Showing posts with label featured. Show all posts
Showing posts with label featured. Show all posts

Differentiating Between Trending vs. Mean Reverting Data

Thursday, December 02, 2010

Share
Derek Hernquist had a great post out a few weeks back titled "How I Use Mean Reversion" in which he discussed the stark difference between two types of data: trending and mean reverting. While these ideas are not rocket science, it is crucial for success in markets to understand how these two types of data differ.

What are mean reverting data?

Hernquist points out some typical mean reverting data: sentiment, valuation, profit margins, asset class popularity. I like to view many of these in terms of a swinging pendulum. Sentiment, in particular, swings back and forth between extremes around a static mean. Over long horizons humans really don't change. We are greedy at times and fearful at others and these sentiment changes will effect valuations on assets.

Financial excess has never been and will never be stopped. Some level of government intervention is helpful in muting the extremes, but regulation cannot fix this eternal cycle. Financial markets will always find a way expand to irrational levels and contract to similarly irrational levels. Humans, given a recency effect, tend to believe good times will continue forever, likewise bad times.

In the same vein profit margins drive asset class popularity. Yet profit margins will mean revert over time. Economic competition keeps industries in line with each other. High margins induce new firms to enter and squeeze margins while low margins incent firms to exit.

Hernquist's best observation from his post is that "there is a general tendency for news flow to continue in one direction, but an oscillating pattern in how market participants respond to that news flow." We see this everyday in the stock market and turning points can often be foreseen by gauging reaction to headlines. When prices stop declining on bad news, often a turn is afoot.

What is trending data?

Examples of trending data are highlighted as: sales, earnings, government spending, stock prices. While I think it could be argued in the very long term, sales and earnings data for individual companies do exhibit some form of mean reversion due to the competition factor I discussed above, trending does occur at least on a 5 year horizon, plenty of time for investors and traders. In the case of the market or economy as a whole, the data are most certainly trending in nature.

If you have any faith in human innovation and ingenuity, you'll recognize that stock prices will not fall in perpetuity at any point. Stock prices, for all their volatility and randomness, follow earnings over the long-term and tend to rise as economies expand and humans create value to sell to each other. The chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average for the last century tells the story better than anything else can.


Does this mean anything for the active trader?

In my view, shorting is a useful strategy during anomalous times like the Panic of 2008 and for very select companies about which you know a great deal. The market, though, is built to go higher. Very simply, we drop failing companies from the index. Economically, companies go bankrupt. Removing failures from an index and replacing them with growing firms helps push prices higher. There's just no reason to believe in lower prices over the long-term.

When looking at individual companies, it's important to see that momentum and trends tend to persist. Shorting flying stocks is often a losing, and almost more importantly, extremely frustrating game played in vain. Innovative companies expanding their sales and earnings can have dramatic rises in price and not be in a bubble or nearing some impending collapse. The persistent shorts in names like Apple (AAPL), Netflix (NFLX), Salesforce.com (CRM) or Baidu (BIDU) fail to recognize the trending nature of earnings and stock prices. Quick trades, scalps and the like are always possible in any moving price but often sticking with trends will be the most successful strategy in the long run.

It all comes back to the old statement: don't fight the trend. Stock prices trend along with the sales of companies and there's just no reason to doubt it. As I talked about yesterday, we are in a recovery with growing GDP and corporate profits and these are trending data. Separate this data from mean reverting indicators and the trend will become clearer and easier to stick with.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."


*DISCLOSURE: Long AAPL.

Intuitive Surgical (ISRG) Growth at a Reasonable Price

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Share
A great investing model that attempts to combine the best of the growth and value worlds is the GARP model, or growth at a reasonable price. This strategy seeks to find companies growing at above market rates yet selling with moderate price tags. Often these stocks are previous momentum crowd favorites but have been rejected because of some overhang or disappointment along the road that caused the weak holders to dump shares and move on. Intuitive Surgical, Inc. (ISRG) may be a great fit for this investing model.

What is Intuitive Surgical?

Intuitive Surgical is a leading medical technology company designing and manufacturing cutting-edge, minimally invasive robotic surgery equipment. In surgery, the name of the game is precision and using the same skills learned in open surgery, doctors can now control the instruments like never before. The da Vinci Surgical Systems offer doctors enhanced visualization with 10x high definition magnification coupled with robotic arms that provide greatly improved dexterity and precision. Intuitive Surgical's robotic systems have revolutionized minimally invasive surgeries (MIS) advancing the quality in FDA-cleared general, cardiac, thoracic, urologic, gynecologic and pediatric operations. The expanding use of minimally invasive surgery benefits patients with faster recoveries, lesser chances of complications, lower blood loss and lower pain infliction.

The company generates revenues through the initial capital sales of the da Vinci Surgical Systems as well as the recurring sales of instruments and accessories along with annual service contracts. They hold over 290 US patents and 300 foreign patents for the da Vinci system. At the end of the third quarter 2010, the company had an installed base of 1,661 da Vinci systems with 1,228 in the US, 292 in Europe and 141 in the rest of the world.

ISRG boasts a pristine balance sheet and moderate valuation

Intuitive Surgical has a minor $76.2 million in long-term liabilities against $1.6 billion in cash, equivalents and available for sale investments. With a 73% gross profit margin, the third quarter's $86.6 million in net income represented a 34% increase year-over-year. The company is a cash cow with high quality earnings generating $404 million in operating cash flow for the $260.6 million in net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2010.

A surface look at the P/E of ISRG may intimidate some given its 31x valuation but the company has a long-term record of sustained growth. For the last five years, ISRG has averaged a rate of 51% for both sales and net income growth. Shares of ISRG have been out of favor in 2010 with a year-to-date return of -13.7% significantly lagging the Nasdaq's 11% gain. Traders have dropped shares as sequential growth in earnings has stalled but with its market-leading position shares may now offer a compelling value. If ISRG is only able to grow at 20% next year, a 30x P/E applied gives an approximate price target of $315 per share, an 18% gain from current prices. I believe this may be a conservative estimate.

Risks to the company

Sequential earnings growth has slowed quarter-over-quarter throughout 2010 with Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) citing patients delaying elective procedures as the cause of slower medical device sales. Growth in individual procedures has slowed somewhat during 2010 for ISRG but still remains north of 30% Q-o-Q. Europe's capital spending has and will likely continue to be constrained in the near future as the debt crisis inhibits hospital capital spending. The company is also seeking approval from Japan for reimbursements and will needs this for growth to take hold in a significant way. The health care reform bill still presents itself as something of an unknown, and potentially a large unknown.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."


*DISCLOSURE: Long ISRG.

Focus on Individual Companies in this Pullback

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Share
The S&P 500 dropped 2.2% for the week after rallying for nine straight weeks. Bull markets, especially new ones, are difficult to get involved in because with everyone wanting in, the perfect entries are snatched up very quickly. As is often stated, stocks rise on an escalator and fall on an elevator. The pullbacks are always the clear buy areas in hindsight but fear always accompanies buying into a declining market especially when CNBC carts out all the permabears to scare us all.

The macro versus micro battle rages on

It is amazing to see how persistent the battle between the micro and the macro has been over the last year. Whenever macro worries have hit headlines the market has declined with high correlation between stocks and assets. Once we solve/delay/forget the problem stocks are freed up to continue their rally on the steadily improving micro picture.

As Zacks Investment Research laid out this week, third quarter earnings have been great on the whole. With 7/8ths of the companies in the S&P 500 having reported, we've seen 72.7% of all reporting firms do better than expected, 79.4% report positive year-over-year growth and total net income reported up 27.4% year-over-year. Full-year total earnings for the S&P 500 expected to jump 42.0% in 2010, 14.3% further in 2011. Bottom up valuation puts P/E at 14.9x for 2010, and 13.1x for 2011.

With tailwinds from round two of quantitative easing and greater clarity on the political front with the midterms out of the way, the market may be primed for greater upside. China may tighten which could impact global growth but it's not some out-of-the-ordinary possibility as they have been slowly curbing inflation for the last couple years already. And imagine that, Europe's debt woes were not perfectly and entirely fixed with the ECB's debt package; but coordinated action from officials should be able to prevent any renewed panic.

Ignore the market, find good companies

The initial move off the March 2009 bottom was fast and furious as the S&P catapulted 80% higher in little over a year. This summer's correction represented the first significant worries of a double dip and we were reminded that the developed world is still dealing with too much debt. Yet, the last two months showed the strong resilience of our markets and in short order we rallied right back to April 2010 highs.

I will be the first to say that I don't know if there's more downside in the market up here. I am very optimistic over the next year but I just couldn't tell you whether the market will go down or up next week. But, quite frankly, I don't think it matters all that much. For most of the last three years, ignoring the market's moves was nearly impossible and possibly deadly. Heightened correlation made it imperative to watch the general market closely and many chose to just trade it directly as a basket.

As we rally further though, the market is somewhat less relevant. The S&P is up 7.5% year-to-date but what has that really mattered for the likes of Apple (AAPL) up 46% YTD, Baidu (BIDU) up 169%, Netflix (NFLX) up 214%, Salesforce.com (CRM) up 56%. There are extremely impressive, innovative companies out there doing great things. These companies are rapidly growing their earnings and will perform well in any moderate market. Barring a complete collapse which I believe is highly unlikely, a company like Apple will keep making more iPads and iPhones and we'll all keep on buying them.

I think the key to not being the guy in hindsight who says that was the pullback to buy (but didn't actually buy) is focusing on individual companies and stocks that provide compelling setups. My focus is on some of the companies I've been writing about like Google (GOOG), EMC Corporation (EMC) and Potash Corporation (POT). I don't find predicting whether the market will be up or down 2-3% this week as a worthwhile endeavor but I do think EMC around $21 or POT around $130 could create very attractive entry points. Finding good stocks trading around solid levels will be my focus in the coming days.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

*DISCLOSURE: Long EMC, POT.

Tilling for Returns in Potash Corporation (POT)

Monday, November 08, 2010

Share
Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan (POT) hit headlines in mid-August when BHP Billiton (BHP) bid $39 billion for the company (~$130 per share). PotashCorp immediately rejected the bid calling it "wholly inadequate", "highly opportunistic" and an "ill-disguised attempt to exploit an anomaly in the equity market valuation". Last week Canadian authorities also rebuffed the bid believing it is "not likely to be of net benefit to Canada". With the bid out of the way and shares trading up 30% year-to-date versus the S&P's 9% gain, investors must value the enterprise's futures prospects.

The secular fertilizer story

PotashCorp is a distinct beneficiary of a major secular global trend: rising populations and rising affluence. These two trends make for significant annual increases on the demand side yet are met on the supply side with limited arable land space, particularly in the largest and fastest emerging economies of China and India. We will add 80 million people to the planet this year and many millions will achieve higher standards of living. As populations progress economically, diets typically change to ones with higher meat content over grains. Meat requires a much greater intake of grains by animals than humans themselves need with grains alone to meet the same level of satiation.

The supply side sees farmers around the world developing new lands and attempting to garner greater yields from their fields already in use. Arable land around the world is relatively fixed and massive mountain ranges and deserts in China and India limit possible future enlargement of farmland. America has some of the most fertile soil in the world endowed with 589 hectacres of land per 1000 people. This is contrasted with China and India which only have 80 and 146 hectacres, respectively. These countries will likely become major importers of grains in the future to meet their growing and advancing societies.

Both sides of the supply/demand equation create the increased need for fertilizer over time. As farmers grow more food to feed the world, they must reuse their fields year after year depleting the soil of key nutrients and minerals required. Add in major technological advancements to increase yields and fields are depleted faster than ever before. Fertilizer companies are well-positioned in a secular global trend.

Where does PotashCorp fit in?

PotashCorp is the world's largest fertilizer company and in particular controls 20% of the world's potash production capacity. It is estimated that Canada holds over 60% of the world's potash reserves putting the big three producers in a prime spot for growth: PotashCorp, along with The Mosaic Company (MOS) and Agrium Inc. (AGU). The three key ingredients to replenish in soils through fertilizers are potassium, nitrogen and phosphate, thus the three primary lines of production at PotashCorp. Potash itself is the best and purest way to restock potassium in fields placing it in high demand with an estimated 93% of potash used exclusively for fertilizers.

PotashCorp is located in the middle of a major rebound wave in agriculture production and economic growth. After the devastating destruction in soft commodity prices following the oil bubble in 2008, farmers and dealers stepped back, demand for fertilizer fell off and potash prices collapsed. Now the recovery in prices has been well underway throughout 2010. This summer's large advances in prices of soft commodities should allow for a much clearer demand picture as wheat, corn, soybeans, oats are all up anywhere between 40-100% just since June of this year.

Importantly the valuation is still attractive

PotashCorp management is known for being conservative and oriented to generating sustainable long-term results for shareholders. CEO William Doyle has been with the company for over two decades slowly but surely acquiring and expanding operations to forge a dominant fertilizer company. With the BHP bid out of the way, third quarter earnings provide a very exciting narrative for investors to consider.

In the Q3 earnings release the company stated their forward-looking expectations:
We expect 2010 net income to be in the range of $5.75-$6.00 per share.

In this tightening environment, we anticipate that restocking of the distribution chain will begin in 2011 and, accordingly, have raised our global potash demand forecast to between 55 million tonnes and 60 million tonnes in the next calendar year. Given our expectation that current conditions represent the front end of an escalation in demand and pricing for our products, we are providing 2011 earnings guidance in the range of $8.00-$8.75 per share. [emphasis mine]
In valuing shares using the bottom end of management estimates, POT is selling at 24.5x 2010 EPS and 17.6x 2011. The lower end of guidance of $8.00 per share translates to 39% EPS growth should full year EPS come in at the lower end $5.75. Closing out the year with EPS of $5.75 should not be tough to achieve given the $4.34 already booked this year.

Notably within the report was a look at the pricing trends seen for the quarter. PotashCorp's third quarter earnings grew 61% year-over-year yet average potash prices were lower than last year. The gains were made in the tripling in sales of potash. The report states that "pricing trends improved significantly with September and October announcements of higher spot-market prices, although third-quarter realized prices did not yet reflect the shipment of tonnes booked at these higher levels." When the prices are reflected in Q4 earnings, the company should be able to handily meet the $5.75 guidance.

PotashCorp's business lines have significant momentum behind them with pricing hitting the "inflection point" management has been predicting for several quarters. Current valuation on shares is 30x trailing EPS which simply applied to year-end 2011 makes for a price target of $240 (a 70% gain from current prices). It is not unreasonable to apply at 30x P/E when EPS growth as foreseen by management is 39%. This would result is a PEG of 0.77. With a 5-year EPS growth rate of 28% based on year end guidance above average growth in this economic rebound is to be expected and could possibly be maintained for an extended period of time.

Risks to PotashCorp

Shares of PotashCorp are particularly sensitive to movements in grain prices and the prices of its outputs, potash, nitrogen and phosphate. A slowdown in the economic turnaround may negatively affect these prices and, in turn, hurt PotashCorp. Given the dominance of the big three Canadian producers, the company has been investigated by US authorities for monopolistic pricing tactics. Any restrictive measures imposed could adversely affect the company.

In the conclusion of the earnings report from CEO William Doyle he bluntly offers his compelling case for owning shares of PotashCorp:
Our strategies are designed to maximize earnings in the strong market conditions we see unfolding today," said Doyle. "As we have demonstrated in the past, we have an unmatched ability to move quickly to capture value when demand and prices are on the upswing. Looking ahead, we believe market conditions will provide an extended opportunity to show the full strength of our operations in all three nutrients — particularly potash — and to deliver substantially greater value to our shareholders. This is our time to demonstrate how our patient, long-term approach delivers returns for all stakeholders.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

*DISCLOSURE: Long POT.

A Much More Sustainable Equity Market Advance

Friday, November 05, 2010

Share
Goldman Sachs released a great chart in October showing S&P 500 earnings per share against the index's prices. The chart tells a very interesting story about the last decade and gives some indication about what Goldman thinks this market will look like in the coming year.

Late '90s were years of multiple expansion

The late 1990s saw a massive rally fueled by enormous public appetite for anything in the technology sector, in particular any stock with '.com' in the name. At peak prices in March 2000 the S&P 500 was trading 29 times 12-month trailing earnings. Not only was this a extremely high market valuation historically it was based on unsustainable earnings. Both the 'P' and the 'E' of the P/E equation were terribly flawed.

While many huge and important innovations rose out of the 1990s technology explosion, along with it came many more inviable businesses touting entirely unrealistic expectations for growth. Valuations on a large swath of technology firms were completely out of whack and would correct once the music stopped.

Stock prices started to decline and simply didn't stop. Yet, the P/E on the market rose! Prices couldn't fall fast enough to maintain the same valuation. After dropping for a year and half and losing 26% in value the S&P ended the year 2001 with a whopping trailing P/E of 47. The S&P finally bottomed in late 2002 after a total fall of 50%.

Next rally built on shaky leveraged foundation

The next major leg up in the market was largely financed by leverage. Financial sector profits exploded driven by major legislative rollbacks that allowed for super center banking institutions and unlimited leverage for the top five investment banks. Section 20 of Glass-Steagall should not have been repealed and the 2004 SEC leverage exemption was a significant precursor to the eventual destruction seen at the top five investment banks.

Yet, much of this underlying leverage in the system went unnoticed by investors. Though, investors had learned from the technology bubble not to accept such radically high valuations based on ever-rosier and optimistic outlooks. The end of the third quarter in 2007 the S&P had a more modest trailing P/E of 19, just a month before the top in prices.

But, as the cracks in the housing market began to reverberate through financial markets, banks found themselves wildly overleveraged with now illiquid markets for their derivative securities. Stocks rapidly disintegrated wiping out 58% of their value in a year and a half.

What can the next rally look like?

After a decade of over valuations and leveraged earnings, can we enter a period of sustainable earnings growth with moderate valuations? Goldman Sachs has a 12-month target on the S&P of 1275 while they predict earnings will be $89 per share, only $2 off the all-time high in October 2007. This would result in a much more modest trailing valuation of 14x at the end of 2011 if the scenario plays out. Investors are much more pessimistic about future economic growth in the US than they have been in the last decade and are consequently assigning lower multiples.

If the valuation question is tackled, the sustainability of earnings is next to consider. The most levered names in finance are gone, namely Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, AIG and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are now banks subject to leverage limitations. Earnings have dramatically rebounded fueled by capacity cutbacks across the board and a surge in worker productivity. This type of corporate cleansing has forced companies to streamline and do more with less.

With much of the leverage washed out of the system in the 2008 crash and widespread pessimism about the US economy keeping valuations muted, the S&P may be entering a period of sustainable advance in prices. Private company hiring is slowly returning and revenue growth is strengthening demonstrating that EPS growth is starting to come from the top line, the necessary support needed for continued growth.



Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind.

*DISCLOSURE: Nothing relevant.

Is Stock Picking Dead?

Monday, October 18, 2010

Share
"Stock picking is a dead art form, macro themes dominate the market now more than ever." ~James Bianco, Bianco Research (Wall Street Journal, September 21, 2010)

Is the age of the stock picker dead? James Bianco apparently believes bottoms up trading/investing has lost its place in today's market environment never to return again. I believe this is a wildly short-sighted view and fails to recognize the opportunity that high correlation has introduced to discriminating managers.

The rise in correlation

In the WSJ's article, the recent rise in correlation among stocks is highlighted:
Between 2000 and 2006, on average, the correlation of stocks in the S&P 500 was 27%, according to Barclays Capital. That meant that most stocks were moving independently of the index, driven more by company fundamentals, says Barclays stock-market strategist Barry Knapp...

...Between October 2008 and February 2009, at the height of the financial crisis, correlation hit 80%, meaning lots of stocks were moving in lock step. When stocks rallied last year, the figure fell to 40%, then it spiked back over 80% during the European debt crisis, according to Barclays. What has caught many investors off guard is that correlation stayed high over the summer. In mid-August, correlation was 74%. In recent weeks, it has drifted down to 66%.
There are many reasons for high correlation in today's equity markets. Correlation typically rises aggressively in falling markets as panic drives indiscriminate selling while buying is typically much more concerted. In the last three years equity markets have seen blanket selling during panics as the crux of our problems have been manifested in debt and credit markets, the equity markets then simply seen as a risky asset class.

The huge growth in exchange-traded funds (ETFs) has also been a major component in rising correlation. While macro issues have always jumped into the limelight from time to time and overwhelmed the micro company picture, until recent years there was never an easy way to quickly put on the a directional macro bet. Now, for example, if a manager sees debt problems in Spain as a major problem, they can simply short the iShares Spain ETF (EWP) on the New York Stock Exchange very effectively placing a macro bet on a foreign stock market in just minutes. Add high frequency trading to the mix and ETFs and underlying equities are rapidly adjusted to changes in ETF prices.

The impacts of rising correlation

Cortina Asset Management put together some very telling charts in their 3rd Quarter Small Cap Growth Commentary. Cortina manages small cap equities and uses the Russell 2000 as its benchmark. The charts below compare the top and bottom quintiles of companies within the Russell 2000 since 2002.


These charts show that the spread between the top and bottom quintile in terms of growth is approximately 25%, near relative highs up from 21% in 2008. At the same time, the PE spread is around 7x, near relative lows and down from 16x in 2003. The primary point conveyed here is that while the top companies are growing much faster than the bottom companies compared historically, they are not receiving a valuation premium.

The opportunity for stock pickers

As investors across the spectrum throw all stocks into the same basket, opportunities arise for those more discerning. With extremely low interest rates coupled with exceptionally high cash holdings on balance sheets, the lack of premium given to better companies likely will not last. The wild bidding war for 3Par (PAR) by Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) and Dell (DELL) is a prime example of the willingness for larger companies to pay up for exciting growth prospects. 3Par tripled its market capitalization in a few weeks eventually receiving a $2.4 billion bid that valued the company at 125 times 2011 earnings.

As larger companies hold incredible flexibility to make acquisitions, investors will begin to anticipate takeovers and seek out the cheap, growing companies in the small to midcap arena that the market is undervaluing. The age of the stock picker is far from dead. Indeed, now is probably precisely the time investors should be seeking out values as other market participants ignore the possibilities in discovering the hidden gems.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

*DISCLOSURE: Nothing relevant.

EMC Corporation (EMC) a Great Play on the Cloud

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Share
EMC LogoWhat is EMC?

EMC is the largest data storage company and biggest player in the virtualization space through its 80% ownership of VMWare (VMW). Companies and governments around the world utilize EMC's data storage solutions as more and more records are retained electronically and advanced databases are needed to manage content effectively. The Information Storage unit accounts for 76% of EMC's 2009 revenues. While this line of business saw a cyclical downturn in '09 as lowered spending in IT dragged down EMC's sales, the long-term story is quite bright. Another 10% of revenues are derived from the content management and information security divisions.

Virtualization is the exciting piece of EMC's business line and the company wisely spun off 10% of VMWare (VMW) to unlock value in 2007. EMC acquired VMWare for $635 million in 2003; VMW now boasts a market capitalization of $32 billion. After spinning off the unit at nearly the top in the equity market in August 2007, VMW has still returned shareholders 46% since inception. Virtualization allows companies to get more out of less. By using the software VMWare creates firms can efficiently split up their servers allowing them to run multiple applications from one server. This helps reduce total hardware costs for firms that previously would be required to invest in greater numbers of individual servers.

Capitalizing on a secular trend

Cloud computing has been the hot sector in 2010 and despite last week's sell-off in many cloud-related names, the secular trend is in tact. The high momentum behind these businesses has carried their stocks to extreme levels and the sell-off last week brought some of the stocks' valuations back to earth. Yet, the cloud is an extremely attractive option for many businesses across the spectrum promising an easier, cost-effective way to manage IT. Growth in this industry is likely far from over even if the valuations are a bit overheated.

The electronic storage of information is a long-term growth story with exponential growth opportunities as more companies adopt online databases and the content itself dramatically increases in size: think streaming movies as an example. EMC invests roughly 11-12% annually in research and development giving it sustainability in cutting-edge innovations.

A modest valuation given potential

EMC sells for 29 times trailing but based on analyst expectations sells for a relatively cheap 14.6 times forward. Smaller rival NetApp, Inc. (NTAP) garners a PE of 37 in the market and a forward PE of 22 even though 5-year analyst growth expectations are nearly inline with EMC. EMC has a 5-year sales growth rate of 12.5% and an astounding 82% gross margin. The company has an impeccable balance sheet holding only $3.1 billion in long-term debt against its $41.7 billion in equity market capitalization. And, with $6.7 billion in cash on hand EMC has the flexibility for future strategic investments.

EMC has guided $1.18 for the FY 2010. I believe EMC conservatively can increase earnings by 20% in 2011 given the recovery in IT spending with the global economic rebound and the secular trends in cloud computing driving exponential growth in storage needs. EMC would produce $1.42 in earnings per share with 20% EPS growth. With a PE of 21 by the end of 2011 EMC would sell for $30 per share, a 40% gain from current prices.

Risks to target

Shares of EMC are inherently volatile with a beta of 1.65 creating large divergences in returns based on timing of purchases and sales. EMC can also suffer as competitors such as IBM (IBM) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) encroach on the data storage space. The recent bidding war for 3Par (PAR) that drove HPQ's bid to $33, a valuation of 125 times 2011 earnings, is a prime example of the strong desire to break into the cloud arena. Also, while companies have record amounts of cash and IT investments are expected to rise, a sluggish economic environment or lack of clarity on future demand may suppress IT spending and stall EMC's growth.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

*DISCLOSURE: Long EMC.

Least Understood Risk Management Concept: Coefficient of Likelihood

Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Share
Normal Distribution
If you're still reading this after the title at least I haven't already bored you with the statistical jargon. The Coefficient of Likelihood is defined as the probability that an event will occur. In risk management, given a variety of possible future scenarios, each one can be assigned a percentage chance of happening. Most of us are not quantitative analysts with degrees in mathematics but the following is a framework for thinking about risk management and perhaps it will add an element to your decision-making process.

The understood side of the risk equation

Nearly every trader is taught from day one to measure the risk versus the reward of a trade before taking a position. Traders should and will typically focus on the risk first, the reward second. An important note: the risk is defined by the setup and should reflect the dynamics of the intended trade. This is a key initial point, the setup dictates the risk of loss per share, you dictate the P&L loss by your choice of size. Too many traders attempt to risk less by putting their stops at arbitrarily closer levels rather than respecting what the trade itself calls for. In order to put on a position, the trader should figure out the appropriate stop out level, then determine the dollar value they're willing to risk and back into the number of shares. But, not before considering probability as I explain below.

The reward side of the equation is often taught to be at least 2-to-1 versus risk. Some teach to look for scenarios with a much higher ratio but 2-to-1 is usually the accepted minimum. Reward can be measured in any variety of ways. Technicians will look at measured moves, Fibonacci extensions, subsequent support and resistance levels and the like. Fundamentalists will use valuation tools to forecast expected growth in earnings and possible expansions in multiples. Any way you slice it, calculating some idea about the possible reward is important for understanding whether the trade is a good bet relative to the assumed risk.

The poor approach to risk

Most traders understand the above concept in risk management and use it to their advantage by hunting around to discover the lowest risk/highest reward trade setups. They will let the trade's risk then dictate their position sizing based on the total dollar value they are willing to lose. The irony arises in that this is often the worst possible thing a trader could do! It is counter-intuitive yet without some deeper, more sophisticated analysis taking only the lowest risk/highest reward trades will likely lead to consistent losses. The reason for this derives from the Coefficient of Likelihood that too many traders ignore or never consider in their analysis.

The least understood side of the risk equation

The crucial component of the equation is the probability of each event: the stock hitting the stop or achieving the reward. The reason the counter-intuitive statement, that lowest risk/highest reward trades are often poor decisions, is true deals with the likelihood of the trade working out. In most cases, the seemingly lowest risk trade is trend-fighting. As the famous saying goes, "the trend is your friend" and as was later wisely added "until the bend at the end". The reason the extremely low risk/high reward trade may exist is because its probability of success is very low. Without accounting for the likelihood of success, the trader may be taking trades that actually have very poor expected returns.

Say a stock has rallied $5 and come off $1. A trader measuring risk/reward without probabilities thinks "if I short here, I'll risk $1 and if the stock reverses, I can make $4". So, the risk:reward is 1:4. But, say the stock has been trending higher for weeks, the broad market is very bullish and the stock is not extended. The probability of this trade working may be very low, say a 20% chance of it actually rolling over and achieving your measured reward. Therefore, using the Coefficient of Likelihood you find:

Expected risk: (80% x $1)= $0.80
v.
Expected reward: (20% x $4)= $0.80

By considering the probability that your trade actually works out, you find that the risk/reward is actually equivalent and therefore not worth the trade as commissions will knock you into the red for the net expected outcome.

How to use this concept

It is my belief that the best traders do not simply find the lowest risk and highest reward trades and dictate their sizes accordingly. The best traders have a feel for the market and an intuition about probable future direction. Using this feel these traders know when the probabilities have shifted in their favor and only then put on larger position sizes. Most traders are not quants and so they do not precisely calculate the odds of success, and I doubt you even can do that. But under this framework, traders can begin to consider how probable a trade is. A very low risk trade that will probably not work out is often a terrible trade because it's virtually guaranteed to be a loser. At the same time, seemingly more risky trades that require larger stops may have the highest probabilities of success and, as such, be much less risky.

Many of the best trades require some of the largest risk in nominal terms because the probability of success is so high. These two go hand-in-hand because the broad market is all believing a trade will work and every trader is trying to get in. This scenario very often occurs with large gaps to the upside or downside. The novice trader will believe his risk is too great so he chooses not to put on a trade believing he missed the move and would be chasing prices. While the expert trader may have expected the gap and understands that the market is repricing stocks based on changed expectations. The gap is simply acting as confirmation that the trade to that direction is the correct trade and prices have moved away because so many others believe the same thing.

Amateur traders assume that every trade is 50/50 as far as probability goes. I think after years of experience and the development of a feel for the tape, most will know that many trades have much worse chances of success while others have much better. Considering trend is very important as it often increases your probability of success and will allow for greater risk-taking in terms of stock movement because the expected value is higher.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

*DISCLOSURE: Nothing relevant.

Google (GOOG) a Value Play

Friday, September 17, 2010

Share
Google signFor the first time in its history as a public company, Google (GOOG) can be argued as a value play for investors. Yet, Google has so many growing pieces that the growth argument is almost just as compelling. Either way, the sub-$500 price on GOOG shares seems to discount a much greater slowdown in growth than looks likely.

What's holding shares back?

It's important to understand why a stock is without friends in order to diagnose how your opinion differs from that of the market. Shares of GOOG have been beat up this year, down 22% YTD versus a 2% gain in the Nasdaq. Clearly investors see much slower growth going forward.

In many ways shares of GOOG have just undergone what stocks of large, maturing companies eventually must go through when growth metrics slow sequentially and the momentum crowd becomes bored of the stock. Google redefined the way we discover information on the internet and the persistent doubts about the company's ability to monetize their products only added to the repeated enthusiasm every earnings report for years. Eventually though, growth slowed now in the 20% range and investors fled shares for the new momentum stocks of the day.

From a mechanical perspective, company insiders have been bulk sellers of the stock for months running. I am not sure how much of an impact this has on the shares but willing buyers are being absorbed on a daily basis by insiders diversifying out of the company. I only raise this fact given the pressure that selling puts on the shares, not as a reflection of insider opinion. Peter Lynch had it right when he said: "insiders might sell their shares for any number of reasons, but they buy them for only one: they think the price will rise". The insider selling leads me to no conclusion other than some explanation of the downward pressure on shares.

The China battle is somewhat perplexing to me. Google has been in a widely publicized confrontation with the Chinese government with regard to censorship of Google's search results. After blocking Google, the government changed its mind in July and re-allowed google.cn to redirect to google.hk, the uncensored search site in Hong Kong. Baidu (BIDU) was the clear winner in this fight as the government was helping to eliminate a major competitor in the search space. Yet, China has never been a money making operation for Google but I suppose investors punished shares for the fear of missing out on future possibilities.

The growth story

Google's second quarter earnings for 2010 showed 24% year-over-year revenue growth. A healthy 13% of revenues are devoted to research and development showing Google's desire to stay ahead of the curve. The investment in developing the Android platform should be a key driver of growth going forward.

Google's search monetization business is a powerhouse and the company continues to build and improve offerings that generate revenue through search. YouTube is a prime example where a very effective monetization plan has finally been developed and, most importantly, widely accepted by users. Previously, there was no model for monetizing the YouTube site and it was just viewed as a massive collection of everyone's random videos. Now, YouTube has a viable business model and is growing its partnerships with contributors.

The Android operating system and the potential growth in the mobile arena should not be underestimated. The latest reports show that month-over-month growth in smartphone ownership from April to July 2010 was a whopping 11% in just a month. Yet, only 23% of mobile phone owners have a smartphone leaving considerable room for industry growth. Research in Motion (RIMM) is the leader in the smartphone space with 39.3% share and Apple (AAPL) is a distant second at 23.8%. Google entered this market with a vengeance and growth is surging rapidly stealing market share from entrenched rivals. Google, as a percentage of market share in smartphone platforms, grew 5% during the same month from 12% to 17% of the market while RIM, Apple and Microsoft all declined: 1.8%, 1.3% and 2.2% respectively, in market share. (Source)

Growth in the mobile platform market allows Google to bundle in its search features and add to its advertising revenues, already at 97% of revenues. Google's search will also be a key component for developers in monetizing the hundreds of thousands of apps developed for smartphones.

The value story

Google's current market capitalization is just north of $150 billion and the company employs nearly 22,000 people around the world. The impeccable balance sheet boasts $30 billion in cash (20% of the market cap) and zero debt. The brand has become synonymous with online search as the oft-heard words "Google it" define the company as the go-to resource for finding any information on the web.

The valuation is very cheap trading just 21 times trailing earnings and 15 times forward estimates. With consensus analyst expectations for 5-year growth in earnings per share at 18%, this PE rounds out to a cheap PEG of 1.15. With a profit margin at 28%, Google is dominating the search space with 65.4% of the market and feeble attempts from Microsoft and Yahoo have hardly dented its overall market share. (Source)

My one year price target for shares is $700 as I think continued growth in the Android will help Google generate EPS growth of 20% and the Android excitement will lead to, at the very least, multiple expansion. If shares of GOOG begin to receive the premium I believe they deserve, I see it trading for 25 times trailing which would already put shares at $578 based on valuation. Add 20% growth in earnings per share from trailing four quarters of $23.12 leads to next four quarters amounting to $27.74. A 25 price-earnings ratio applied to this estimate yields a $700 price target.


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

*DISCLOSURE: Long GOOG, BIDU, AAPL.

Dow 20,000 Not Far Off

Thursday, September 09, 2010

Share
I suppose it depends on how you define not far off but I believe that over the next decade the market will rally to 20,000 without much trouble. With the Dow trading just over 10,000 and memories of the Panic of 2008 still very much reticent in investors' minds, a call for a doubling of the Dow, much less even new all-time highs in the forseeable future, is seemingly a radical belief to hold.

It's not crazy, it's only a 7% CAGR and don't forget the Internet

A call for 20,000 by 2020 amounts to a required compound annual growth rate of 7%. Believing this can happen is far from unreasonable. Say we see El-Erian's "New Normal" and the economy muddles along at 2-3% growth for the next decade as we undergo "deleveraging, reregulation and deglobalization". Even assuming this case it makes sense for the Dow to appreciate at a higher rate given that its composed of 30 of America's top companies. The best handful of American companies should be able to safety capture 6-8% equity growth especially considering many of them have substantial international exposures, particularly to emerging markets where growth is still red hot.

Yet, a forecast of 2-3% economic growth seems to vastly underestimate America's future prospects over the ten years. Investors have too easily forgotten what has happened in the last 20 years and the wide-ranging, never-before-imagined impacts one particular invention will create. Namely, the Internet. The Internet is in its infancy. We have not even scratched the surface on the incredible efficiencies and innovations that can and will be achieved. The eventual impacts of the Internet on our everyday lives will be like the ground-breaking changes electricity brought to our lives. Electricity fundamentally changed the way we live, the Internet has already done the same.

Technology adoption rate has been dramatically shortened

Throughout human history the path of innovation proliferation has typically followed a S-curve. From invention, new innovations take a significant amount of time to gain acceptance by what is termed a critical mass of adopters. Once a product reaches its required critical mass, the adoption rate dramatically spikes as exponentially more consumers purchase the product. Eventually, the innovation reaches a saturation point where demand stabilizes and the product matures. These innovation S-curves can be traced back over the last century and measured for their durations as the chart below shows.


The table below shows the incredible rapidity with which today's innovations are adopted by the general public. While electricity was invented in 1873, it took 46 years for a quarter of the American population to adopt it. Fast forward 100 years and the PC was invented in 1975 yet only took 16 years to reach a 25% of Americans. Even more amazing is the internet, invented in 1991 and adopted by a quarter of the population in just seven years!


Facebook and cloud computing

Facebook is an example too incredible not to discuss. The company was founded just six years ago in February 2004. Yet, Facebook now has over 500 million members and boasts a multi-billion dollar valuation on Second Market. Achieving that rate of adoption by a new technology is absolutely unprecedented in a historical context. The management of personal and business relationships has been entirely transformed in just the last several years through the rise of online social networking.

Cloud computing is a new wave of the future and many have yet to recognize how it will revolutionize everyday business. Google Docs is a simple example. You can now start a spreadsheet, share it with some friends, and all join in simultaneously working on it each from your own personal computer from any location around the world. The efficiencies that will be achieved with just this simple concept are enormous.

Tech boom buyers were right

The 1990s bubble in technology stocks was based on an overly optimistic timeframe for what the Internet could accomplish. It was not Tulipmania of the 1600s resulting from the 'greater fool' theory where buyers assumed that even if the investment was questionable, there would always be a greater fool to buy at a higher price. Nor was it like the much more recent oil or real estate bubbles built on expectations of higher and higher demand for something relatively fixed, crude oil and houses. To be sure, there were definitely those late in the game operating under Burton Malkiel's "castles in the air" philosophy not thinking about the underlying fundamentals of the businesses. But, many of the buyers of technology stocks believed the world would be fundamentally changed by the PC and the Internet...and they were right!

What will the next decade bring? Maybe we should first ask: what will the next year bring? Innovation is occurring at an astounding pace and while buyers of technology stocks in the late 1990s were absurdly optimistic on how fast the innovations stemming from the Internet would come on line, they were not irrational to believe in the world-changing power of the computer and Internet. Add all this together and Dow 20,000 may just be a conservative bet!


Brandon R. Rowley
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

*DISCLOSURE: Long SPY but professionally I am a long/short active trader. This position is subject to change many, many times in the next decade. Perhaps this lends me credibility because I am not just touting my built-in professional bias but sharing what I believe is a very realistic outlook amid a swath of investor pessimism.

How One Portfolio Manager Climbs the Wall of Worry

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Share
The last few months have been challenging for many in the investment industry as the market corrected 17% from highs on the back of sovereign debt issues in Europe. After the preceding 80% rally in equities off the March 2009 lows many are claiming the bear market is back on and we are in for a double dip recession. So I called up one of the smartest guys I know to get his opinion on the state of the markets and the economy and to see how he is handling the wall of worry.

Jason Stephens, CFA is a Portfolio Manager at Thompson Investment Management, Inc. located in Madison, Wisconsin. Stephens runs separately managed accounts and is co-manager of the firm's three mutual funds: Thompson Plumb Growth Fund, Midcap Fund and Bond Fund.

The last couple of years have been extremely tumultuous for the investment management industry. Can you tell me a little bit about how you felt? Did you ever think the world was going to end? How did you deal with client fears?

I don’t think that we ever thought the world was going to end necessarily, but it certainly was unnerving to sit in our research room watching the market plummet. We had some ideas about problems the country was facing with respect to leverage and low savings rates, but we weren’t quite sure how they would manifest themselves. So when things actually started falling apart, I wouldn’t say that we were surprised, but we were certainly taken aback by how far things went. It was nerve-wracking.

We have fixed income products, equity products and direct relationships with a lot of clients, so at the same time we were trying to figure out what was going on and how to position ourselves, we were also concerned about making sure that our clients were comfortable. At that point in time, because everything was so synchronous with respect to the decline, unless you were in U.S. Treasuries it was hard for anyone to be comfortable at all. We spent a lot of time talking with clients to help them understand the fundamentals of the investments they held. We talked to them about specifics -- about the idea that Coca-Cola would not likely go bankrupt and despite what’s going on at GE Capital, GE will probably be okay. And, I really think that helping clients understand the nature of that which is in their portfolios is the best thing you can do.

As even those with decades of experience under their belt stated that they had never seen a market like the one of 2008 in their tenure, do you think living through this relatively early on in your career was beneficial in any way? Did you learn any valuable lessons during the Panic of 2008 that you did not realize before?

Yes, I think it was incredibly beneficial. I worked with two individuals, one who had more than 40 years of experience and the other with 35 years, and both of them said they had never seen anything like it. And by never seeing anything like it, I mean the credit markets freezing and house prices plummeting in the way that they did. That just hadn’t happened since the Great Depression.

If you talked to most people in 2007, it was apparent that there were some major things that were out of whack with respect to personal saving and with respect to leverage as I mentioned before, but there was very little prognostication that what eventually did happen would happen. Nobody had lived it before.

I think the lessons that we will learn from it haven’t really been learned yet. It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next 3 to 4 years as we recover and rebuild from what happened. The mood right now is still so negative, so pessimistic and people are still in such shock that I think it’s hard for people to see the light at the end of the tunnel. It will be informative for all of us to see what happens next. Because I do believe that our industry is generally overly pessimistic about whether US has the ability to recover from this. We are more optimistic. Capital moves freely and quickly and will be re-allocated and I think we will see that happen and it will be interesting to see how that plays out.

Is there anything that you look back on and think, ‘had I known what I know now I would have done this differently’?

Yeah, there are a couple things. Specifically, one was that we knew something wasn’t right and the way we reacted to that knowledge in our equity portfolios was to buy what we thought were the more conservative financials -- to lean the portfolio toward more conservative names in those areas where we thought there was risk, when the real risk was a systemic meltdown. If we had been able to see that coming, we certainly would’ve been positioned differently.

The other thing we learned after a tough year in 2008 in our large cap equity fund was that if we had equal-weighted the portfolio during that period we actually would have been competitive with our benchmark. In actuality, with the weightings we had we under-performed our benchmark pretty significantly. For us, it caused us to change the way we manage this fund. We are much more neutral with respect to individual position sizes now than we were before. We believe we have a competitive advantage in our ability to pick stocks but what we hadn’t done well during that period was finding the correct position sizes.

With 10-year returns on equity indexes negative, what do you say to the crowd claiming 'buy and hold is dead' and that it’s no longer a viable strategy?

It depends on how you define ‘buy and hold’. If you’re talking about sitting on a banking stock forever and never looking at it, which is something that people used to do, or sitting on AT&T or Exxon forever, I do think that that is dead. It seems funny now for one to think of AIG as a solid, stable organization, but it was and it’s basically gone now. So this idea that you can buy a stock, even Coca-Cola, and nothing will ever go wrong is a bad idea. So, if that’s what you mean by ‘buy and hold’ then I agree with you.

If you’re talking about doing fundamental analysis and having a time horizon longer than a day or a quarter, then I completely disagree. I think that we’ve only seen one half of the story with respect to what has happened in the market’s reaction to the recession and the credit market dislocation. That is that the market overreacted to the downside to some admittedly horrible circumstances. I think we’ll look back in 3-4 years and we’ll see what good fundamental analysis has produced over this period. Having a 2-3-4 year time horizon can still benefit investors and I don’t think you need to trade portfolios every day. I think it’s a knee-jerk reaction to how far the market has declined and how much volatility we have seen. Assets have relative values to investors that are calculable, and stocks currently look very attractive. If this is true, capital should flow to equities from less attractive assets over time. For this reason, I don’t think that in the long-term it says anything about how solid long-term fundamental investing is a bad idea. I believe it will continue to prove itself for investors.

What is your primary strategy in your investing process? With so many different approaches to the stock market, why do you believe this is the best method to invest?

I don’t think there’s necessarily one right way to invest. There can be a lot of different strategies that work well, but for us considering the expertise that we have, the strategy that we employ is ‘growth at a reasonable price’ or the GARP model. What we’re trying to do is pretty simple. We try to find companies that can grow their earnings at an attractive rate over the next few years, and not pay too much money for them. We analyze their balance sheets, their business models, cash flows, those kinds of things. It’s really not any more complicated than that, it’s traditional, standard fundamental investing.

We’re probably a bit more bullish than most and we have over the last several quarters gotten more aggressive. This has worked out in the quarters where the market has been going up but when the market takes a breather, we’ve tended to lag.

Do you think because 2008 is so reticent in investors’ minds that we underestimate our ability to rebound from the recession?

Yes, this is a recession that hit Wall Street hard when past recessions have not. People on Wall Street lost jobs this time around. To steal a concept from my associate James, “If it’s raining in New York and it’s sunny in the rest of the country, Wall Street thinks that it’s raining everywhere.” And I think that’s true. I’m not trying to pick on Wall Street. I think it’s just human nature. With our industry being concentrated there, and it being hit pretty hard it’s difficult to be optimistic. For example, if you live in a town where the auto plant was shutdown, you’re unlikely to see how things can be recovering anywhere else.

Company fundamentals tend to color our views. We continue to see companies with a lot of cash, good margins, moderately growing revenues with an ability to grow earnings well. One thing to notice is that while individuals’ and our country’s balance sheets are bleak, corporate balance sheets are phenomenal. I’m certainly not the first person to talk about this, but I’m not sure investors actually believe this situation will create an attractive story going forward.

I think, what was it, in an issue or two ago, I read a BusinessWeek lead article complaining about how companies have too much cash on hand that they’re not spending. It seems to me that’s a pretty good position to be in relative to where we were two years ago.

Oh yeah, in our midcap fund in just the last six or seven months we’ve had a handful of companies bought out. In 2009, that would have been unheard of. I think companies were holding things close to the vest because they didn’t want to take any risk with a future so uncertain. Companies are now gaining a bit more visibility and I believe that cash will be employed. Not all companies will employ it well, but they will start to employ it.

What do you think about the current economic recovery? Do you think any aspects have gone largely unnoticed? I’ve largely thought that productivity has been an underappreciated story, what do you think?

Yes, that’s a good point and I think it’s why margins have been so high. But, I’m not sure that anything has really gone unnoticed. There’s more transparency now, maybe more than ever. Everyone follows every little detail and tries to draw some kind of broad conclusion from it. So I would almost think the opposite, everyone is paying too much attention to every detail. They’re missing the overall story.

We’re in earnings season again, and this is the fourth earnings season in a row where things look pretty good. Companies have more visibility and it’s improving every earnings season, and that is what should excite investors and that is what people should pay attention to. Everyone is trying to find the answer by digging through every report and they’re missing the forest for the trees.

You see the market wiggle on every data point when most economic releases follow a jagged pattern. They don’t follow a straight line, and there are all kinds of surprises along the way. Every small surprise either way makes the market shoot up or shoot down.

I know you are primarily bottom-up managers but with the equity market 10% off the highs since April, where do you think we go from here? Are you concerned about the debt problems in Europe and the slowing global growth story?

Whenever something like a crisis in Europe occurs, it is certainly concerning. But, I think the impact was overblown. The contribution of these countries to our GDP is not so significant that it could derail our recovery. I think the worry was more that ‘X happens, then Y will happen’. There is a general sense that the recovery is fragile, and any negative shock could derail it.

The idea of slowing global growth because of massive deleveraging is reasonable, but trying to predict what is going to happen over the next several years from a macro perspective is a perilous thing. What we try to do is follow companies and listen to what they’re seeing. Most companies that we follow are global and there are pockets all over the world that are growing at a decent clip, and as long as there is growth occurring we remain fairly optimistic.

Another thing that people forget is that companies can grow earnings a lot faster than we can grow GDP. There is a very reasonable case to be made for fast growing earnings, at least in the short-term, in the midst of lower economic growth in the US. While over a five year period that may not be such a promising story, for now it looks fairly good. And when you take a look on a valuation basis and you see, at least in the middle of last week, the S&P was trading around 11 times 1-year forward earnings, I’d say that is discounting a lot of pain.

On a different note, do you believe the so-called "flash crash" hurt investor confidence in the integrity of the stock market? How did you react to it?

I think it was absolutely terrible and hurt investor confidence. I immediately started receiving calls from clients. You can talk clients through a lot of ups and downs by explaining what’s going on. They are very smart, and they understand the way we invest and are comfortable with it. When things happen that are almost unexplainable, it rightly concerns them. And, without a clear answer, I do think it is very damaging. While people have short memories, I don’t think enough time has gone by to forget about this one yet. I’m not sure a reasonable explanation has even come forth yet, which makes people even more nervous.

The Thompson Plumb Bond Fund, of which you are a co-manager, has had a great run. With short-term bond yields near zero, how do you manage to generate returns for shareholders?

Generally, when credit spreads are wide we tilt the portfolio toward a heavier corporate weighting and when they are narrow we tilt it more toward agencies. Right now, credit spreads are probably in the more reasonable range. We’re still buying a lot of corporate bonds right now, and as long as we continue to find deals with companies that we think are high-quality companies, we’ll continue to do so. This is allowing us to capture some yield that is significantly more attractive than Treasuries or Agencies. That said, with all yields as low as they are and the fund being short-term with a duration of less than 3 years, it’s getting more and more difficult to find yield.

The biggest risk we see in the short-term besides credit spreads widening is interest rates rising in some kind of a step function, so we’ve made the duration of the fund pretty darn short. Of course our outlook can change over time.

I think we certainly won’t see the returns going forward that you would’ve seen over the last several years, because rates reached high levels in the late 1970s and have been declining ever since. This provided a tailwind for bond investors, but we’re likely facing the opposite now. Our goal is to hunker down and be cautious with respect to interest rates, and still find values in individual issues that can help produce attractive returns for shareholders.

What do you like and dislike most about being a money manager?

I like that it’s a constant learning game and we’re always trying to solve a new problem. It’s very interesting and stimulating. It sounds corny but it is. If we do a good job the results are tangible, and there’s a good feeling that comes from that.

I don’t like things like the flash crash. I didn’t particularly enjoy the market taking a dive like it did for no fundamental reason.

But the majority of my job I like. I enjoy talking with clients, I like interacting with my co-workers, they’re all very bright and I learn from them everyday and that makes it very enjoyable.

Any advice for people just starting out in the business?

There are many things you learn in college and from the CFA Institute with respect to fundamental analysis that are incredibly valuable. Take advantage of both. At the same time, don’t be afraid to learn about many different types of analyses. Where the job market is concerned, I think you have to be willing to be work for less money right now than you would’ve gotten 5 years ago, if you want maximum flexibility. We’re in the Midwest and in a pretty small community compared to New York, but we probably had a disproportionate number of finance professionals relative to the size of the city. We have a lot of people changing careers here, but I believe this is a short-term phenomenon. So I believe if you hang in there and get by, more opportunities will present themselves eventually.


Thompson Investment Management, Inc. is an investment advisory firm based in Madison, Wisconsin. John W. Thompson, founder of Thompson Investment Management, Inc. has been an Independent Investment Advisor since 1984. They specialize in investment portfolio management for institutions and high net worth individuals through individual accounts and their proprietary mutual funds.

Put Your Rally Caps Back On, Long-Term Bull Advance Resumes

Saturday, July 24, 2010

Share
"Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds,
while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
~Charles Mackay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness of Crowds


The last time I wrote this quote it was May 2009 and I argued that the market had upside even after the 33% rally off lows in "So Much for Shorting the Markets" (shameless reference I know). I wrote this article following an extraordinarily anomalous time and the opportunity was the once-in-a-decade type of opportunity. While we are far from those extreme circumstances, the equity market has just experienced a 17% correction from highs and we are now 9% off those lows. Many are wondering whether the bull market is back on or this is just a bear market rally. I believe we could be at another quality buying opportunity, not nearly the extreme of 2009, but a great chance to pick up stocks on a 10% discount. Below are my five reasons for being bullish:


1. Europe learned from the US crisis and made all the right moves.

The world has been in a rolling credit crisis for three years now. The deflationary collapse struck in the United States first causing an incredible drop in asset prices in late 2008. The government was fairly quick to respond to the massive demand-side slump. In fact, the government intervention was accomplished much earlier along in comparison to the Great Depression largely accounting for why another depression was avoided.

The $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) achieved major feats in restoring confidence in the banking system. Re-capitalizing major financial firms was the first step in stabilizing the collapsing equity markets and frozen credit markets.

European markets started to fall in mid-April as sovereign debt fears hit front page and calls for the complete collapse in the euro monetary union were abound as the euro was dropping from highs of over $1.50 to cracking $1.20 on the downside. The EU responded even more quickly than the US did with the TARP program. The playbook had already been written by the US, the EU borrowed the best plays and put them into action earlier and more effectively. The EU announced a debt aid package for €700 billion that quickly halted the euro's decline.

The next step for Europe was to give its banking system the seal of approval. The stress tests in the United States worked very well to build confidence by helping struggling banks re-capitalize and systematically show that most banks would be fine even in the face of possible worsening economic headwinds.

The EU's stress tests were carried out brilliantly. They were just harsh enough as not to be seen as a farce finding seven banks in need of €3.5 billion in capital. Many may disagree with that statement in terms of the test's rigor and plenty of analysts did complain but the US equity market response Friday was muted to positive signaling a broader acceptance. The names of the failing banks were wisely leaked ahead of the results so there were no surprises for participants. The tests offered the needed assurance that most of the system was in good shape to withstand foreseeable volatility.


2. Second-quarter earnings reports have been great & the sentiment pendulum has swung positive.

The chief concern this earnings season was weakness on the top line. Analysts have been arguing for months that while cost-cutting is great and improves the bottom line, sustainable growth in earnings will only come from top line growth. Bespoke has a great chart out showing that these fears have not been realized so far. As of Wednesday 73% of companies have beat expectations on their revenue numbers, far better than the historical 62% average. While earnings reporting is inherently backward-looking, it is clear that analysts continue to underestimate this recovery.


On top of strong reports, earnings sentiment has dramatically shifted from week one of this season to week two. Bespoke assessed as of Wednesday that the average earnings reaction has been -0.4%. Yet, Friday was a game-changer. Anecdotally, the reaction difference between Intel (INTC) and Amazon (AMZN) was rather shocking.

In week one of earnings season, on Tuesday night Intel (INTC) reported an absolutely astounding quarter amazing the Street by exceeding top and bottom line estimates on higher margins and aggressively raising guidance. INTC reported EPS of $0.51 versus $0.43 expected and revenues of $10.8 billion versus $10.3 billion expected. Gross margins expanded year-over-year from 51% to 67% for the second quarter 2010! INTC topped it off by raising Q3 revenue guidance well above $10.9 billion estimate to $11.6 billion. Second quarter 2010 was Intel's "best quarter in the company's 42-year history". How did the market reward INTC? After opening the following day 5% higher shares were sold aggressively throughout the day to close the stock up a marginal 1.7% for the day. By Friday all the post-earnings gains were wiped out.

Amazon (AMZN), on the other hand, reported earnings on Thursday night this past week. AMZN produced a huge miss of analysts estimates with EPS coming in at $0.45, far lower than the $0.54 consensus estimate. AMZN eked out a top line beat by $100 million reporting $6.6 billion. The large prices cut for the Kindle device from an original selling price of $399 down to $189 to maintain competitiveness with the iPad, Reader and nook caused a significant reduction in margins. This report was the first major miss of estimates by a market leading company. Did the market punish AMZN? Hardly. While AMZN opened on Friday at $105.93, down 16.8% from the previous close, buyers immediately stepped in on the open snapping up the discounted shares. AMZN continued rallying throughout the day and recaptured nearly all of the day's losses to close down a very mild 1%.

The change in sentiment is quite drastic. The pendulum has swung to the positive side as even a very disappointing report was confidently bought, that response coming in stark contrast to the selling seen after the absolutely steller INTC report the previous week.


3. The leaders to the downside have stabilized, GS & BP.

The SEC investigation into Goldman Sachs (GS) in mid-April marked the first significant drop in a leader of the market. Over the ensuing months shares of GS dropped from $185 to below $130 by the beginning of July. The hearings, speculations, rumors all worked as an overhang to shares for months and acted as a major drag on the equity market. The Deepwater Horizon rig explosion on April 20th was another blow to the market. Shares of BP (BP) melted from over $60 to well below $30 by late June. The oil spill pulled down many others in the oil sector, particularly Halliburton (HAL), Cameron (CAM), Transocean (RIG) and Anadarko (APC), among others.

Now, the SEC has settled with GS for a minor $550 million fine. In a broader context, the uncertainty over financial reform is behind us as Congress finally passed the financial reform bill. Shares of GS are on the rebound back up to the $150 area now. BP finally managed to stop the leak in the Gulf quelling fears of an unstoppable disaster, bankruptcy, etc. Shares of BP are now over $10 off the lows and the cleanup is well underway.




4. The first higher low is in place confirming buying interest.

For the first time in this market correction, there is a convincing higher low in place on the charts. After a series of three lower lows, buyers have stepped in to buy at higher prices. Along with the higher low, the close on Friday amounts to the first higher high and takes out the descending trendline. While the break of a trendline is not inherently bullish, it does signal a significant change in the rate of decline. The cocktail napkin technicals point to an encouraging change in previous trend.



5. Doctor Copper is forecasting a strengthening economy.

What is Doctor Copper saying? A reading of the technical tea leaves in both copper and crude oil offers compelling evidence for the bullish argument. Something has clearly changed in the dynamics of copper. Once again, similar to equity markets copper had its first higher low put in and this past week achieved its first higher high. In just this last week, copper rallied 8.9% from below $3 to challenge the $3.20 level. It may take a few days but recouping the $3.20 level will be final confirmation of this rally.

Crude oil is also showing signs of increasing demand. After breaking down below $70 per barrel in late May, crude prices have rebounded and are now bumping up against the $80 resistance level. Oil also has a higher low in place on the charts.




Actively trading this new rally:

Right when a trader gets used to trading one way, the market changes. This is happening again as it will become increasingly difficult to trade on the short side should my call be realized. Shorting can be thrilling because gains come very rapidly when they do as a result of panic-induced selling. As far as strategy goes, gains on the short side are meant to be taken off the table very quickly. As Keith McCullough of Hedgeye.com says, "There is no such thing as short and hold". I should have heeded this advice and brought in my shorts earlier rather than holding them back to flat after equities found support at the 1,050 level.

The short squeeze is often the first move up the market. This squeeze is rapid because it is exactly the same type of buying as the selling was: panic-induced. Yet, after the first move, the momentum typically slows. Buying occurs in a much more controlled and logical manner than selling often does. I think of it in this way: buyers looking to enter positions use limit orders, capitulating sellers use market orders. The buying is concerted and rational, the selling is fast and indiscriminate. Buyers say, "work me into this position"; sellers say, "get me out now!" Profit-taking definitely occurs more logically than this but a lot of selling, especially in sizable corrections like the one we just saw results from irrational panic.

Trading a new move higher will require longer holding times and much greater relaxation of anticipated levels. Panicking sellers are more acutely aware of price and will make decisions based on declining price. Buyers are typically not as aware of specific price and look to buy on pull-ins. Levels are therefore more fluid and active traders should be more diversified not only in the number of positions but also the timing of entering those positions. Allowing yourself to be wrong on timing by starting smaller and legging into a position slowly will reduce much of the stress that comes from mistiming purchases.

I have been accumulating long positions slowly over the last couple of weeks. Although I was net short as of two weeks because of a long volatility and short market position, I kept buying small amounts of individual names. Now, all my shorts are off the table and I have a broad basket of individual names that I believe will do well in the next wave higher. Time to see if this thesis plays out.


Disclosure of full portfolio: Long SPY, VMW, EMC, GS, LLY, AONE, SPWRA, IRBT, IMAX, DNDN, STP, CREE, ILMN, LOGM, AGU. Short GLD.

Discretionary Traders in the Brave New HFT World

Monday, June 14, 2010

Share
Robot on computer screenLast week's high frequency trading conference by the World Research Group helped me form a much greater understanding of HFT systems and the future of the industry. (My summaries of the event here: Day One & Day Two) Much of the discussion focused on the race for the lowest latency which I suspect was somewhat due to the high number of vendors in attendance and on panels. Yet it was reiterated by actual practitioners multiple times that the clear victors in the end will be those with the most creative and innovative programming uncovering and exploiting inefficiencies in the financial system. While hardware will always be important, it has been of an out-sized focus for the last couple years and T3 Capital's Sean Hendelman, in particular, does not believe that will continue. Software will reign supreme in the end and the brightest computer scientists will garner the largest share of the profits. Jeremy Muthuswamy, Professor of Finance at Kent State University believes we have only "scratched the surface" on HFT computational complexity and expects quantitative modeling to evolve incredibly in the coming years.

The Brave New HFT World
The takeover by the machines was overlooked by many active traders as HFT grew rapidly during the 2008 crash because the human trader still had ample opportunity to profit in a wildly volatile equity market. As market conditions have dramatically changed over the last 18 months, the edge computers have has reeked havoc on the P&Ls of traders unwilling to adjust their strategies. In my personal opinion, dedicated scalpers are a dying breed. The most difficult part of the equation for a hyper-scalper is maintaining discipline and emotional control under an impulsive, rapid fire strategy of buying and selling. Not only is the opponent now an unemotional black box, it is faster, much faster. Trades are now happening in nanoseconds, far faster than the couple microseconds required for a human eye even to see a bid or offer appear in the Level II. With that speed comes an inability for the human scalper to control their downside risk as positions move out of their favor far too quickly. This of course causes a high degree of stress and blurs judgment. Scalpers have found themselves outmatched on speed, emotion and risk control as HFT has grown. For the most part, a scalper's edge has been stolen from them.

There was decent amount of discussion during the conference on deciding the target latency to achieve through hardware investment. Latency is of importance only relative to what the strategy requires. HFT practitioners distinguish between strategies needing ultra low latency and those only needing low latency and those not as concerned. Regular traders often think of HFT simply as fast computers yet there is a high level of differentiation in terms of latency even within the HFT universe. The thought of being able to beat the computer on speed is almost comical as they are discerning among themselves the varying levels of latency.

Also worth noting is the much more complicated manner in which a computer can rapidly and accurately assess risk and reward scenarios. Typically a trader will judge risk and reward based on perceived levels while watching a Level II or by gauging trading levels on a chart. Yet, black boxes can calculate risks immediately based on percentages not dollars, the bid and offer interaction, the frequency of bids hit/offers paid in a manner far more sophisticated than the human daytrader attempting to measure trades through visual interpretation of the Level II and a chart.

As I have stated in the past (here) HFT is requiring traders to become more sophisticated. The computers will win in the very short-term trading game, there is no doubt. That does not preclude discretionary traders from finding a way to be profitable. It simply forces traders to study, learn, adapt and evolve.

Survive and prosper bookHow to Survive & Prosper
Ultimately, not being an HFT programmer myself the question is: how does the discretionary trader live in this brave new world? In a recent interview on Wall St. Cheat Sheet with President of First New York Securities, a prominent NYC-based proprietary trading firm, Joe Schenk made his business model clear: "Contrary to popular belief, our business is proprietary trading not day trading. Though we may trade intra-day, we are not day traders." This is a very important distinction and firms ahead of the curve have invested in HFT infrastructure while refocusing the manual trading to strategies beyond the very short-term.

Later in the interview with First New York was an excellent recognition by Donald Motschwiller: "But the guys who truly trade the markets the best — the most talented guys in the firm — they trade the markets intuitively. They’ve seen it so many times and are so confident in the decision making process that they’re not reacting." From my experience, this is absolutely true. The best traders have an unexplainable gut feel that they are in tune with and trust in their decision-making process. Any technical or fundamental analysis does not represent hard and fast rules. The rules only work within the context of the overall direction and movement of the tape. Fundamental guys buying financials in 2008 without respect for the downward momentum would have seen painful losses. Likewise technicians highlighting a head and shoulders pattern in June 2009 failed to respect the incredibly strong bid that had entered the market. Intuition can certainly trump strictly quantitative strategies.

Simply put you will not win in the quantitative space; your approach must be different. In order for traders to succeed in a highly quant-driven tape they must develop a feel for the overall market and understand the ebb and flow of particular stocks and markets. Feel is very abstract, nearly impossible to teach and for the most part will only come through years of experience. But there are two particular daily activities I believe traders can do to help significantly shorten the learning curve. First, follow prices. Making a purposeful effort to memorize prices will allow you to contextualize any movement over time. This includes internalizing charts in order to know the history of prices. Second, read read read. The only way to understand the prevailing psychology is to gauge price reactions against headlines. There are many great financial blogs out there that help in determining broad sentiment.

In general traders need to understand trend and volatility. Trading with the trend is more important than ever as programs often exacerbate moves far beyond anticipated levels of support and resistance. Volatility is absolutely crucial in predicting the possible reward scenarios. While reward is measured in a pure dollar or percentage sense, traders must also appraise the probability of that reward coming to fruition. Lower volatility times yield lower returns and therefore require tighter stops.

Beyond developing feel, I believe traders are well-served by studying fundamentals. Trading plans must be arranged well before the stock hits the buy or sell points. Most important for me is background research on the underlying companies. My best trades have always occurred when I have the greatest amount of conviction in the idea. This conviction is only gained by putting in-depth research on the idea. Holding stocks for longer periods of times will only be consistently profitable if you are correct on the motivating factors behind the buying or selling. While it is probably not necessary to know the long-term debt to capitalization ratio of a given firm for example, it is important to recognize catalysts and know their impact in order to swing trade effectively. With technical levels becoming more fluid than ever before, the ability to hold through tumultuous volatility is only possible by intertwining fundamentals into the equation in order to maintain confidence in the trade.

At the end of the day, as argued by Muthuswamy, "so went the pit trader for the electronic trader, so will the quant human trader go for the robo trader." Admitting the inability to compete as a human is the first step, the second is to find a new method. There is huge opportunity in swing trading as volatility remains elevated currently at 27%. High beta names have huge ranges on daily basis. The keys for out-performance over the next few years will be those that are in tune with the tape and those that generate fundamental conviction for their trades.


Backlink: Wall St. Cheat Sheet