Archive for October 23rd, 2012
SIA Alert: Silver Wheaton CP TSX (SLW.TO) (October 23, 2012)
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
SIA Charts Daily Stock Report (siacharts.com)
Silver Wheaton (SLW.TO) – Silver Wheaton (SLW.TO) has moved into the favored zone oftheSIAS&P.’TSX 60 Report a week ago with a strong performance over the last month. The first resistance level is found at $37.79. The $40 area provides the next level of resistance with the prior highs at $45.16 coming into play if the strength continues. Support is found at $32.25 and below this at $28.64.
Silver Wheaton (SLW.TO) has continued it run upwards to resistance at $40.91. A move above this could see it challenge its prior high from April 2011 at $45.16. Support is now found below at $37.05. Further support remains at $32.25 and $28.64 from the last time we looked at SLW.TO.
Green – Favoured
Yellow – Neutral
Red – Out of favour
Important Disclaimer
SIACharts.com specifically represents that it does not give investment advice or advocate the purchase or sale of any security or investment. None of the information contained in this website or document constitutes an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any security or other investment or an offer to provide investment services of any kind. Neither SIACharts.com (FundCharts Inc.) nor its third party content providers shall be liable for any errors, inaccuracies or delays in content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
Copyright © siacharts.com
Tech Talk: Coal ETF Could Break Out to Over $30 (October 23, 2012)
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
Pre-opening Comments for Tuesday October 23rd
U.S. equity index futures are sharply lower this morning. S&P 500 futures are down 17 points in pre-opening trade. Index futures are responding to negative guidance issued by Dupont and MMM as well as renewed concerns about European sovereign debt.
Third quarter earnings continue to pour in. Companies reporting this morning included Dupont, Reynolds American, Coach, Harley Davidson, Regions Financial, Xerox, United Technologies, Radio Shack, UPS, Illinois Tool Works and Whirlpool.
The Bank of Canada maintained its overnight lending rate at 1.0%. The Canadian Dollar is slightly higher following the announcement. The Bank of Canada maintained its forecast for GDP growth in Canada at a 2.3% rate in 2013.
Buckingham initiated coverage on the U.S. airline industry with a favourable rating. Delta, United Continental and US Airways were initiated with Buy ratings.
Yahoo added $0.60 to $46.40 after reporting higher than expected quarterly results. In addition, Susquehanna upgraded the stock from Neutral to Buy.
Apple is expected to launch the iPad Mini later today.
Target slipped $0.31 to $61.90 despite announcing sale of its $5.9 billion credit card unit to Toronto Dominion Bank.
Technical Watch
Dupont Co. (NYSE:DD) – $46.40 fell 6.8% after reporting lower than consensus third quarter earnings and revenues and after lowering fourth quarter guidance. The stock has a mixed technical profile. Intermediate trend is neutral. The stock recently fell below its 20, 50 and 200 day moving averages. Short term momentum indicators are neutral. Strength relative to the S&P 500 Index has been negative since the beginning of May. Preferred strategy is to accumulate on weakness closer to support at $45.77.
![clip_image001[1]](http://www.advisoranalyst.com/glablog/goto/http://www.timingthemarket.ca/techtalk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/clip_image001112.png "clip_image001[1]")
Leibovit Volume Reversal Signals
Negative Leibovit Volume Reversal signals were recorded by UNG and WRI. Following is a link: http://tinyurl.com/9o6jbjt
Interesting Charts
A wild day for U.S. equity indices! Both the S&P 500 and Dow Industrials broke to five week lows in early trading, but charged back by the close. Nice bounce from near their 50 day moving averages!
![clip_image002[4]](http://www.advisoranalyst.com/glablog/goto/http://www.timingthemarket.ca/techtalk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/clip_image00242.png "clip_image002[4]")
The trigger was strength in Apple in late trading. Apple is bouncing from near the top of a previous trading range. The company is expected to announce new products today.
Notably strong were the coal stocks. The coal ETF completed a classic reverse head and shoulders pattern. Classic technical target on the breakout is $30.39.
Responses to third quarter reports once again were significant. Caterpillar opened sharply lower after reporting higher than consensus earnings, but lower than consensus revenues. The company also lowered guidance. However, late buying carried the stock to a gain on the day.
Peabody was the leader in the coal sector despite reporting lower earnings. An encouraging sign for Chinese related stocks! Coal stocks also are expected to benefit if Romney becomes President.
The most frequent miss by big cap companies, that have reported third quarter reports to date, is revenues. The main reason for lower revenues is strength of the U.S. Dollar Index in the third quarter relative to the same period last year and its impact when international currencies are translated into U.S. Dollars. Notice that the negative impact on revenues (as well as earnings) due to currency translation virtually disappears in the fourth quarter if the U.S. Dollar Index remains near current levels.
Prairiecropcharts.com Blog
Harold Davis gives his latest comments on specialty grain crops. Following is a link to his comments:
http://www.prairiecropcharts.com/
Note from the charts that grain prices once again are increasing, an encouraging sign for the agriculture sector. Not surprising, COW is testing its high. ‘Tis the season!
Special Free Services available through www.equityclock.com
Equityclock.com is offering free access to a data base showing seasonal studies on individual stocks and sectors. The data base holds seasonality studies on over 1000 big and moderate cap securities and indices.
To login, simply go to http://www.equityclock.com/charts/
Following is an example:
Agricultural Products Industry Seasonal Chart
FP Trading Desk Headline
FP Trading Desk headline reads, “Stocks that win from U.S. housing recovery”. Following is a link to the report:
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/10/22/stocks-that-win-from-u-s-housing-recovery/
Disclaimer: Comments and opinions offered in this report at www.timingthemarket.ca are for information only. They should not be considered as advice to purchase or to sell mentioned securities. Data offered in this report is believed to be accurate, but is not guaranteed.
Don and Jon Vialoux are research analysts for Horizons Investment Management Inc. All of the views expressed herein are the personal views of the authors and are not necessarily the views of Horizons Investment Management Inc., although any of the recommendations found herein may be reflected in positions or transactions in the various client portfolios managed by Horizons Investment Management Inc
Horizons Seasonal Rotation ETF HAC October 22nd 2012
Treasuries Now Have the Worst Risk/Return Profile in Decades
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
by Sober Look
Below is an excellent chart from Goldman Asset Management. It shows the risk/return profile of holding the 10y treasury during different periods of time. “Principal” is the mark-to-market impact of the bond yield increasing by 100bp (1%). “Roll” is the impact of time passage. In one year the 10y bond becomes the 9y bond, and if the yield curve is positively sloping, the 9y bond should have a lower yield, offsetting slightly the 100bp yield increase. ”Coupon” is just the income collected in one year, and “Total Return” is a combination of the three.
In addition to the ridiculously low current coupon these days, the duration of the 10y bond is now considerably higher (precisely because of the low coupon), making the bond more vulnerable to rate shocks. That’s why the 100 bp rate increase (dark blue) causes a much higher principal loss now than it did at any time in the past 40 years.
GS: – In the 1980’s, the average yield and duration of the 10-Year Treasury was 10.6% and 6.1 years, respectively. When rates rose 100 bps, investors still made money. Today, the on-the-run 10-Year Treasury has a yield of 1.6% and a duration of 9.2 years, resulting in heightened rate sensitivity and significantly less coupon to offset principal losses during periods of higher rates.
Source: GS (click to enlarge)
Posted in Markets | Comments Off
There’s New Hope for US Recovery as Early Cyclical Sectors Rebound
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
by Joseph Carson, U.S. Economist and Head of Global Economic Research, AllianceBernstein
Something is changing in the US economic recovery. Housing and autos are finally starting to wake up from a recession-induced slumber, and the timing couldn’t be better.
Since the recession ended in mid-2009, the US economy has been primarily driven by exports and investment. These two sectors, which traditionally drove growth later in a recovery, have recently started to lose steam amid the slowdown in global trade and uncertainty about US fiscal policy, as the display below shows. In contrast, housing and autos, which have always been early cyclical leaders in economic recoveries, are now starting to recover after being stuck in the fallout from the downturn.
To date, the strength of exports and investment alongside the weakness of housing and motor vehicles was an unusual combination. More than two years ago, we described this as a new mix of economic growth drivers. It was just what the economy needed.
At the time, emerging-market economies were growing rapidly, allowing a competitive US manufacturing sector to increase sales abroad. This spurred a strong export cycle, as well as investment spending gains for the US.
Meanwhile, US households were saddled with debt from the credit bust. Because of this, domestic sectors such as motor vehicles and housing weren’t capable of driving the recovery.
Today, US households have made great progress in reducing their debt burden, repairing their balance sheets and improving cash flows. Against this backdrop, I expect an imminent shift back toward the more traditional early cyclical sectors that have powered recoveries in the past. There’s a lot of pent up demand waiting to be released.
Motor vehicle sales had fallen to 10 million units a year in mid-2009, at the start of the economic recovery, the lowest level of any starting point since 1975. Progress has been uneven, but the cumulative gains to date now exceed the rebounds in each of the last three US recoveries.
The same goes for housing. When the recession ended, the US real estate market was hobbled by a massive overhang of unsold homes and even more houses were stuck in the foreclosure pipeline. Now, the pace of the rebound in residential construction (from depressed levels) rivals that of the previous three economic recoveries. And there’s still a long way to go, since new construction is only a little more than half of normal levels of activity.
A recovery in these domestic industries should support more robust and sustainable economic growth by helping to augment job and wealth creation, while fostering improved flows of credit and leading to increased business and consumer confidence. And if the transition of the US economy back toward early cyclical growth drivers continues, I think it would also mark an important new stage for global growth by allowing the US to resume a greater leadership role in the world economy, at a time when other major regional economies are facing significant challenges.
The views expressed herein do not constitute research, investment advice or trade recommendations and do not necessarily represent the views of all AllianceBernstein portfolio-management teams.
Joseph G. Carson is US Economist and Head of Global Economic Research at AllianceBernstein.
Copyright © AllianceBernstein
Posted in Markets | Comments Off
What’s Bubbling Up? The Hidden Costs of Indexing
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
by Vladimir Zlotnikov, Chief Market Strategist, AllianceBernstein
Investors eager for “safety” have been piling into indexed portfolios at the expense of actively managed strategies—and thus making a big, and risky, bet against deep value and for high-dividend yielding stocks. We think they’re pursuing just the wrong course.
We see significant opportunity for outsize returns in deep-value stocks and an unusually high degree of downside risk in the high-dividend payers.
You can see the opportunity by comparing the weight of the two groups within the S&P 500. Outperformance by stocks paying high dividends has driven their index weight to a record high: almost 45% of the index’s market capitalization is in stocks with a dividend yield 20% or more higher than the index, as the display below shows. At the same time, underperformance has driven down the weight of low-price-to-book stocks. Roughly 25% of the S&P 500’s market cap lies in stocks with a price/book ratio 20% or more below the market P/B. That’s even less than during the tech bubble!
Since 1970, the median market cap of the two groups has been similar: 34% for high-dividend payers, and 31% for the low-price-to-book group. If the mix normalizes—as it has historically—low-price-to-book stocks will outperform and high-dividend payers will underperform. Investors in the index could be slammed two ways.
Deep-value stocks have outperformed the market significantly over time, with large bursts in outperformance following prior periods when poor performance drove down their market weight. In the 12 months after earlier low points in their index weight, low-price-to-book stocks have outperformed the market handsomely: by 3.8 percentage points in the 12 months after August 1978, by 12.7 points after October 1990, by 7.5 points after December 2000, and by 10.3 points after November 2008. And indeed, the gap in market weights between low-price-to-book and high-dividend yield stocks wasn’t as wide at those points as it is today.
If we assume a relatively conservative 10% future outperformance by low-price/book and 10% underperformance by high-dividend paying stocks, index investors may be leaving almost 200 basis points annually on the table, owing to the biased construction of the S&P 500 today.
And we estimate that a portfolio with exposures to high-yield and deep-value stocks close to the historical average could outperform the S&P 500 by as much as 15%.
The views expressed herein do not constitute research, investment advice or trade recommendations and do not necessarily represent the views of all AllianceBernstein portfolio-management teams.
Vadim Zlotnikov is Chief Market Strategist for AllianceBernstein.
Posted in Markets | Comments Off
Bank Of Canada Fires Shot Across Bow: “Withdrawal Of Stimulus Will Likely Be Required”
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
With the entire world engaged in global coordinated easing, slashing, burning, and overall lowering rates and printing money by the wheelbarrow, the Bank of Canada just fired a shot across the bow. Here is the kicker: “Reflecting all of these factors, the Bank has decided to maintain the target for the overnight rate at 1 per cent. Over time, some modest withdrawal of monetary policy stimulus will likely be required.”
The Loonie is happy:
Full statement link here, and a side by side comparison with the last statement below.
Posted in Markets | Comments Off
Bruce Berkowitz: Financial Stocks and Other Unloved Securities
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
Interview with Bruce Berkowitz
Consuelo Mack WealthTrack – October 12, 2012 – Full Transcript
Great investor and Morningstar fund manager of the decade, Bruce Berkowitz discusses his controversial concentration in financial stocks, and other unloved securities.
CONSUELO MACK: This week on WealthTrack, Fairholme Fund’s Bruce Berkowitz explains why he is ignoring the crowd and swimming with financial stocks while other investors flee! An exclusive interview with Great Investor Bruce Berkowitz is next on Consuelo Mack WealthTrack.
Hello and welcome to this edition of WealthTrack, I’m Consuelo Mack. “Ignore the crowd” is the motto of this week’s Great Investor guest, and Fairholme Fund’s Bruce Berkowitz has had his work cut out for himself defending it, especially in 2011.
The roar of the crowd was deafening as Berkowitz heavily invested in a handful of stocks left for dead by most investors. Fairholme’s largest holding by far is AIG, the global insurer brought to its knees and then resuscitated by the U.S. government. Next is Sears Holdings, the long out of favor retailer and corporate real estate behemoth. Fairholme is the second largest shareholder after Sears chairman, Eddie Lampert. The fund’s third biggest holding is Bank of America, which is still under legal assault related to its Merrill Lynch acquisition and mortgage business. The three companies account for over 50% of Fairholme’s portfolio.
That concentration in then declining unloved companies freaked out shareholders, who abandoned ship in droves last year. Assets under management had climbed to a high of $20.5 billion by early 2011, helped by Berkowitz being named Morningstar’s first ever Domestic Equity Fund Manager of the Decade and his exceptional 13.2% annualized returns for the period; assets have since fallen to the $7 billion range since. One of shareholders who has not fled is Berkowitz himself, who has much of his wealth invested in the Fairholme Funds. As with the vast majority of our Great Investors, staying with them through thick and thin has proven to be a profitable decision. The Fairholme Fund’s 10% annualized returns over the last decade place it in the top one percent of its large value category and have handily beaten the market.
Bruce Berkowitz is the sole owner of Fairholme Capital Management, its chief investment officer plus portfolio manager of the flagship Fairholme Fund, launched in 1999, and two much smaller and more recent ones. In addition to Manager of the Decade, Morningstar also named Berkowitz Domestic Equity Fund Manager of the Year in 2009. I began the interview by asking him why his fund remains so concentrated in so few companies.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: It’s the history of success. When you want to look at the Fortune 400 or those who’ve really succeeded well, they have focused on few activities. One could say well, they were running those activities, but I think we focused on companies that the managers could do a better job than I could. And that’s the reason. So the point being, why would you possibly want to buy your tenth best idea if you can buy more of your best idea?
So I understand if you’re not confident or you feel ignorant about what you’re doing, I could understand the need to have a lot of positions. But if you believe you’ve focused and you understand, and the facts are telling you that you’re right, then I don’t believe there’s a need for more than ten, and you could have a handful of significant positions and do quite well in this world. You only need a few ideas and a lifetime to do unbelievably well. And that’s what we’re trying to achieve. That’s what we’ve promised. We’ve kept our word and we’ve stayed the course. And no matter how shareholders may feel, after a decline, we’re going to keep to what we said we would do.
CONSUELO MACK: So let’s talk about the few good ideas. And of course your motto is ‘ignore the crowd.’ You certainly have done that, in spades, no question. And you’ve ignored the crowd to the extent where a large portion of your limited holdings are in financial stocks. Financial stocks which are hated and vilified by the crowd, no question about it. So why go looking for trouble? I mean, why invest in AIG and Bank of America, for instance? Why choose the financial stocks?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Well, the financials are just smack-dab in the middle of my circle of competence. The greatest performance I ever had was in the ’90s when I invested in the late ’80s/early 1990s in financials. It was a rocky road for a few years, and then we had—
CONSUELO MACK: So Wells Fargo, for instance, was one of your holdings back then.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Wells Fargo, we made seven times our money. It was a decade of very good performance, abnormally high performance. And I was much younger, and I always promised myself if one day the financials would have another collapse, I hope I have enough money and I made enough money, to really take advantage of it. And this is exactly what I’ve done. We have bought systemically important companies at a fraction, say less than half of their liquidating values.
CONSUELO MACK: What’s the opportunity versus the risk that you saw in going into the financial companies that you did in 2011?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: We went into the financials after they were recapitalized by the government, after their business trends turned positive, and they were still priced less than liquidation values. And today, they continue to be priced less than liquidation values. So we had the situation in 2011 where the businesses are all starting to improve, and we invest. But their prices plummet because investors did not believe the facts, what they were seeing reported by the companies. Obviously when you look back, you had the recent pain of these companies being decimated. You had the fear of the future, maybe a double-dip recession. And a lot of investors just couldn’t go there. Even though when you can look back today and see how they performed since we purchased the companies, they’ve done very well. And they’ve made good money in a difficult environment. They’re going to make great money in a more normal environment.
And this is what I do. This is what I’ve always done. I mean, a lot of people look at the fund and they say, oh the fund’s down. You know, we made a lot of distributions. We made almost two billion dollars in distributions. So when you take into account distributions. When we started out with ten dollars, we’re at $40 right now.
CONSUELO MACK: So you’re talking about then, from inception.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: From the Fairholme Fund, from the share. And if you compare that to the S&P, if you put $10 into the S&P Index, you’d have $12. Ten to 12; we’ve gone to 40. Now people say, oh, we’re very volatile, you’ve got to be careful. But you know what? You can pick any 60-month period you like during our existence, and the worst we performed over those five years, we were down seven percent.
CONSUELO MACK: So it’s interesting. Since inception, there’s no question, and also in the last five years, since inception especially, in the last ten years you’ve beaten the market handily, no question about it. The last three years, again, for the most recent investors, you’ve actually trailed the market. So let me just put it this way: from a recent experience, shareholders have not benefited by being investors in the Fairholme Fund. So what do you say, basically, to them?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: I say to them that we invest for the long-term. We talk about a five-year horizon. We ask you to look back at our firm, at the Fairholme Fund, and look at any five-year horizon you’d like, any 60-month period. And we’ve crushed the S&P on the worst five 60 months, on the best 60 months; our best 60 months is 160% up. Multiples of the S&P. We ask you to look since inception, five years or longer, any five years. We had a very difficult 2011, so you have to understand the facts. The facts are we bought companies after they turned. Their values, their book values, liquidation values, bad debt ratios, ROEs, RIAs, whatever you want to look at, we’re improving.
CONSUELO MACK: Right, and you’re talking about the fundamentals of the companies themselves.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: The fundamentals, the facts.
CONSUELO MACK: You’re talking about AIG and Bank of America.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: AIG, Bank of America, CIT, all the financials that we’ve invested in. The ones we had before, that were some of the ones we had to sell because of liquidations. They were all turning. When we bought, it was half of liquidation value. And it went further down, which created more opportunity, which allowed us to focus more. That’s my job.
CONSUELO MACK: Right, so as a value investor, a deep value investor, this is just par for the course, then, of what we should expect if I want to invest in the Fairholme Fund, just get used to the fact that you’re going to be looking for deep values, which means that people don’t like them, they’re shunned, they’re vilified.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Right.
CONSUELO MACK: And people are going to think you’re nuts for a certain amount of time.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: I think that’s true. If I see a dollar bill on the floor, and I can buy it for 20 cents or 30 cents, and I know that dollar bill is real; in fact I believe that dollar bill will eventually be two dollars and three dollars, and I can get it for a fraction, I’m going to buy as much as I possibly can within the rules being a mutual fund.
CONSUELO MACK: Okay. Your motto is ‘ignore the crowd.’ But the crowd that did come into the Fairholme Fund, because you’ve had this superb track record, you were named Morningstar’s first-ever Manager of the Decade. And so people basically flocked into the fund, and then in 2011 they just fled the fund, so you lost over half of your assets.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Yes.
CONSUELO MACK: In retrospect, would you have handled anything differently? Or were there lessons? What was the takeaway of that, for you?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Well, if I knew the future, I would have waited, I would have held onto the healthcare companies longer. I would have waited for the financials if I knew what the prices were going to be. But I don’t have the crystal ball. All I can judge are the facts. That companies turned the corner. They were not going to die. They were unbelievably cheap. We had a huge opportunity and over a five-year window, we were going to make a lot of money. This is what happened to me in the late ’80s, and through the ’90s, and I thought this was a replay. And it is turning out to be a replay.
CONSUELO MACK: That’s the question. So it is turning out to be a replay, then.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: It is, and we’re back. Our performance, when you take into account distributions, we are 10, 12% from our all-time high. We’re getting there. And based upon, we’re up, what, 32, 33% right now?
CONSUELO MACK: Right, year-to-date.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Got about twice the S&P. And our companies, many of our companies are still dirt cheap. That dollar bill may be $1.50 now, and they’re not even 75 cents on $1.50. So we have a long run ahead of ourselves. And the facts, the evidence, the quarterly reports are showing that it’s going the way we thought it would. And for those, you know, you go back three years, see what I had to say, five years, a couple of years ago. I believe our thesis is correct.
CONSUELO MACK: It’s starting to be reflected in the market.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Right, and the facts, and quarterly reports, it’s proving it and the facts are proving it. And I wish I could figure out how prices go up and down in a six-month period, or 12-month, but I don’t have that ability. So we look at book values, we look at more stable measures. We look at performance ratios and we know eventually the facts cannot be ignored. You could only ignore certain issues, like making a ton of money for so long. It’s right there, it’s cash you can count in the bank.
CONSUELO MACK: And I know cash is very important to you. Give me the quick executive summary for AIG, you’re largest holding by far, and you really have these terrific case studies that you have in the Fairholme Fund website. We’ll probably a link on our website as well. So AIG, give me the rationale.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: AIG, a victim of a set of circumstances, from Hank Greenberg leaving to two little small divisions that were no longer being watched by a smart manager, almost blowing up the entire company, because of liquidity issues. If Hank Greenberg was there, it would not have happened.
CONSUELO MACK: And the government ended up owning like 90%, right?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Ninety-two percent. A very smart government. So we’re the largest owner after the government. So you look at the company. I mean, growing up in the insurance world, being on the boards of insurance companies, you drooled about AIG. At one time, it was five, six times book value. And all of a sudden the price goes down to near zero. And you still have a very valuable global franchise, large U.S. domestic life insurance. Huge amount of assets. You’re buying tangible assets for less than 50 cents on the dollar and you’re becoming a large owner of a systemically important company that has to exist. After it’s been refurbished.
CONSUELO MACK: So right now, AIG still your largest holding, still a terrific buy?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Terrific buy.
CONSUELO MACK: And so when do you decide to get out? I mean, what’s the decision that you start trimming back?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Well, I think the book value is near 70. It’s going to continue to grow. The price, less than 35, will eventually reach book value. Maybe that happens in the 70s or the 80s, I don’t know. But it gets about there, we’ll see. But companies such as AIG can trade at a multiple of book value. But I don’t want to go there yet. Just getting to book value will be a very nice return for shareholders. It’s a similar case for Bank of America. It’s a very similar case in Sears.
CONSUELO MACK: But talk about, so in the next case of Bank of America. Stick with the financials. And again, you keep seeing these headlines, the New York State Attorney General’s going to sue them as well, after J.P. Morgan Chase. So you keep getting this drumbeat of mortgage exposure and who-knows-what.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: The big uncertainty with Bank of America, the legal issues, are related to mortgages. Clearly they have to work as hard as they can to resolve that uncertainty. That’s the catalyst, though, the uncertainty. Bank of America has a $20 book value. It has 16, $15 billion of reserves against these issues. They have earnings power of $20 billion a year. They are burning through their issues. They’re more than halfway through now. But no one’s going to really touch Bank of America until the uncertainty diminishes.
But I look at it as you could have a wide range of uncertainty and they can handle it. And they have. And you can see the results of settlements and you can see where it’s heading. You’ve had a long period of time now, so you see how it’s sort of the tenure, you see how the vintage, you see how it’s aging. And they’re making money. Their book value’s going up. So here you have a company less than, last time I looked, nine dollars that has a book of 20. There’s trading for less than the cash they own in the bank. What am I missing?
And a company that is just a huge pot of the system, the financial system of the United States. So what more can an investor ask for? If it’s hated, I mean, it’s absolutely hated. But it’s like going to a restaurant with a new chef, and you won’t go to a restaurant with a new chef because of the bad meal you had with the old chef. I mean it doesn’t make any sense how people are behaving to a situation that no longer exists.
CONSUELO MACK: All right, so this is definitely vintage Bruce Berkowitz strategy, there’s no question about it.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: This is what we look for.
CONSUELO MACK: The third case study I’m going to ask you about is Sears. It’s not a financial stock. It’s considered to be an old, mature retailer, and you’ve owned it for about five years.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Right.
CONSUELO MACK: Hasn’t been a great investment, right, for you?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Absolutely.
CONSUELO MACK: And so what’s the rationale for sticking with Sears? You’re the second-largest shareholder of Sears.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Yes, I’ve tried to explain this a bunch of times.
CONSUELO MACK: Maybe this time it’ll take.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: And I’m trying a new way now.
CONSUELO MACK: Okay.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: The largest mall operator, I believe in the United States, is Simon. Sears owns more, or leases, very long-term lease, which is the equivalent of ownership, owns or long-term leases, more square footage than Simon. And if you compare the values of the two companies, Sears is about one-tenth the enterprise value of Simon. Now, what’s wrong with the picture, how can Sears be valued, the equity and debt be valued one way, and Simon, which has less space, be valued at almost ten times that value?
CONSUELO MACK: Well, I’ll tell you how it can be valued differently, and it’s because Sears is a retailer and it’s not trading properties like Simon is. So people have a very different view of Sears, because these are retail brand spaces.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: If you look at what’s happened in the past year, and you see how Sears has sold properties and they’ve closed stores down, and how they’ve made money by closing stores, and pulled in huge amounts of cash, the facts tell you that it’s true. They have tremendous value in the real estate. Look at it another way. Today’s market price of Sears is equivalent to the liquidation value of just the inventory within Sears and Kmart. So there’s the inventory, there’s the real estate. We haven’t even talked about the brands, Lands’ End, or the insurance company, it’s Canada. So any way you look at it, it’s worth a multiple of what we paid for, of where it’s trading today, and there’s a fact set that shows that’s correct.
CONSUELO MACK: So shouldn’t Sears be doing more, I mean, here you are the second-largest shareholder. Shouldn’t it be doing more to unlock the values that you’re talking about?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: When it comes to real estate, you can’t push on a string. When you’re in a real estate cycle, there’s a time to sell, there’s a time to buy, there’s a time to do nothing. And I think Eddie Lampert will figure out at what point it makes more economic sense to close down a store and sell it to a company that needs it, whether it’s European outlets or a chain store, whatever. Malls are doing quite well. Rents are up, occupancy is up. And if you understand the history of malls in America, and what it is to be the anchor and the kinds of deals that you receive, to be an anchor, in terms of owning the property, rights of first refusal, the price of long-term leases, when you look at all of it, you have to come to the conclusion that the kind of stock price doesn’t make any sense.
CONSUELO MACK: So looking at Fairholme, what place do you play in my portfolio, if I want a well-diversified portfolio, and I want Fairholme to be part of it?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: I believe it’s dependent upon your sort of emotional attitude towards the markets. And how you feel in terms of what fraction Fairholme should be, of an overall portfolio. And it’s really up to the individual. I can’t tell you.
CONSUELO MACK: Right.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: I’m all in, I can tell you that, but…
CONSUELO MACK: You’re all in. So what is it that it’s going to deliver for me, as an investment? What is it that I can expect if I stick with you for five years or more?
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Before 2011, we had high teens performance.
CONSUELO MACK: Annualized performance.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Annualized performance. And now we’re down to a measly 10%, 11% compared to zero for the S&P 500. But we’re bums. I think we’re going to get back in everyone’s good graces because of the positions we have now have the ability to make a 10% return on equity, on shareholder’s money. And if they’re at half of equity price, at half of book value, that means we should be able to make 20% per annum. So I see us getting back to that high teens performance.
CONSUELO MACK: One Investment for a long-term diversified portfolio.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Our largest position, by far, is AIG. Rumors of AIG’s death were greatly exaggerated a few years back. The government is pretty much out. You’re paying 50 cents on the dollar of tangible book. The company will grow, the franchise is still there. They’re back. They’re back, we’re back, the economy’s getting back. It’s happening. I know it’s been a long time and people are still traumatized from the past few years. But eventually you have to get over it and take a look and see the reality of what’s actually happening.
CONSUELO MACK: You heard it here first. Bruce Berkowitz, the Fairholme Fund, are back. So, Bruce, thank you so much. You certainly are back on WealthTrack, and we really appreciate you being here.
BRUCE BERKOWITZ: Thank you.
CONSUELO MACK: At the conclusion of every WealthTrack, we give you one suggestion to help you build and protect your wealth over the long term. This week’s interview with Bruce Berkowitz reminded me of a timeless message that we have delivered to WealthTrack viewers since our launch eight years ago. It is: avoid the underperformance trap!
There have been numerous studies done comparing mutual fund performance with that of the shareholders who invest in those funds. Investors underperform even top funds they invest in by a huge margin because time after time they pour money into funds that have had a stretch of exceptional performance, as they did with the Fairholme Fund, and they bail out when the fund underperforms, thus missing any subsequent rebound: the infamous buy high and sell low mistake.
The solution: once you have chosen your funds based on their management, culture, long-term track records and just as important, matched their risk profile with your tolerance level, stick with them. We want you to beat the underperformance trap!
Next week we’re going to be joined by another contrarian Great Investor. Steven Romick of the FPA Crescent Fund will explain why he’s low on conviction and high on “compounders.” We’ll find out what those are. To see our interviews again, please go to our website, wealthtrack.com. Advanced viewing is available to Premium subscribers and additional material can be seen on our new and improved WealthTrack Extra feature. And that concludes this edition of WealthTrack. Thank you for watching and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Copyright © Wealthtrack.com
Posted in Markets | Comments Off
“Silver Anniversary” (Saut)
Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
“Silver Anniversary”
by Jeffrey Saut, Chief Investment Strategist, Raymond James
October 22, 2012
It was Friday October 16, 1987 as I looked across Wheat First Securities’ trading desk only to see a stark look on the face of my second in command, Art Huprich. At the time the D-J Industrials (INDU/13343.51) were down about 100 points with 30 minutes left in the trading session. And, as stocks swooned I said to Art, “Today is just for practice!” Little did I know how prophetic that statement would prove. To be sure, the “set up” for the Great Crash was almost preordained with the D-J Utility Average peaking in the Spring, while the D-J Transportation Average and Advance/Decline figures topped during the summer months. In fact, I was actually quoted in Barron’s three weeks prior to “the crash” stating, “Get ready for a waterfall decline.” Accordingly, I had termed the 35% rally in the Industrials during the first nine months of the year as, “The solitary dance of the Dow,” because every other indicator I monitored was diverging from the Dow Delight. At the time a run on the U.S. dollar was in full swing despite a Yield Yelp for the 30-year Treasury bond from 7.5% to over 10%. Participants, however, were lulled into complacency, emboldened by the belief that “portfolio insurance” would guard them against any stock market decline. As the sagacious Craig Drill, eponymous captain of Drill Capital, writes while quoting that legendary economist Stevie Wonder:
“When you believe in things that you don’t understand, then you suffer, superstition ain’t the way, yeh, yeh …”
By that Friday’s close (October 16, 1987) the senior index had lost 108 points, accompanied by record volume of 338.5 million shares, leaving participants brooding about their losses. Such broodings were amplified as the crash gathered steam over the weekend when markets in Hong Kong “melted” followed by similar slides in all of the European markets. When Art and I arrived at work on October 19, 1987 the rout was on, exaggerated by the shelling of an Iranian oil platform in the Persian Gulf by two U.S. warships. As the NYSE opened there was chaos on the trading floor where the specialists were being inundated with sell orders, causing many of them to throw up their arms and simply walk away. At the time I was sporting a rather large position in the preferred shares of Castle & Cooke, now named Dole Foods (DOLE/$12.21). Those shares had closed on the previous Friday at $22, but after a multi-hour delayed opening they were changing hands at $9 per share. Many other stocks suffered a similar fate on Black Monday as the Industrials shed 508 points (22.6%), leaving that index at 1738.74, on a record volume of 604.3 million shares, for the worst one-day percentage loss in stock market history.
I revisit the events of October 19, 1987 this morning because over the weekend many pundits have conjured up a similar crash sequence for this week, building on last Friday’s 205-point tumble. Admittedly there is some correlation to the 1987 fiasco, for as the good folks at the “must have” Bespoke organization write:
“While 1987 was a much stronger year for equities, the patterns were similar in both years (see chart on page 3). In each case, the S&P 500 rallied to start the year, reached a short term peak in the spring, then sold off through early summer, only to rally through the fall. At this point in 1987, however, the S&P 500 had already started to break down. Let’s hope that for the sake of stockholders everywhere, the patterns have ceased to track each other.”
Bespoke goes on to note:
“If there is one key difference between now and 1987, it is valuation. The chart below (page 3) compares the trailing P/E ratio of the S&P 500 in 1987 versus 2012. In 1987 the P/E ratio of the S&P 500 peaked at an above average valuation of 23.4 just as the market was topping out. Following the crash, the P/E ratio bottomed out at 14.4. This year stocks are far from overvalued and are actually below average (see chart). So far in 2012, the S&P 500’s peak valuation was 14.9, which is just half a point above the post-crash valuation in 1987.”
Still, I was surprised by last Friday’s Fade as stocks finished the week with their biggest single-day decline in four months. Surprised, for as stated in last Wednesday’s Morning Tack, “Upside resolutions are often tricky, so we may experience a day or two where the markets stall, and rebuild more internal energy, before we get an upside breakout to new reaction highs.” Indeed, while the market’s daily internal energy was used up by mid-week, its weekly and monthly energy levels remained fully charged. Historically that suggests any decline should not gain much traction. Obviously, that was not the case on Friday. The media’s causa proxima for the Dow Dive was the slew of weak corporate earnings reports. To wit, so far just 58.6% of companies have beaten their earnings estimates, while only 43.2% have bettered their revenue estimates. This week, earnings season will be in full swing with some 700 companies reporting. Yet while last week’s earnings numbers were soft, the economic numbers had a decidedly stronger tilt with 10 coming in above expectations and 3 below.
Looking at the charts, while the S&P 500 (SPX/1433.19) failed to break out above a double-top around 1470, and in the process left what looks conspicuously like a triple-top, most of the indices closed higher for the week. The exceptions were the Russell 2000 (RUT/821.00), the NASDAQ Composite (COMP/3005.62), and the NASDAQ 100 (NDX/2678.32), all of which were weighed down by the technology stocks. Indeed, the Technology sector was the biggest loser for the week with a decline of 2.42% followed by Consumer Staples (-0.65%) and Telecommunication Services (-0.15%). By Friday’s close most of the indexes I monitor were testing, or marginally breaking, their respective 50-DMAs, except for the aforementioned tech-heavy indices. In those cases not only did they decisively violate their 50-DMAs, but they also broke below their post-QE3 support levels with the NDX closing at its lowest level in more than two months. While I would like to believe the SPX will gather itself together and break out above the now visible triple-top around the 1470 level, it just doesn’t feel like that is going to play. A more likely scenario is for a break below the oft mentioned 1418 level followed by a dip towards the 1400, which I continue to think should be bought on the premise the SPX will break out consistent with the Presidential election year pattern.
On that premise, one name that has a Strong Buy recommendation from our fundamental analyst is 3%-yielding Covanta (CVA/$17.73). Covanta is the nation’s largest owner/operator of waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities and disposes of approximately 5% of the nation’s waste stream while generating approximately 6 Mwh of renewable energy. As our fundamental analyst writes, “Covanta’s recurring revenue stream, including 75% of waste revenue under long-term contract with inflation escalators, provides a stable base while higher power economics, metal recovery and special waste should drive future growth. Covanta’s robust free cash flows afford a solid dividend with growth prospects, funds available for a recurring buyback and, in our view, attractive total return prospects.”
The call for this week: The Industrials finally experienced a daily decline of more than 1% for the first time in nearly four months. While many believe this is the beginning of a collapse, it does not appear that way to me. Indeed, the evidence of a major top in the equity markets is nowhere near conclusive. So while it may take a few sessions for the markets to stabilize, I continue to think the path of least resistance remains up.
Copyright © Raymond James
