cyprus is now also experiencing a major credit crunch http://t.co/uRMUjaUCyf Dec 24, 2013
  • http://t.co/60MjQwGbNz “It’s the thought that counts, which is worth more than money.” ? David_Merkel http://t.co/Ij9Ttfesye $$ Dec 24, 2013
  • RT @michaelsantoli: Trust me, in Dec ’87 no one said “Only 1/3 done” RT @CiovaccoCapital: Bull Markets can last a long time – see 82-’00 h? Dec 24, 2013

 

What are Safe Assets?

What are Safe Assets?

When I was young, my paternal grandfather retired, and made my Dad and my Uncle, who worked for him,? buy him out of his firm.? They did so, and laid out a lot of cash to do it, which my grandfather invested in certificates of deposit at various banks.? In the ’70s, he looked like a genius, while my mother, who was beating the market with her half Growth At a Reasonable Price, half utilities strategy, still lagged behind CD returns.

But when the ’80s came, there was no contest.? CD yields fell, fell, and fell.? Stocks gave high returns, and the returns more than outpaced CDs over the two decades combined.

So what are safe assets?? Part of it depends on time horizons.? If you have a short time horizon for when you will need to use the money, then you have to only look at money market funds, and high-quality short-term debt.

If the time horizon is long, it becomes a question of margin of safety.? What is the worst outcome reasonably possible?? Assets that are risky are at their safest point at the bottom of a bear market, and their riskiest point at the top of a bull market.? The difference is margin of safety.? But it doesn’t feel that way.

For those with a long time horizon, the safest assets are those that are misunderstood and hated, with low prices relative to intrinsic value.? The downside is clipped, and the upside could be considerable, with decent probability.

That is one reason why I think that for those with long time horizons risk and return are negatively correlated.? Take less risk, get more return, within reason.? There are times when the market is irrationally bearish.? That is the best time to invest, but wait until things stop getting worse before investing.

Moderate risk-taking tends to win in the long run. If markets mean-revert, a 50-50 mix of stocks and bonds will beat a 100% stock portfolio.

Beyond that, in an environment like this, where there is more capital than there are good places to deploy it, we should see a lot of IPOs to absorb excess capital into mostly unprofitable ideas.? Much as I like Twitter as a service, I don’t see how it grows into its current valuation.? This feels a little like 1998-2000, but only a little.? We need more of a frenzy of IPOs offering dubious value to suck up the capital of those who are foolish.

What does make this situation more like 1998-2000 is the Q-ratio, which is at its highest point since 1998-2000.? This is the second-highest peak for the Q-ratio, which measures the value of stocks versus their replacement cost.? This means that equity returns are likely to be negative/low for the next 5-10 years.

So at a time like this, where can your assets be safe?? Bond interest rates are low, and don’t reflect the risks.? Stocks have high valuations, and I invest in the few stocks with low valuations.? The alternative is to earn nothing in cash.? At present, that is the safest option, and may return the best over the next year.

I know, no one can do market timing well, but at present, the odds are tilted against risk.? I’m thinking of buying a hedge against my taxable brokerage account.

Safe assets are those that avoid loss, and behold, safe assets often offer better returns as well, if purchased during a time of fear.

Unconstrained Will Get Overdone

Unconstrained Will Get Overdone

Maybe I’ve just had a couple of unusual random draws from the information urn, but it seems to me that unconstrained mandates are getting more favorable investment attention from investment consultants than they used to. ?The “style box” is breaking down a little, and I think that is a good thing.

My view of the investing world starts with industries, not market cap size, and not even growth/value. ?Much as I end up on the value side, I am flexible on what constitutes value in different industries. ?I range from growth at a reasonable price to deep value. ?It depends on the state of the industry.

All that said, let me talk a little about what it takes to be a good unconstrained manager. ?Organizationally, you have to understand a lot of things better than the rest of the world. ?Do you understand the market, factor, and industry cycles, as well as asset level misvaluations? Investors have the choice of the informationless index, which typically does well versus the average active manager.

As consultants analyze unconstrained managers, their models will get stretched. ?The more degrees of freedom a manager has, the tougher it is to evaluate them. ?If an unconstrained manager made a brilliant tactical move once, can he do it twice? ?Three times? ?More?

Think of the few market players that got short prior to the 1987 crash. ?Aside from Elaine Garzarelli, none were heard from again, and Garzarelli never had a second episode like that in 1987.

It is really tough to come up with significant ideas that will make a huge difference in security returns. ?Home run hitters usually do not hit for average.

What I suspect will happen is this: the initial unconstrained managers will do well, but they will reach capacity limits, and lesser managers will put out “me too” products. ?Consultants will buy into those products to some degree, and a decent number of them will fail to meet expectations. ?The investors hiring the consultants will wonder why they hired them. ?If there is no skill to picking unconstrained managers, then why not pick them directly themselves, or just go back to indexes?

I write this as one that mostly manages equities, long-only. ?I like having no constraint on market cap, value factors, industry, and country selection. ?I like to roam the world in search of value. ?I like to concentrate on industries when I have a good thesis. ?Why should I have non-economic criteria limiting my choices, if I reason well?

That’s why I like unconstrained mandates. ?I run one for upper-middle class individuals, and small institutions. ?But every manager will not do well with it, because most investment organizations are not designed to think that broadly.

Thus I expect that investment consultants will revert to the “style box” (or something new like it) once they realize that few managers can consistently generate alpha over a full market cycle whether unconstrained of constrained. ?At least with constrained, the variation when they do badly is more limited, which protects the consultant, who also does not want to end up in the fourth quartile, where business is lost.

Post 2300 — On Business Issues

Post 2300 — On Business Issues

Every 100 posts or so, I take a moment to think about the broader aspects of what I do.? As a blogger, my goal is to educate, and I think I have covered many issues well here.

As an asset manager, my goal is to serve existing clients well.? Most of my assets under management stem from value investing, and 2013 has certainly been good to my clients and me.? 2013 has made up for 2011-12, and then some.

What has surprised me is how existing clients have added to their assets with me.? I expected growth to mainly come through new clients, but at present, most is coming from existing clients.

Another thing that surprised me is that a number of my clients said have said something like this to me, “I really appreciate that you don’t press us to give all of our assets to you.? But you help us as if you have all our assets.”

I know that I have to do marketing, but I don’t like it, and so I do as little of it as possible.? Part of it is the unpredictability of investing.? I have a good track record, but does that really mean I will do better than the index in the future?? Markets are fickle, and much more is due to favorable providence than most of us imagine.

All of us say, “Past performance is not indicative of future returns,” but few of us truly act as if we believe it.? How many consultants? will bring forth managers that are underperforming but have good prospects?? Isn’t the proof in the pudding?? Past may not be prologue, but it is incredibly difficult to get in the door with those who advise individual and institutional investors if you don’t have a winning track record.

Why is that?? Secretly, everyone believes that “Past performance IS indicative of future returns.”? Success breeds success, right?? The man with the hot hand will remain hot, no?

Sadly, no.? Though momentum effects sometimes work in the stock market, there is no evidence for manager outperformance persistence, outside of Graham-and-Doddsville.? But you can’t get naive buyers to think otherwise.? Almost all individual and institutional investors choose managers at least partially on past performance.? That’s the sad truth, and all the disclaimers in the world can’t change that.

I am grateful for the trust my readers place in me.? I am grateful for the trust my investors place in me.? And I hope that I never disappoint you badly.

Sincerely,

David

Classic: Financials are Different

Classic: Financials are Different

The following was published at RealMoney in March 2006:

When you are a corporate bond manager, one of the lessons that you learn early is that financial companies (or, financials) are different from industrials or utilities.? Why?? First, the novice manager wants to buy a lot of financials, because they yield more at equivalent ratings.? Second, you have a staff of analysts, and you realize that only a few of them can do financials, whereas almost all of them can do industrials or utilities.? Again, why?? Here are a number of related reasons:

  • Tangible assets play only a small role in a financial company.? What constrains the growth of an industrial company?? The fixed assets (plant and equipment) limit the technical amount of product that can be delivered in a year.? With services, workers? Finally, demand is the ultimate limiting factor, but this affects financial, industrial, and services businesses alike.? With a financial company, sometimes the limits are akin to a service business (?If only we had more trained sales reps!?), but more often, capital limits growth.
  • The cash flow statement plays a big role with industrials and utilities, but almost no role with financials.? One of the great values of the cash flow statement is the ability to attempt to derive estimates of free cash flow.? Free cash flow is the amount of cash that the business generates in a year that could be removed, and the business is as capable of functioning as it was at the start of the fiscal year.? Deducting maintenance capital expenditure from EBITDA often approximates free cash flow.? Cash flow statements for financials cannot in general be used to derive estimates of free cash flow because when new business is written, it requires capital to be set aside against the risks.? Capital is released as business matures.? In order to derive a free cash flow number for a financial company, operating earnings would have to be adjusted by the change in required capital.
  • Sadly, the change in required capital is not disclosed anywhere in a typical 10K.? Depending on the market environment, even the concept of required capital can change, depending on what entity most closely controls the amount of operating and financial leverage that a financial institution can take on.? Sometimes the federal or state regulators provide the most constraint; this is particularly true for institutions that interact closely with the public, i.e., depositary institutions, life and personal lines insurers.? For entities that raise their capital in the debt markets, or do business that requires a strong claims paying ability rating, the ratings agencies could be the tightest constraint.? Finally, and this is rare, the probability of blowing up the company could be the tightest constraint, which implies loose regulatory structures.? Again, this is rare; many companies do estimates of the economic capital required for business, but usually regulatory or rating agency capital is tighter.
  • Financial institutions are generally more highly regulated than non-financial institutions.? There are several reasons for this: the government does not want the public exposed to financial risk, systemic risk, guarantee funds are typically implicitly backstopped by the government (think FDIC, FSLIC, state insurance guaranty funds, etc.), and defaults are costly in ways that defaults of non-financials are not.? The last point deserves amplification; in a credit-based economy, confidence in the financial sector is critical to the continued growth and health of the economy.? Confidence can not be allowed to fail.? Also, since many financial institutions pursue similar strategies, or invest in one another, the failure of one institution makes the regulators touchy about everyone else.
  • Rapid growth is typically a negative; financial businesses are mature, and there is a trade-off between three business factors: price, quantity and quality.? In normal situations, a financial institution can get only two out of three.? In bad times, it would be only one out of three.
  • Because of the different regulatory regimes, financial institutions tend to form holding companies that own the businesses operating in various jurisdictions.? Typically, borrowing occurs at the holding company; the regulators frown at borrowing at the operating companies, unless the borrowers are clearly subordinate to the public served by the operating company.? This makes the common stock more volatile.? In a crisis, the regulators only want to assure the safety of the operating company; they don?t care if the holding company goes bust, and the common goes to zero.? They just want to make sure that the guaranty funds don?t take a hit, and that confidence is maintained among consumers.

All of these factors together lead to the following conclusion: financials are more complex than other types of companies, and are not correctly analyzed in the same way as non-financials.? Earnings quality is hard to discern, and growth is not always a positive thing.? Bankruptcies are rare, but when they happen, recoveries are poor for common stockholders and holding company debtholders.? Finally, management conservatism and competence are paramount, given the less certain nature of accrual accounting at financial companies, and the inability to calculate free cash flow with any precision.

In part 2 of this two-part series, I will give my approach to analyzing a sector of the insurance space in order to demonstrate some of these ideas.

Risks, not Risk, Again

Risks, not Risk, Again

One of the most important things I am here to teach readers is that there is no such generic concept as risk. ?There are risks, and they must be handled separately. ?Generic measures of risk such as standard deviation of returns, beta, etc. are unstable. ?This was driven home to me when I heard a presentation from endowment investment advisors, where they talked about their models, and how the models translated current economic statistics into investment decisions.

I’m sorry, but the models can not be that good. ?The financial markets are only weakly related to the real economy in the short-run, though the tie gets strong in the long-run.

Economies are unstable; get used to it. ?The concept of equilibrium is also not useful, and it holds economics in thrall, because it makes the math work, even though equilibrium never occurs.

It is far better to look at your investment in an oil refiner and ask “What are the possibilities for where crack spreads will be a year from now,” than to look at the beta, correlations to anything, standard deviations, etc. ?The coefficients aren’t stable.

Many advisors would rather follow a false certainty, than have to think for themselves, and have to deal with the complexity of the markets.

I am a quantitative analyst, and a very good one. ?That is why I pay attention to the limitations of models, and the possibility that past data might be special, and not so relevant to the present. ?It is far better that you pick over your portfolios, and ask what risks they are subject to, than to look at standardized risk measurements that describe the past or present.

Be forward looking. ?What can go wrong? ?Analyze each company. ?Find the three most pertinent risks — read the 10-K if you are having a hard time. ?See if you think the risks are worth taking.

But be assured of this. ?Merely by looking at market price derived variables for stocks, you won’t learn anything valuable about the risks of what you own, or might own. ?You need to think like a businessman, a sole owner, and ask whether the risks can be ably faced.

To the Consultants

Your models are garbage. ?You need to review your managers at the holdings level, or you are doing no good at all. ?All of the aggregate statistics hide the instability. ?Far better to understand the qualitative methods of managers, and analyze whether they have a durable competitive advantage or not.

That may not seem so scientific, but science is put to bad ends in areas where there is no good science.

If I were hiring managers, I would spend a lot of time on process and people, and ignore a lot of other items.

Summary

Mathematics is of limited use in analyzing investments and investment managers. ?It is far better to look for those that have good business sense, and invest with them.

The Prime Directive: Stay Out of the Bottom Quartile

The Prime Directive: Stay Out of the Bottom Quartile

If you are a money manager, you would like to be in the top quartile of managers all of the time, but you know that is virtually impossible. ?So you might set a more achievable goal, staying out of the bottom quartile. ?Now there are two ways to achieve that:

1) Make intelligent asset selections that outperform your competition.

2) Own an index-like portfolio that has low odds of slipping into the fourth quartile.

Now, which of those do you think is easier? ?Right, #2. ?Which do most money managers adopt? ?Right again, #2. ?Charge active management fees for a portfolio that will not perform much different from the index.

I take route #1 for several reasons.

1) If I am charging a fee for active management, I find it unethical to try to hug the index.

2) I am willing to look bad for a year or two, if I believe that my methods will outperform over time, reduce risk, etc.

3) My focus on “margin of safety” keeps me out of the fourth quartile anyway. ?I rarely take large losses on a given stock, even though I do not automatically sell stocks after ?a certain level of loss.

4) If you look hard enough, and are willing to try assets that have issues, but with adequate safety, you can do pretty well.

I would encourage you to look for managers that have a large active share — that is, those that are very different from the index, but with a record of doing well.

Understand the asymmetry of interests between managers and clients. ?You pay fees; they receive fees. ?Thus, look for managers that have a large proportion of their liquid net worth invested in the assets that they manage. ?That imposes a discipline that makes them fight for themselves as well as their clients. ?At present, I am still my firm’s largest client, with over 80% of my liquid net worth invested in my strategies.

If your active investments underperform over long periods of time, and you don’t know where to look, consider an ETF or index fund in the same area. ?My view is to look for managers that successfully take risk over time, and run portfolios that do not look index-like.

An Aside

As for me and my clients, increasingly the portfolio has become global. ?My portfolios don’t have a limit on non-US exposure. ?As I have selected assets the last few times, foreign assets have offered better opportunities than domestic. ?Maybe that implies something regarding US stock overvaluation, and maybe not.

From my angle, many foreign markets seem cheap, even if things don’t seem that great now. ?Regardless, I buy what seems to be best, and if I end up with an entirely foreign portfolio, so be it. ?I don’t aim for that, but if that is what is on sale, I will buy.

When to Worry — An Asset-Liability Management Perspective on Financial Macroeconomics

When to Worry — An Asset-Liability Management Perspective on Financial Macroeconomics

At the end of the day, the world is net flat.? Every asset is owned 100%; every liability is someone else’s asset.

If everything is 100% owned, why are there ever crises?? Financial companies owning illiquid assets financed by short, liquid liabilities.? Liquidity crises are credit crises; a company going through a liquidity crisis did not do sufficient stress testing to realize that they were weakly financed.

Crises are never accidents, aside from things like Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy.? And guess what?? How many insurers failed from those two events?? None.

Crises happen because things are inverted.? Under ordinary circumstances, prudence dictates that long-term assets be financed by equity or long-term debt.? Before a crisis, long-term assets are owned with short-term debt, and wealthy guys like Buffett and Klarman hold cash and shun long-term assets.? That’s inverted.? Those that should not be bearing risk are bearing risk, and those the could bear risk aren’t.? Why?? Because the prices on risk assets are high, and smart investors lighten the boat as the envious buy into momentum at the end of a doomed rally.? Ben Graham’s weighing machine takes over from the voting machine.

So what are reasons to worry?? Here are a dozen, not in any order:

  • The combined balance sheets of investment banks grow, and the complexity of their assets rises.
  • The repo market grows, as less liquid assets are financed by very liquid liabilities.
  • Poor-to-middle class people begin taking risk by buying homes, or speculating in stocks.? These people have weak liability structures, because they live paycheck to paycheck.
  • Mortgage finance moves to ARMs or even more exotic loans.
  • Downpayments on homes get low.
  • Rich hold more cash while the poor and middle-class borrow.? The rich can take losses — they have long time horizons.? When they play defense, it is a time to be concerned.
  • In a given sector there has been a large increase in debt, and there are concerns over ability to repay.
  • Shadow banking has increased dramatically.
  • Financial commercial paper issuance has increased dramatically.
  • People rely on certain large financial firms to not default, even if they have taken on too much credit risk relative to their capital.? (Think of Fannie and Freddie.)
  • Increased financial complexity makes everything opaque.? Bad things happen in the dark.
  • The credit cycle gets long in the tooth, and credit spreads/yields tighten to levels that are far too low for the risk taken on.

Now, I leave aside pure macroeconomic concerns like the possibility that the Fed might face a greater problem with stagflation than it did in the ’70s.? When long illiquid assets are financed by short liabilities, all sorts of bad things can happen.? Keep your eyes open.? Hey, aren’t Buffett and Klarman letting cash levels rise?

Classic: The Value of Financial Slack

Classic: The Value of Financial Slack

This was my first article published at RealMoney, in October 2003, I think on the 17th.

=-=–=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==–=-==-=-=-

As investors go, I am a ?singles hitter.?? I don?t get many investments where I more than double my money.? But I bat a high average when I invest.? One of the keys to this is insisting that the companies that I invest in possess ?financial slack.?? Financial slack means that a company can make a few mistakes, and not get killed.? This is the equivalent of Ben Graham?s margin of safety.

 

If you run a portfolio with a small number of stocks, it is important to avoid companies that destroy your capital.? It is difficult to recover when your capital has been impaired.? A good defense allows the offense to play aggressively, without losing sleep at night.

 

The market is a cyclical beast, with cycles inside cycles.? The market has a cycle of its own, but industries have their cycles within the cycle of the market.? This is where I find my advantage in the market ? analyzing industry cycles.? Industries go in and out of favor.? The time to buy a company in any industry is when it is out of favor; as a matter of risk control (and humility) the companies to buy when an industry is out of favor are those with financial slack.? If you are wrong about the industry, you won?t lose much; if you are right, the gains will be significant.

 

My example for today is the steel industry.? The steel industry is economically necessary for our world, but is in decline in the US.? The older integrated steel mills are inefficient compared to the mini-mills, and foreign competition.? The foreign firms have varying advantages ? cheaper labor, and governmental subsidies, both implicit and explicit.

 

Understanding Cyclicals

 

Steel is a cyclical business that follows the pricing of steel.? This may sound obvious, but the finance textbooks teach us to look at companies in a mode that assumes constant earnings growth.? This is a rare condition in the real world, and non-existent with cyclical companies.? With a cyclical company, watching the pricing trends of the commodity produced is the most critical factor in short-run stock performance.? Longer-term, it comes down to:

 

  1. Buying industry leaders with impeccable balance sheets.
  2. Reasonable operating leverage ? they should be profitable at the cycle trough
  3. Buying them when the industry is hated.? Buy them cheap.
  4. Only buy firms that use free cash flow at cycle peak in a way that prepares for the trough.

 

Point 1 comes down to size and financial leverage.? Points 2 and 4 suggest a corporate humility that arises from restraining the increase of productive capacity when times are good, and a willingness to invest when times are bad.

 

Point 3 is the hardest point.? In growth industries, P/E ratios are a reasonable measure for valuation.? In cyclical industries, P/B [price-to-book] and P/S [price-to-sales] ratios are more reasonable, because earnings are less stable and reliable.? With cyclical companies, P/E ratios are typically lowest at the cycle peak, when companies have peak earnings, and high-to-nonexistent P/E ratios at the cycle trough.

 

Other issues around steel

 

There are a number of structural problems around the steel industry.? Tariffs to protect US production prevent inefficient capacity from exiting the industry.? The hint of removal or increase of tariffs can move steel stocks markedly.? Second, labor unions have not figured out how deeply uncompetitive the US steel industry is.? Between total compensation costs and work rules, the unions help make many US steel uncompetitive.? Finally, pension liabilities are often large relative to the total capitalization of many steel companies.? It is no surprise that one of the key issues regarding emergence from bankruptcy in the steel industry involves reduction of pension benefits.

 

Conservative investors investing in the steel industry will look for companies that do not have large pension deficits, and companies that are non-union, or where the unions have made peace with management.? They will also look for companies that can exist without tariff protection.? (Perhaps politicians will realize one day that more jobs hinge on the use of steel, rather than its production, and eliminate tariffs because it preserves more jobs, but I doubt it.)

 

Companies

 

In my investing, in the past, I have made money on AK Steel [AKS], Algoma Steel (insolvent), and Nucor [NUE].? When steel prices were higher, low cost producers (at that time) like AK and Algoma did well.? Their main problem was their debt loads; a company that is operationally efficient still has to service its debts.? EBITDA is all very good if you are a bondholder, but stockholders need free cash flow ? AK and Algoma had none of that as steel prices fell.

 

In this uncertain environment, I am invested in Nucor.? With little debt, a non-union workforce, and relatively low cost production, Nucor is an acceptable stock for conservative investors.? Nucor has been a consolidator of steel assets on the cheap amid the many bankruptcies that have plagued the sector.? When steel industry conditions normalize, they will earn a good return.? It has a strong focus on return on equity.? It should earn a about $1/share in the trough, and perhaps as much as $5/share at the peak.

 

But is it the right time to own Nucor?? Is it cheap enough?? I made my last purchase in the high 30s, and would purchase more there.? In the high 40s, I am a little more indifferent, because I would sell Nucor in the low 60s.? Given the normal level of profitability for Nucor, I view it as a buy below 1.3x book, and a sell at over 2x book.

 

An alternative

 

I do not have a position in POSCO [PKX], but am considering it for my portfolio at present.? POSCO, formerly Pohang Iron and Steel, is the third largest steel producer in the world.? It is based in South Korea, and is presently the lowest cost producer in the world.? Debt is low, and if you can trust Korean GAAP, it has earned consistent money for nine out of the last ten years.? It trades around its book value, and 7x 2004 earnings ? very cheap, unless we get a new war on the Korean peninsula.

 

As with any investment, the risks must be weighed against the likely returns.? I have one Korean company in my portfolio.? Do I want to double my risk?? That is my main question on POSCO.? Absent that, I would rate it a buy for those who can tolerate the risks involved.

Theme: Overlay by Kaira