Argentina Rejoins Index and Boosts Yield

Argentina Rejoins Index and Boosts YieldArgentina Rejoins Index and Boosts Yield

Emerging Markets Bonds – Argentina Rejoins Index and Boosts Yield

In a somewhat accelerated fashion, Argentina recently became eligible for inclusion in the J.P. Morgan suite of GBI-EM indices. This follows a series of measures that have been implemented to facilitate foreign investor access to local government bond and currency markets. As a result, several Argentine peso-(ARS) denominated bonds were added to the J.P. Morgan suite of GBI-EM indices on February 28. The eye-popping aspect of the ARS bonds is their high yields, which are yield between 13.4% and 14.4% as of February 28. Argentina now represents approximately 3% of the GBI-EM Global Core Index (GBIEMCOR), and the net effect of its addition was more than 20 basis point boost in the overall yield of the Index to 6.75%.

Argentina Debt Boasts Substantial Yields

10-Year Local Currency Sovereign Bond Yields (%) As of 2/28/2017

Source: FactSet as of 2/28/2017. All performance quoted represents past performance. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Argentina’s Low Correlation May Provide Portfolio Diversification

A more interesting aspect of the ARS inclusion may be the effect of the political and economic dynamics of Argentina on the country’s foreign exchange rate. In short, since the ARS was liberalized at the end of 2015, it has exhibited an extremely low correlation to the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Core Index coming in at 0.07 for the 14 months ending February 28, 2017 – making it an attractive from a diversification standpoint. It is likely, however, that by its very inclusion in the GBI-EM indices, the consequential impact on flows may increase the ARS correlation. However other currencies which are excluded from the tradeable and most benchmarked indices, such as the Indian rupee (INR) and the Chinese yuan (CNY), have shown much higher correlations than the ARS, as shown below (0.54 and 0.52 versus the GBI-EM Global Core Index).

We expect that Argentina’s net effect on the J.P. Morgan investable benchmarks to be, as a consequence, both additional yield and greater diversification.

Currency Correlations

January 1, 2016 – February 28, 2017

ARS – Argentine peso, BRL – Brazilian real, MXN – Mexican peso, RUB – Russian ruble, PLN – Polish zloty, DXY – U.S. Dollar Index, INR – Indian rupee, CNY – Chinese yuan. GBIEMCOR represents the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Core Index, which is comprised of bonds issued by emerging market governments and denominated in the local currency of the issuer.

Important Definitions and Disclosures  

Sources of all data: FactSet, J.P. Morgan, and BofA Merrill Lynch. All data as of 2/28/2017.

Correlation measures the degree to which two securities move in relation to each other.

DXY represents the U.S. Dollar Index, which indicates the general international value of the USD. The index represents an average of the exchange rates between the USD and major world currencies.

GBIEMCOR represents the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Core Index, which is comprised of bonds issued by emerging market governments and denominated in the local currency of the issuer.

Indexes are unmanaged and are not securities in which an investment can be made. Index returns are not representative of Fund Returns. For fund returns current to the most recent month-end, visit vaneck.com.

Fran Rodilosso    Head of Fixed Income ETF Portfolio Management
Portfolio Manager for Fixed Income ETFs
Oversees the Fixed Income ETF team; responsible for portfolio strategies, as well as credit and market analysis; specializes in international bond markets
Investment Management Team member since 2012
Prior to joining VanEck, Managing Director of Global Emerging Markets with The Seaport Group; launched the firm’s emerging markets fixed income sales and trading business
Previously held portfolio management positions at Greylock Capital and Soundbrook Capital; focused on corporate high-yield and distressed bonds with an emphasis on emerging markets
Earlier career experience includes senior fixed income trading positions at Credit Lyonnais and HSBC
Quoted in Financial Times, Barron’s, and ETF Trends, among others
CFA charterholder; member of New York Society of Security Analysts
MBA (with distinction), Finance, The Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania; AB, History, Princeton University

Hard Currency Emerging Markets Bonds Shine in August

Hard Currency Emerging Markets Bonds Shine in August

Key Takeaways as of August 31, 2016 – Hard Currency Emerging Markets Bonds Shine in August

•    The search for yield continues to fuel strong flows into emerging markets debt funds
•    Hard currency sovereign bonds outperformed, driven by tightening spreads over U.S. Treasuries
•    Emerging markets high yield corporate bonds were also solid performers, and provided a notable pickup in yield over U.S. high yield
•    Although skittishness over a possible Federal Reserve rate hike may continue in September, the climate appears to remain supportive for emerging markets debt

Skittishness has increased in September over a potential hike in U.S. interest rates, especially ahead of next week’s (9/20-9/21) FOMC meeting. In August (the month covered in this post), these concerns were mostly in the background. The ongoing search for yield continues to bring investors into emerging markets debt. Our view is that a rate hike by the Federal Reserve (the “Fed”) is not likely to dampen this trend, and that the environment for emerging markets debt will remain supportive.

All Eyes on the Fed

Investors focused on the Fed’s annual event in Jackson Hole, Wyoming (held in late August) for clues about the likely path of interest rates. A surprisingly strong July jobs report led to increasing expectations of a rate hike before the end of the year, and comments from Yellen and Fed Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer seemed to support that case. However, following the meeting weaker than expected U.S. manufacturing and August employment figures seem to have convinced the market that an imminent rate hike is now less likely.

Despite this rate uncertainty, flows into emerging markets debt remained strong in August, slightly moderating from the previous month. Globally, $8.0 billion flowed into emerging markets debt funds according to J.P. Morgan, bringing year-to-date flows to $31.3 billion, with $29.0 billion going into hard currency debt.

Developments in August

With approximately $11.7 trillion in negative yielding global debt, investors continued to allocate to emerging markets debt despite negative developments in some countries. In South Africa, an investigation of the finance minister increased uncertainty over leadership and caused the South African rand to tumble. Turkey maintained its investment grade status for now, but reviews are ongoing and Fitch Ratings lowered its outlook to negative. Standard & Poor’s lowered Mexico’s rating outlook to negative, citing sluggish growth and increasing debt. The agency noted that structural reforms undertaken continue to show positive results, but have not yet stimulated sufficient investment. In Brazil, President Dilma Rousseff was ousted by the Senate, providing hope that the country can move on with fiscal reforms under President Michel Temer. However, Temer’s ability to impose fiscal discipline is unclear, as the country remains divided with relatively little appetite for austerity measures.

There were also positive developments in August. Colombia’s government announced a peace deal with FARC (The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), ending a 52-year-old war with the leftist rebel group. If successful, the Colombian government may now be able to focus on much needed tax reforms. In addition, the strength of emerging markets local currencies this year, assisted by commodity price gains, has helped central banks build up foreign currency reserves for the first time in two years.

Besides bullish political developments in Brazil, there are signs that monetary policy has turned more supportive as Brazil’s central bank indicated potential room for easing. Low or slowing inflation in other countries (e.g., Russia and Indonesia) may provide central banks room to ease rates or end tightening cycles to help boost growth. Elsewhere, including Chile and Mexico, central banks appear to maintain a more hawkish tone.

Spread Tightening Boosts Hard Currency Bonds

In August, hard currency sovereign bonds returned 1.79%, outperforming local currency sovereign bonds, which returned 0.04% (all returns are stated in U.S. dollar terms), and corporates which returned 1.18%. Returns of hard currency bonds were driven by a tightening of spreads over U.S. Treasuries. Local currencies detracted from positive local bond returns as the U.S. dollar showed strength amid expectations of a rate increase.

Latin America was the highest returning region among hard currency sovereign bonds. Both Peru and Colombia released positive economic data, with the latter also benefiting from the peace process. Bonds issued by Mexico were also top performers, despite a cut to the country’s credit rating outlook. Laggards included Mongolia, South Africa, and Chile.

Also of note within the hard currency bond universe is the relative performance of emerging markets high yield corporate debt. At 14.75% total return through the end of August, the sector is performing in line with U.S. high yield, which has returned 14.58%, and is 600 basis points ahead of emerging markets investment grade corporates which have returned 9.35% year-to-date. Emerging markets high yield corporates were still yielding above 7% at the end of August and provided 107 basis points pick-up versus U.S. high yield in option adjusted spread terms. Emerging markets high yield corporates currently have a one notch higher average credit rating than U.S. high yield and a shorter duration as well (3.74 vs. 4.20). That said, the spread pickup over U.S. high yield is near its lowest level since early 2013.

Among local currency sovereign bonds, Colombia, Russia, and the Philippines all experienced currency appreciation, adding to positive local bond returns. South Africa, Chile, and Indonesia were laggards. Chile’s government is dealing with an economic slowdown and rising pension costs. The ability to address these issues is in question given the unpopularity of the current government.

The Supportive Market Environment

In the short run, investors are likely to continue to focus on Fed action and the potential impact of a rate increase on the U.S. dollar. Despite these concerns, we feel the overall conditions remain supportive for emerging markets debt. Emerging markets yields continue to be attractive to investors looking beyond the low and negative rates available from most developed markets core fixed income asset classes.

1-Month Total Returns by Country

By Fran Rodilosso
CFA, Portfolio Manager

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURE

Please note that the information herein represents the opinion of the portfolio manager and these opinions may change at any time and from time to time. Not intended to be a forecast of future events, a guarantee of future results or investment advice. Historical performance is not indicative of future results; current data may differ from data quoted. Current market conditions may not continue. Non-VanEck proprietary information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission of VanEck.

Please note that Van Eck Securities Corporation offers investment products that invest in the asset class(es) included in this email and blog post.

Debt securities carry interest rate and credit risk. Bonds and bond funds will decrease in value as interest rates rise. Interest rate risk refers to the risk that bond prices generally fall as interest rates rise and vice versa. Credit risk is the risk of loss on an investment due to the deterioration of an issuer’s financial health. Securities may be subject to call risk, which may result in having to reinvest the proceeds at lower interest rates, resulting in a decline in income. International investing involves additional risks which include greater market volatility, the availability of less reliable financial information, higher transactional and custody costs, taxation by foreign governments, decreased market liquidity and political instability. Changes in currency exchange rates may negatively impact a Fund’s return. Investments in emerging markets securities are subject to elevated risks which include, among others, expropriation, confiscatory taxation, issues with repatriation of investment income, limitations of foreign ownership, political instability, armed conflict and social instability.

Investing involves substantial risk and high volatility, including possible loss of principal. Bonds and bond funds will generally decrease in value as interest rates rise. An investor should consider the investment objective, risks, charges and expenses of a Fund carefully before investing. To obtain a prospectus and summary prospectus, which contains this and other information, call 800.826.2333 or visit vaneck.com/etfs. Please read the prospectus and summary prospectus carefully before investing.

Van Eck Securities Corporation
666 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017
800.826.2333

This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipient. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. This communication is for informational purposes only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of VanEck or any of its subsidiaries. Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. Therefore we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such. All information is subject to change without notice. All emails at VanEck are, in accordance with Firm policy, to be used for VanEck business purposes only. Emails sent from or to the Firm are subject to review by the Firm in accordance with the Firm’s procedure for the review of correspondence.

© Van Eck Securities Corporation.

 

The Master of Yields interrupted by negative sentiment

Midstream MLPs: The Master of Yields interrupted by negative sentiment

The Master of Yields interrupted by negative sentiment

Summary

•    Master limited partnership (MLP) distributions continued to grow in Q4 2015.

•    MLP valuations are attractive when assessed by appropriate valuation metrics.
•    Midstream MLPs’ revenues are more resilient to oil price fluctuations than upstream oil companies’ revenues.
•    Yet they are trading more like upstream oil companies. We believe there is potential for an upward correction as MLP resilience becomes apparent.

Download the complete report (.pdf)

The MLP structure remains intact

Master limited partnerships (MLPs) are tax exempt limited partnerships that are required to pass through majority of their earnings as distributions to investors. A confluence of factors from restrained capital market access, declining oil prices and fears of rising interest rates have seen the price of MLPs fall by more than 46%. We believe that this price reaction has been overdone. Negative sentiment over single MLPs such as Kinder Morgan, which became overleveraged after the additional purchase of 30% of Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC, appear to have affected the sector at large. However, we see sustainable distributions and low valuations opening an attractive entry point to this sector.

For the purpose of this report MLPs refer to the 24 constituents (as on 12 Feb 2016) of the Solactive US energy infrastructure total return index.

Sustainable distributions

In their latest fourth quarter 2015 results MLPs have reported a 15% growth in quarterly distributions over the prior year allaying widespread concerns of distribution cuts.

(Click to enlarge) Although funds available for distribution have been on the decline since their peak in 2014, MLPs have been prudent in adjusting their capital budget by keeping distributable cash flow in sync with distributions paid as outlined by the weighted average coverage ratio of 1.27x.

(Click to enlarge)

Attractive valuations

When analysing distribution yields, we believe it’s vital not to view MLPs in isolation. We can draw a comparison to both utilities and real estate investment trusts (REITs). Utilities and MLPs are known to derive their primary source of earnings from services indelible to society that have high barriers to entry. In fact utilities were the original owners of many of the assets from which today’s MLPs are formed. Real estate investment trusts (REITs) and MLPs can be linked by their ownership of tangible, long lived assets ruled by underlying contracts that provide a stable income stream. MLPs also have a similar structure to REITs that escape being taxed at a corporate level. Midstream MLPs currently offer a 6% distribution yield, attractive relative to history of earnings yields of similar assets. The current low interest rate environment has investors searching for yield from non traditional sources, supporting the case for MLPs.

(Click to enlarge) Given that MLPs pay a vast percentage of their income in distributions and rely on debt and equity capital markets to fund capital growth, we use valuation metrics such as enterprise value (EV) to earnings before interest tax depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) multiples, in tandem with net debt to EBITDA rather than traditional price to earnings and price to book ratios. Since the latter half of 2014, MLPs were cautious not to raise debt in large proportions as they did in the prior valuation peaks. In the last valuation peak, MLPs did not leverage as high as in previous peaks because funding costs were higher and they had less capex need. While it has not yet reached the trough of 7x last seen in the financial crisis, EV/EBITDA is currently at 13.5x below its median of 14x. The price to cash flow from operations multiple for MLPs at 7.8x is trading at a discount to the 10-year average of 12x, also highlighting MLP’s attractive valuation.

(Click to enlarge) Midstream MLPs derive their revenues from the volume and not price of the product being transported. MLP revenues are far less correlated to oil prices than oil companies. MLP revenues rose by 2.4% in 2015 while revenues for the top 30 oil companies (by market capitalisation) fell by 5%.

Despite MLPs’ greater revenue resilience to oil price, they have been trading more like upstream oil companies and we believe that there is potential for an upward correction in their price when this becomes more apparent to the market.

(Click to enlarge) Correlation of MLPs with oil, natural gas and the US benchmark S&P 500 index have been rising this year. The correlation of MLPs with the S&P 500 index has risen to 0.8. This underscores the effect of negative sentiment emanating from the global equity market rout on MLPs and not just weak oil prices. MLPs are likely to remain correlated to the oil price and a potential rebound in oil prices could play in MLP’s favour.

(Click to enlarge) Credit default swap (CDS) spreads that measure the cost of protecting MLPs from default have risen astronomically compared with energy companies and have surpassed levels last seen in the 2008 financial crisis. What stands out from the historical data for CDS spreads is that upstream MLPs (compiled from the weighted average of the top 20 upstream MLPs) are at a greater risk of default and are denting sentiment among midstream MLPs. It’s imperative to distinguish between the energy silos as they carry different cash flow dynamics. While upstream MLPs are directly involved in exploration and production of oil and natural gas products, midstream MLPs differ from them as they generate a significant amount of fee based revenue tied to storage and transportation. In fact the vast majority of distribution cuts that occurred in Q4 2015 were from upstream MLPs and we have seen no distribution cuts from our current midstream MLP universe. Valuations are treating upstream and midstream MLPs similarly, while in reality their default risks, are inherently different, a result of their different business models.

(Click to enlarge)

Conclusion

In light of the above discussion we believe midstream MLPs are trading at levels that reflect the distress in the energy sector. By virtue of the resilience of their revenue streams, current valuations on EV/EBITDA basis and managed debt levels, midstream MLPs are well positioned to appreciate given a turnaround in stressed capital markets and sentiment.

For more information contact:

ETF Securities Research team
ETF Securities (UK) Limited
T +44 (0) 207 448 4336
E infoUK@etfsecurities.com

Important Information

This communication has been provided by ETF Securities (UK) Limited (”ETFS UK”) which is authorised and regulated by the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (the ”FCA”).

When being made within Switzerland, this communication is for the exclusive use by ”Qualified Investors” (within the meaning of Article 10 of Section 3 of the Swiss Collective Investment Schemes Act (”CISA”)) and its circulation among the public is prohibited.

The information contained in this communication is for your general information only and is neither an offer for sale nor a solicitation of an offer to buy securities. This communication should not be used as the basis for any investment decision. Historical performance is not an indication of future performance and any investments may go down in value.

This document is not, and under no circumstances is to be construed as, an advertisement or any other step in furtherance of a public offering of shares or securities in the United States or any province or territory thereof. Neither this document nor any copy hereof should be taken, transmitted or distributed (directly or indirectly) into the United States.

This communication may contain independent market commentary prepared by ETFS UK based on publicly available information. Although ETFS UK endeavours to ensure the accuracy of the content in this communication, ETFS UK does not warrant or guarantee its accuracy or correctness. Any third party data providers used to source the information in this communication make no warranties or representation of any kind relating to such data. Where ETFS UK has expressed its own opinions related to product or market activity, these views may change. Neither ETFS UK, nor any affiliate, nor any of their respective, officers, directors, partners, or employees accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from any use of this publication or its contents.

ETFS UK is required by the FCA to clarify that it is not acting for you in any way in relation to the investment or investment activity to which this communication relates. In particular, ETFS UK will not provide any investment services to you and or advise you on the merits of, or make any recommendation to you in relation to, the terms of any transaction.  No representative of ETFS UK is authorised to behave in any way which would lead you to believe otherwise. ETFS UK is not, therefore, responsible for providing you with the protections afforded to its clients and you should seek your own independent legal, investment and tax or other advice as you see fit.

Värdedrivare på aktiemarknaden sedan 1940

Värdedrivare på aktiemarknaden sedan 1940

Värdedrivare på aktiemarknaden sedan 1940. Värdeutvecklingen på aktiemarknaden genereras dels genom att aktier stiger i värde (prisuppgång), dels genom utdelningar. Vilken värdedrivare är mest värdefull? Är det alltid samma värdedrivare som är bäst? I detta inlägg ska jag besvara dessa frågor. Jeff Kleintop på LPL Financials har brutit ner värdeutvecklingen i tre beståndsdelar: utdelningar, vinstökningar i de underliggande bolagen och multipelexpansion / högre värderingsmultipel (baserat på P/E-talet).

En kort förklaringstext till de två prisuppgångsparametrarna / värdedrivarna. Om aktiekurserna stiger i samband med att vinsterna ökar men utan att värderingsmultipeln P/E förändras klassificeras avkastningen som vinstrelaterad. Om aktiekurserna stiger medan vinsterna minskar klassificeras avkastningen som värderelaterad.

För utvecklingen sedan 1940, se graf nedan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nya ETF lanseringar – Vi har hela listan

Nya ETF lanseringar –  Vi har hela listan

Nya ETF lanseringar –  Vi har hela listan. Under de senaste veckorna har två stycken ETF:er noterats på New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) och fem stycken på tyska XETRA. Det finns flera intressanta lanseringar som är värda att titta lite extra på. Den mest intressanta, enligt min mening, är ETF:en Arrow Dow Jones Global Yield ETF (ticker GYLD). Denna ETF är en s.k. ”multi-asset ETF” bestående av högavkastande aktier, obligationer och alternativa investeringar (inkl. t.ex. REIT:s och MLP:s). Denna inriktning ligger verkligen rätt i tiden. Jag har själv funderat på att sätta ihop en ETF-portfölj med detta fokus. Det ska verkligen bli intressant och följa hur denna ETF utvecklas. I dagsläget väntar jag dock med att köpa.

Deutsche Bank bryter också ny mark. Två av Deutsche Banks nya ETF:er gör det möjligt att för första gången få en hävstång på 2x/-2x för statsobligationer emitterade av euroländerna. ETF:erna heter db x-trackers II Eurozone Sovereigns Double Long Daily ETF och db x-trackers II Eurozone Sovereigns Double Short Daily ETF.

Obligations-ETF:erna med inriktning på skräpobligationer i Emerging Markets från Market Vectors och asiatiska statsobligationer från SPDR är också intressanta nyheter.

[table id=356 /]