Tuesday, April 19, 2011
"Hard To Avoid Treasuries"
Yesterday I was asked for my reaction, in terms of portfolio construction, to the outlook change for the US' debt (this may have been an interview or just a more casual email conversation, I'm not sure). Along the way the interviewer pointed out that it is hard to avoid treasuries.
We all know what he meant of course but just because treasuries are easy to access and there are plenty of them available does not mean we have to own them (either individual issues or funds). The only US treasuries we own are legacy positions that clients may have brought with them so the yields are worth holding on to.
Long time readers will know my belief in avoiding spaces where the risks (relative to the history of the space) are elevated or the fundamentals have obvious problems. With treasuries this has meant interest rate risk for quite a while now (prices can stay high for a very long time) and with muni bonds, which we also avoid, I believe there is credit risk. Even if Meredith Whitney turns out to be wrong in terms of magnitude I prefer to not have to even think about it.
There are many tools with which to build a fixed income portfolio and still avoid obvious trouble spots or at least minimize the exposure.
For now "safe" yields are very low. We allocate quite a bit of our (relatively) safe fixed income allocation into short dated high quality corporate notes. With a 2013 maturity date if rates go up a lot a meaningful price decline is unlikely because of how soon the notes have to pay out at par. The yields in the space are low but quite a bit higher than treasuries with like maturities, 70-90 basis points is better than 20. There are obviously plenty of ETFs in this space but the downside is that there is no par value to return to. The best middle ground is probably the Guggenheim BulletShares which terminate when the last issue in the fund matures.
We do a lot with foreign sovereign debt issues. We own debt from several countries including Norway and Australia. Individual issues can be difficult to access for individual investors but the fund space is improving here. The first funds are all heavy in Japan but we are starting to see a next generation of these funds coming that avoid Japan. The first one came out recently from WisdomTree and it is Asia ex-Japan. There is also the Aberdeen Asia Pacific CEF (FAX) which has always been heavy in Australian debt (some clients own FAX), there is a Canadian preferred stock ETF that someone has in registration that could also turn out to be useful in this regard.
We do own TIP from iShares so there is some US treasury exposure but I feel far more confident here than with plain vanillas. The monthly payout has been all over the place (not unusual for an ETF) ranging from zero to pretty decent but it has generally done well.
Another space is emerging markets with the PowerShares Emerging Market Bond ETF (PCY). The paper is denominated in USD but there are times where the fund exhibits dollar sensitivity. We also own the Vanguard GNMA Fund (VFIIX). This fund has had a dividend cut a couple of years ago from four cents a month to three which is obviously noticeable but the historically low volatility of the fund makes it a good hold. We own one bank preferred stock which has a pretty good yield and I am quite certain the bank will not fail and we own one other closed end fund which is very un-volatile as CEFs go.
There a lot of funds that although they do not own bonds could be thought of as bond proxies or bond substitutes. A while back I wrote about the Collar Fund (COLLX) which owns mostly volatile stocks that it collars with options. Part of the marketing is that the fund can be a bond substitute. Based on price action this might be true but not based on payout. If the idea of bond proxies interests you then you may find some suitable candidates within the various absolute return niches.
We all know what he meant of course but just because treasuries are easy to access and there are plenty of them available does not mean we have to own them (either individual issues or funds). The only US treasuries we own are legacy positions that clients may have brought with them so the yields are worth holding on to.
Long time readers will know my belief in avoiding spaces where the risks (relative to the history of the space) are elevated or the fundamentals have obvious problems. With treasuries this has meant interest rate risk for quite a while now (prices can stay high for a very long time) and with muni bonds, which we also avoid, I believe there is credit risk. Even if Meredith Whitney turns out to be wrong in terms of magnitude I prefer to not have to even think about it.
There are many tools with which to build a fixed income portfolio and still avoid obvious trouble spots or at least minimize the exposure.
For now "safe" yields are very low. We allocate quite a bit of our (relatively) safe fixed income allocation into short dated high quality corporate notes. With a 2013 maturity date if rates go up a lot a meaningful price decline is unlikely because of how soon the notes have to pay out at par. The yields in the space are low but quite a bit higher than treasuries with like maturities, 70-90 basis points is better than 20. There are obviously plenty of ETFs in this space but the downside is that there is no par value to return to. The best middle ground is probably the Guggenheim BulletShares which terminate when the last issue in the fund matures.
We do a lot with foreign sovereign debt issues. We own debt from several countries including Norway and Australia. Individual issues can be difficult to access for individual investors but the fund space is improving here. The first funds are all heavy in Japan but we are starting to see a next generation of these funds coming that avoid Japan. The first one came out recently from WisdomTree and it is Asia ex-Japan. There is also the Aberdeen Asia Pacific CEF (FAX) which has always been heavy in Australian debt (some clients own FAX), there is a Canadian preferred stock ETF that someone has in registration that could also turn out to be useful in this regard.
We do own TIP from iShares so there is some US treasury exposure but I feel far more confident here than with plain vanillas. The monthly payout has been all over the place (not unusual for an ETF) ranging from zero to pretty decent but it has generally done well.
Another space is emerging markets with the PowerShares Emerging Market Bond ETF (PCY). The paper is denominated in USD but there are times where the fund exhibits dollar sensitivity. We also own the Vanguard GNMA Fund (VFIIX). This fund has had a dividend cut a couple of years ago from four cents a month to three which is obviously noticeable but the historically low volatility of the fund makes it a good hold. We own one bank preferred stock which has a pretty good yield and I am quite certain the bank will not fail and we own one other closed end fund which is very un-volatile as CEFs go.
There a lot of funds that although they do not own bonds could be thought of as bond proxies or bond substitutes. A while back I wrote about the Collar Fund (COLLX) which owns mostly volatile stocks that it collars with options. Part of the marketing is that the fund can be a bond substitute. Based on price action this might be true but not based on payout. If the idea of bond proxies interests you then you may find some suitable candidates within the various absolute return niches.
Labels:
fixed income
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)





16 comments:
After a 30 year bull has allocation, not geographically but as a percentage, changed? Also lifespans are lengthening so do you look at this when analyzing clients' risk profiles?
Just curious; I'm a long way off from considering fixed income except to reduce volatility.
Also you mention Oz; although it (and Asia) is having a decent start to the new year* I read Roubini saying overcapacity - initially in China but spreading to producers close by - will become a problem in the near future.
*Dan Reingold, in his book, says the Wall Street new year starts in March
Justin, I don't follow your first question.
Lifespans getting longer is less of a consideration than know a client's own family history. A 60 year old who has one or both parents alive need to plan on being around for a while.
Roubini was very useful back in 2006 and 2007. since then....
Ah, I was thinking of T-bills and getting my thoughts/currencies crossed. Ignore.
The thought Roubini was pandering to the anti-China demographic to boost his RGE site numbers occurred to me (too?). I'm happy with a (sorta) consensual opinion.
Shame though, as hearing his analysis against the tide (and him saying 'bah-bull') on Bloomberg was always entertaining.
Trustnet has, once again, Asia (sans Japan) performing highly, for the last month at least. After reading Reingold's book/revisionism and noting many previous inflexion points in March, I thought it was worth reflecting on in the light of many bearish commentating towards the BRICs.
Roger,
I'm curious whether or not you ever use floating rate income funds (FFRHX comes to mind) as part of a fixed income portfolio. The yield is good, and the NAV's appear to go up with rising interest rates. The only time NAV's seem to get whacked are during periods of extreme credit risk.
not a fan of floating rate--usually the quality is poor and I can remember one or two times where these funds (generally) blew up.
On topic and critical given the upcoming debate and action on increasing the fed gov't debt ceiling. The administration says failure to raise the debt ceiling will be the end of US credibility; interesting hypocrisy given Sen Obama's vote against such an increase during the Bush years. However, Fred Barns (Fox commentator) said something yesterday I never realized, but that makes perfect sense. Barns said, paraphrasing, that the US does not automatically default if the debt ceiling is not raised. The US gov't will still be in business and still collecting revenue; the only difference is that it cannot borrow and, therefore, cannot spend more than it takes in in revenue. My words, now: The real problem the administration will have is figuring out where to reduce spending if the debt ceiling is not raised; there is plenty of money to continue paying interest on outstanding bonds, but something will have to give. The US gov't would be in the same situation that state gov'ts are in; i.e., no more printing press. It would be very interesting to see where the administration's real priorities are. Seems to me the Republicans have a strong hand for forcing real cuts. We'll see how this evolves.
I use six month T-Bills laddered for each month (6) as an inflation hedge within my income portfolio (held in a Treasury Direct account). They account for about 7% of this portfolio (I have three - Permanent, Speculative and Income). I also own inflation-protected securities,foreign and domestic.
Granted,T-Bills have yielded squat, but I want to be ahead of the inflation curve.
T
Roger,
I have not heard you talk about Mark Hebner. He strykes me as a smart person.
Jeff from Milan, Italy
Jeff I've never heard of him. I just googled him, but he does not ring a bell
Jeff,
I think you mean "Ken Heebner".
Roger,
he was on daily ticker yahoo finance. here is the url: http://tinyurl.com/65hnpcq
You can also search on google: Mark Hebner yahoo.finance
Jeff from Milan, Italy
P.S. T should be happy. rather, like to get his comment on mark.
there actually is a Mark Hebner in the business in some capacity, I found him on Google
Jeff i can never get tech ticker or daily ticker videos to load--something to do with the slowness of our satellite internet service
Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn occasionally and inflation will doubtless rise above sustainable levels one day but I've made a lot of money over the past decade taking the other side of the inflation-fear trade and, under even close-to-normal circumstances, would expect to do so for at least another few years.
However we now have a congress that is even more venal and/or stupid than normal so the possibility the debt ceiling could be frozen must be taken seriously. In such an event, US bond quality will become suspect for real instead of merely in S&P's models and interest rates will rise, possibly quite steeply, or the Fed will have to buy a lot more bonds, or both. This will create the opposite effect predicted and/or desired by those who argue a debt ceiling freeze is a 'good thing' (pace Martha Stewart) but that's how it seems to be going these days.
The opportunity to take quality bonds away from weak hands at an excellent price shouldn't be ignored -- institutional traders made a quick killing on S&P's announcement for example -- but a refusal by congress to honor fiduciary commitments could impair USA credit in global markets and make treasuries suspect; e.g., the credit worthiness of anyone and everyone holding treasuries and the currencies (yes plural) those treasuries back as assets or collateral would become suspect as well.
Hard to avoid treasuries? Oh my Aunt Millie that isn't the half of it! If congress pursues its threats, even unsuccessfully, the chance of hyperinflation -- dramatic loss of the dollar's purchasing power at home as well as abroad -- on top of another global financial meltdown becomes greater than negligible, possibly much greater.
Well,
his expertise is foreign index funds investment and permanent portfolio and risk rebalencing. In the last 10 years he has made 100% ret. while the S&P is down in ret. His approach to risk and rebalincing is very interesting take. He has couple of things on youtube and is president of index funds advisors(http://www.ifa.com/).
Jeff from Milan, Italy
RW,
chf is perhaps a way to go. Onother way is NOVARTIS. Swiss dividends.
Jeff from Milan, Italy
Post a Comment