portfolio checkup

A friend who’s studying in the Netherlands and just starting out as an investor emailed me a question about what a portfolio checkup/cleanup is supposed to do.  I thought I’d reply in this post and in tomorrow’s.

two objectives

Basically, you analyze your portfolio carefully and at regular intervals to do two things:

–so you know for sure how your portfolio plan is working and what quantify which stocks or ideas are adding to or subtracting from your performance, and

–so you gradually learn about your investing personality.  By this I mean what things you typically do well and which ones you aren’t so good at.  You want this information, as painful as it may sometimes be to find out, so that you can emphasize the former and minimize the latter.  After all, the main goal is to earn/save money–not to massage your ego.

#1  figuring out performance

There’s a purely mechanical aspect to this.  You have a benchmark like the S&P 500, by which you judge your performance (you could achieve this return by buying an index fund.  You should only spend time and effort to select individual stocks or focused ETFs/mutual funds if you expect a return higher than the index fund will give you).

Over the past three months, the S&P 500 is down about 7.5% (ouch!).  Over the past month, it’s up about 9%.

Your first task is to calculate how your portfolio has performed vs the S&P over the interval you’re studying–both as a whole and each individual issue.  (For what it’s worth, after a long period of doing well, my stocks have been clobbered over the past month.)

what to do with this data, once it’s collected

a.  look for outliers, especially big losers.  Everyone has losers.  Everyone, even the most seasoned professional, also has an almost infinite capacity for denial.  My first mentor as a portfolio manager used to say that it took three winners to offset the damage that one big loser can do if it’s left to run amok and not caught early. So finding losers and eliminating them is important.

b.  ask if your plan is working.  This presupposes you have a plan.  A checkup may well bring out that you’re not bringing your intelligence, knowledge and experience to the party but are, so to speak, mailing it in and hoping that’s good enough.  (We all find out quickly that it isn’t.  Although individual market participants may not be the sharpest pencils, the collective entity is extremely acute.)

For example, in general my plan is:

–world economies are still expanding, although slowly.  So I’m still positioned for an up market.  The EU has me worried.  I’m thinking about shading toward larger, stodgy sort-of-growth stocks as a defensive measure but haven’t done anything much yet.

–there will continue to be a sharp separation between haves (mostly meaning having a job) and the have-nots (the 10% or so long-term unemployed in the US).  I want to own stocks that cater to the former and want to avoid stocks whose market is the latter.

–Asian, especially Greater China, exposure is a good thing, because that’s where most of the world’s economic energy is centered

–I think the continuing proliferation of smartphones, tablets and e-readers plus the rapid development of cloud computing mean there’s money to be made in at least some tech stocks.

For me, the relevant question is how this is working out for me overall.  The answer is:  great, until about a month ago.

A second aspect of figuring out performance is to look, stock by stock, at plan vs. performance.  Reading any of my posts about TIF will get you my stock-specific plan since I bought the security about a year ago.  Again, until about a month ago, things were working well  …since then, not so much.

c.  acting on this information

Even in the best of times, the stock market is always a process of two steps forward, one step back.  Also, all stocks, even the long-term winners, have periods of underperformance.  There’s a real experience-and temperament-based art to deciding how to react to the data that show your stocks are underperforming.

In my case, I’m thinking so far that this is a temporary adjustment phase.  But I’ve also got to at least begin to consider how I’d rearrange my holdings if the underperformance persisted.  This thought process–and the possible move to action–is partly a question of risk tolerance, partly of conviction in the correctness of my analysis of individual stocks, and partly a judgment, based on experience, of what is a normal trading pattern vs. a fundamental change in market direction.

More tomorrow.

a view from fixed income land

My first boss on Wall Street, who taught me securities analysis in the late 1970s, switched to the fixed income arena in the early 1980s.  He runs Jamison and McCarthy Investment Advisors LLC, which manages money for institutions and high net worth individuals.  His most recent quarterly letter to clients gives a polished industry veteran’s view of the current global economic situation.  It’s very worthwhile reading.  (Sans charts), here it is:

Where We Are

Economic setbacks come in many different forms. Some are self inflicted – like those caused by over-investment in business assets (inventories, plant
and equipment) or excess spending by individuals. Others are caused by higher interest rates and tighter lending practices in response to inflation
fears or credit risks. Over a relatively short time, the excesses can be worked off and, as inflation and credit fears abate, credit begins to expand again.
The economy recovers. Wealth and the total value of goods and services quickly surpass their old high water marks.

Then, there are economic declines that fall outside the realm of the usual business cycle downturns. These are the ones that occur after a debt-
fueled boom goes bust – the bubble pops. We have just experienced such a pop – caused largely by over investment in housing, not just in the U.S.
but in many other countries. The resulting credit losses and credit contraction will persist over an extended period. And while the root cause can be
traced to one sector of one economy, the resulting credit contraction will trigger shocks in unexpected places. So, the collapse of the U.S. sub-prime
housing market causes banks in Iceland to default. Then, investors worry whether the financial extended countries around the edges of Europe will be
able to pay their debts. Maybe, you shouldn’t even put much faith in paper currencies at all.

It takes a long time to clean up the aftermath of credit cycle bubbles. For example, in the wake of All-Time Depression, it took over a decade for
Gross National Product to reach the level recorded in 1929.   Japan experienced a credit crisis in the late 1980’s caused by over expansion in the
manufacturing sector. Since 1990, that economy has grown on average 0.8% a year and ten year Japanese government bonds yielded just 1.3%. So, it should come as no surprise to investors that ten-year U.S. bond yields recently dipped below 2% especially since the Federal Reserve recently stated that they plan to keep short term interest rates near zero for two more years.

Few are predicting a Japanese style period of malaise for the U.S. economy. They cite the flexibility of the U.S. labor market, the willingness of
American consumers to borrow to support spending, an entrepreneurial spirit, and actions by the federal government and central banks to spur
spending. Perhaps they’re right but the jury is still out.

Housing

At the core of the recent economic collapse is housing – or specifically, housing speculation that encouraged people to leverage in order to
maximize their gains from rising home prices. Buyers had both solid reasons and strong incentives to play the game. According to data from the
National Association of Realtors, housing prices rose 85% between 1996 and 2005. The Case-Shiller Index of home prices advanced 12% a year from
2001 to 2005. Interest rates were low, home ownership received favorable income tax breaks, and the government mandated rules that made it
easy to qualify for mortgages regardless of income level, assets, or down payment amount.

The U.S. housing sector is very cyclical. In fact, by raising interest rates and choking mortgage credit, the Federal Reserve used housing as a swing
factor in regulating economic growth during most of the post-World War II period. But this housing downturn was different. It wasn’t caused by a
contraction of credit and a reduction in building activity. It was caused by a price collapse. The Federal Housing Finance Administration produces an
index of housing prices based on same home sales extending back to 1975. While there have been slight price declines over a short period, the 16%
decline that occurred during the four years ended June 30, 2011 is an anomaly.

Real estate is a major component of household wealth in the United States. It totaled $18.1 trillion on June 30, 2011. As per statistics compiled
by the Federal Reserve, owners equity in household real estate was $13.2 trillion in 2005.  By June 30, 2011, the equity in homes had fallen to $6.2 trillion. Meanwhile, stock prices were tumbling and interest rates were falling. Both factors eroded the value and earning power of most consumers’
financial assets, like their 401k’s.

The natural reaction to these forces was to curtail borrowing. And that’s just what happened. The borrowing binge of the early 2000’s has been followed by the borrowing bust of the last few years. Since the consumer accounts for two-thirds of the total economy, it’s no surprise that this new found spirit of frugality produced first, a sharp recession and second, a weak recovery.

The housing sector led the way into the current financial quagmire and that’s the place to look for the route out. Higher home prices would do much
to improve consumer sentiment and balance sheets. Recent data from Case/Shiller indicate the price decline in housing is moderating, but we have
seen false signs of a recovery before.

A New Twist

…on an old theme. The Federal Reserve’s got a new dance and it goes like this. They plan to sell a bunch of the $1 trillion worth of notes they bought
during Quantitative Easing I and QE II. With the proceeds, they will buy a bunch of longer term government bonds. The plan was announced on
September 21st, but was rumored to be in the works since August. The goal is to drive down the spread between yields on long term securities –
those with maturities beyond ten years – and those on shorter dated items. They figure this will stimulate economic activity. (It’s more likely to
stimulate speculative activity and push up the price of “risk” assets like stocks. But the Fed probably would settle for that, too.)

Based on a Federal Reserve study of an earlier twist operation in the early Sixties, they estimated the new twist would narrow the spread by fifteen basis points (the study) or thirty basis points (Chairman Bernanke’s comments in September). The market – ever the efficient discounting mechanism – took the guess work out of these estimates. Between mid-August and the end of September, it narrowed the yield spread between 10- and 30-year U.S. Treasury bonds by forty basis points, helping to spur a huge rally in longer dated bonds.

This occurred even as the year over year increase in core CPI reached 2.0% compared with 0.8% last December. In fact, core inflation has risen every
month this year. The same is largely true if you add back food and energy to get the full inflation picture. The year over year total consumer price
index is up 3.8% through August. These inflation numbers compare with zero yields on money market securities, a 2% yield on ten-year notes, and a 3% yield on thirty year government bonds. Obviously, the goal of Federal Reserve policy is to push investors into riskier assets by creating negative yields in safe securities. They hope such investments will promote stronger economic growth. It might – or it might just create another mini-bubble somewhere.

Still Lost in the Woods

In the last few weeks, there has been some encouraging news. Recent employment data in the U.S. have put to rest fears of a renewed economic
contraction. Based on the number of new hires and hours worked, we’ll probably see 2% GDP growth for the third quarter. In Europe, the French
and Germans have put together a number of plans to keep Greece from defaulting and dragging the European banks with them. One Belgium bank
has been successfully pulled from the brink – even as that meant splitting it apart. When the positives became news, investors flocked to risky
assets – like equities and industrial commodities – and sold safe investments – like U.S. Treasury bonds and the Swiss franc.

Unfortunately, many of the positive developments are rooted in an ever growing mountain of public debt. It remains to be seen whether this is
sustainable either politically or practically. Some reversal of the recent bond price gains is likely before year end and there may be an opportunity
to profit from such market volatility. But any significant rise in long term interest rates will require a turnaround in consumer sentiment and home
prices in the U.S.

Note:  This Market Environment reflects the views of the Investment Advisor only through the date of this report. The Investment Advisor’s views are subject to change at any time based on market and other conditions. September 30, 2011.

Intel’s record 3Q11

results

INTC announced 3Q11 earnings after the close of trading in New York on October 18th. The report was records all around.

Revenue for the three months was an all-time high of $14.3 billion, up 29% year on year.  Net income was another first, at $3.7 billion, up 24%.  So, too, were eps, at $.69, up 33%.  (Why the difference between the percentage gains in net and eps?  …INTC’s continuing aggressive stock buybacks, which have shrunk the number of outstanding shares by 354 million over the past 12 months.  During 3Q11, INTC bought back 186 million shares at an average price of $21.50.)

These results also blew away the Wall Street analysts’ consensus of $.61 for the quarter.

INTC gave guidance of 4Q11, sketching out a quarter pretty much a carbon copy of 3Q11.  That’s a bit weaker than normal seasonality, but softness in the developed world PC business, especially in the EU, has kept the company from being more enthusiastic.

details

Actually, this is more “new information” than “details.”

How could analysts miss INTC’s earnings so badly?  After all, the company’s overall business isn’t growing at warp speed.   INTC is also deeply connected into the supply chains of its customers, lead times are long enough for it to see much of the coming quarter, and the company tells analysts in advance what it is seeing.

The issue is INTC’s mainstay PC business–which grew by 17% year on year during 3Q.  This performance was based mostly on strength in emerging markets like China and Brazil.  It also contrasted sharply with predictions from third-party research firms that have been saying the global PC market is barely growing at all.

INTC says these firms are systematically underestimating demand.  They have a good handle on the PC market in the developed world, but don’t have good sources in developing countries, where consumers are just becoming affluent enough to afford PCs.  In such markets, PC demand is booming but the consultants can’t see it.

Analysts have so far chosen to believe the consultants, not INTC, and have been projecting a stagnant PC market.

INTC’s 4Q11 caution?  It stems from two factors.  Demand in the EU is weak.  Slowdown in global growth has lowered airfreight rates enough that PC vendors are shifting from ship to air for sending their output to market.  Faster delivery allows PC makers to trim finished goods inventories further.

New chips?  INTC will be churning out 22nm 3-D chips in volume by yearend.  The company thinks that this will give it attractive alternatives to ARM chips for low-end PCs or tablets-maybe even smartphones.  INTC’s offerings can sell at the same $30 price as ARM’s but be faster, smaller and use less power. They’ll also already be compatible with all a potential customer’s existing technology.  If so, INTC may be able to compete successfully with ARM for the first time ever.

what about 2012?

My rough guess is that INTC earnings will be up, and by around 10%. 

INTC thinks corporations are only about halfway through their upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7.  Initial demand for the company’s newest server chip, which will debut early net year, already has 2x the design wins and 20x the demand that today’s standard had at launch.   Cloud computing, which is still a small business for INTC, is growing by leaps and bounds.  These users demand the newest, highest-performance and highest-profit server chips INTC makes. Assume this all adds up to 20% growth for a third of INTC’s business.

For the traditional consumer PC business, let’s say the developed world and the developing world are about equal size today.  For 2012, assume that the developed world be flat and the developing world will slow down to 10% growth.  That would mean 5% growth for two-thirds of INTC’s business.

Add the two together and growth for 2012 will come out to +10%.  Stock buybacks will probably add a few percentage points to that number.  Eps would probably be slightly above $2.50 for this year and would come in at $2.75-$2.80 for 2012.  The consensus brokerage house estimate is at $2.45.

There’s some risk that demand in developed markets will decline next year.  But I think the fall would have to be more than 10% to make an appreciable change to the overall company’s fortunes.  On the other hand, it’s possible that INTC’s new 3-D chips will allow it to gain tablet or smartphone design wins–something that Wall Street now finds impossible to believe.

investment thoughts

At today’s share price, INTC is trading at 9.4x current earnings and 8.5x earnings for 2012.  It’s yielding 3.5%.  I’m tempted to write that the stock is priced like a business cycle-sensitive industrial at the top of the cycle–but even stocks like CAT and DE are selling at higher multiples than INTC.

That’s actually part of the positive investment case for the stock.  It’s priced as if all that matters for it is the consumer PC business in the US and EU, that these markets are in secular decline and that INTCs attempts to adjust its offerings to a smartphone- and tablet-driven future will fail.  So downside risk seems to me to be limited.  Upside could be considerable if INTC’s new 3-D chips do what the company thinks they can.

supply chain disruptions: first Fukushima, now Thai flooding

Chao Phraya River flooding

Thailand is suffering extensive flooding because of unusually severe monsoon rains over the past few months.   Several hundred people have been killed and a number of key industrial parks remain underwater.

Although the worst appears to be over, authorities warn that the Chao Phraya River would remain very high for weeks, as more rainwater from the north plus the water accumulated in flooded areas gradually makes its way south to the Gulf of Thailand.

Although the flooding hasn’t received anything close to the media attention outside Thailand that the nuclear plant meltdowns in Fukushima prefecture did outside Japan, it still may have have important investment implications, for two reasons:

–for many years, Thailand has been a big source of automotive components for Japanese auto firms, as well as a jumping-off point for the assemblers into the rest of Asia.

–Thailand produces a lot mechanical and low-end electronic parts that find their way into computers and consumer electronic devices.

effects on industry

Of the accounts I’ve read, the Financial Times has the best overall summary (I was surprised to find that Nikon makes the majority of its digital cameras in Thailand); Forbes has the most company-by-company information.  Nothing is really comprehensive, though.

Few companies have made public announcements about the effect of the flooding on their operations.  That’s partly, I think, because no one knows for sure, partly because the bigger, publicly listed firms are waiting for their subcontractors, who are the ones directly affected, to say something first.

There are two related issues:

–many roads have been knocked out, so people can’t get to work and parts suppliers can’t deliver shipments. Some areas have no electric power.  It sounds like this situation will last for a couple of weeks, at least.

–no one knows for sure how much damage has been done to factory machinery in the flooded industrial parks.  This could be a really serious problem, especially if machines are heavily customized or built entirely in-house.  The Bangkok Post seems to think that companies had enough warning that they could move machines to upper factory floors, where they would presumably be safe from damage.  But in most cases, it looks like no one has been able to get into the factories to check.

investment implications

Under normal circumstances, Japanese car firms would simply switch to alternate production sources inside Japan.  But those are most likely already running flat out to compensate for capacity lost to the Fukushima disaster.  So the Japanese auto firms will probably face production constraints for some time.  Their third-party component customers will, too.  That’s a mild positive for everyone else.

IT is a little bit trickier, since a lot of Thai companies make components that fly way below the radar.  We do know that Thailand is very important for hard disk drives, however.  And they’re in everything from iPods to set-top boxes to corporate and cloud servers.

If you own a tech stock that seems to be resisting the general uptrend that IT is now experiencing, chances are that if you Google your stock’s name + Thai flooding you’ll see that this is what’s holding the issue back.

What you should do with this knowledge depends on valuation and the extent of your stock’s dependence on Thailand (and your risk preferences, of course).  So you’re on your own.  For the one or two that I own, I think a daily trip to the Bangkok Post website is in order.  That will give the fastest indication, I think, that the flooding problem is not going to get any worse–which will probably be the time to decide whether to own more of the affected stocks.

 

the China-US trade route: getting goods into the stores for the holidays

planning for the holidays

It can take a surprisingly long time for a retailer to go from a hazy concept of what a store (or a chain) should look like for the holiday sailing season to seeing the shelves actually stocked with merchandise.

Let’s skip over the planning time it takes to figure out exactly what items, and in what quantities, the retailer wants to buy and start with what happens once he calls up a manufacturer or wholesaler and places an order.

Let’s also, for the moment, not focus on computer and consumer electronics items.  There, the issues are making sure enough components and manufacturing capacity are available.  That’s what takes months (a complex semiconductor, for example, may take three months to fabricate).  Actually assembling and testing a device takes a day or two; day three gets it to the plane; on day five, the Fedex truck is rolling to deliver the item.  So  …a week, more or less from manufacturing order to warehouse.

timing order flow from China

For, say, garments from China the story is completely different.  Assuming manufacturing capacity is available, it may take a week to manufacture/assemble a large order and get it to a port.  Pencil in another day for loading, two weeks for a container ship to reach Long Beach, California.  Add a day or two (or three…) for unloading there, and the better part of a week for the train the shipment is placed on next to reach the East Coast  Then there’s a trip to a company warehouse, where the goods are parceled out into smaller lots for delivery to the back rooms of retail stores.

That all adds up to about two months for an isolated rush order that sails through the system without any problems.

But problem-free order flow won’t always (ever?) be the case.  Rush orders cost extra.  And you can’t have all the merchandise arriving at the retail stores on the same day–no one has enough trucks or doorways that are wide enough.  So three months is probably a better figure.

using the data

What does this mean if we want to monitor port activity as a way of assessing retail plans for the holiday season?

Figuring merchandise should be in the stores in early November, look for a pickup in port activity in the area around Hong Kong in late July or early August, and an uptick in the ports around Los Angeles–LA and Long Beach–in late August or early September.

…so far?

So far there’s no pickup to be seen.  Hong Kong-area ports are flattish, and the southern California ports were down 5% year on year in August.  Li & Fung, the well-known Hong Kong-based logistics company, indicates in its latest monthly Chinese Purchasing Managers Index report that new orders in China are perking up a bit in September.  But these seem to be for domestic consumption, not exports–and stuff being made right now can’t get to foreign markets before yearend anyway.

investment implications

Hong Kong figures are doubtless depressed by the current situation of the EU.  Also, to the degree that they can (not much), importers have been avoiding Long Beach for years because of the port’s stunning inefficiency.  Therefore, there may be some room for a contrary bet that the upcoming holiday season will be better than dreary port figures suggest.  WMT, M or KSS might be ways to participate.

I have no desire to do so, right now at least.

The pluses would be that the stocks are trading at low PEs, and that expectations are low.  But I don’t know that well the mid-to-lower-end merchandisers who would be beneficiaries of a surprising Christmas spending surge.  So I’m certain to be the dumb money in this trade.

For another thing, I think we’re in for a luxury goods and gadget-driven holiday–jewelry, smartphones, tablets, e-readers and stuff like that.  So, as an investor I’m more comfortable betting on a continuation of the current haves vs. have-nots trend than on its reversal.

But I will be keeping an eye on the ports over the next few weeks for new data that might change my mind.