Pricing
When buying or selling either an open-end or closed-end fund, an investor usually knows the current value of the fund’s assets per share (NAV).
For example, to buy an open-end fund with a NAV of $15, an investor pays $15 per share. The fund simply issues new shares to the investor at the current NAV. The assets the fund manages have increased, but the value per share remains the same because the new shares have exactly the same value as the other shares. If the investor sells, he or she is paid the NAV. The amount of assets the fund manages has been reduced, but the NAV of outstanding shares has not changed because the shares redeemed were equal in value to all others.
With closed-end funds, the shares are traded in the open market and are consequently subject to demand/supply imbalances. They may trade at a price greater than their NAV (termed a premium) or at a price below the NAV (termed a discount). Read the rest of this entry »
All freely traded liquid markets share common traits related to psychological pressures (fear and greed), but each differs as to fundamental relationships, trading mechanisms, and structural factors. Each market’s individual characteristics must be understood. Once this understanding has been achieved, proper evaluation of similarities or differences, as well as interrelated pricing effects, with other markets can be accomplished.
One market that allows easy application of Drach’s common stock analysis is closed-end funds, also known as publicly traded funds or closed-end investment trusts (CEITs).
Although one of the oldest forms of investment, closed-end funds are among the most misunderstood and consequently often overlooked investment areas. Their origin can be traced back to the establishment of a Belgian fund in 1822; thereafter they flourished, particularly among English and Scottish investors in the latter 1800s. The first U.S. fund was formed in 1893 and, until the time of the stock market crash of 1929, closed-end funds were the dominant form of publically owned investment companies. Read the rest of this entry »
Management’s income is usually based on a percentage of the market value of the securities in the fund. The larger the asset base is, the greater the income. Both open- and closed-end fund managers are (at least theoretically) compensated to provide superior investment performance. If the value of the assets being managed grows, the management fees expand proportionately. In addition to pressures associated with performance, the open-end fund manager is faced with problems that can arise form variable capitalization.
Statistically, there is virtually no question that the popularity of both closed-end and open-end funds varies with market conditions. When the market is high, especially during periods of excessive speculation, open- end mutual fund sales increase (sometimes very dramatically), and there is an increase in the number of new closed-end funds. When the market is depressed, open-end sales decline (sometimes redemptions dominate), and there are few new closed-end funds formed. Read the rest of this entry »
Since almost all closed-end funds tend to sell at a discount, it can appear obvious that there is no reason to purchase closed-end funds when they are selling at a premium. Sometimes a special feature, for example, a closed-end fund having a private placement in its portfolio which is about to go public as a hot issue, may justify purchase at a premium. Otherwise, it is difficult to make a case for paying a price higher than NAV.
Central to the advantages of closed-end funds is the discount; both as to dividends and as to pricing variances. Read the rest of this entry »
A primary reason for discounts is a lack of sponsorship. If a securities salesperson (dependent on commissions) has a choice of selling someone an existing closed-end fund (say at a regular stock commission of around 1 percent) or a load mutual fund with a sales charge (that can be as much as 8 percent), the incentive is to direct “investors” to the open-end fund.
The incentives associated with higher sales charges can be easily observed when new closed-end funds are issued. In new issues, compensation is by underwriting fees. A typical fee is 7 to 8 percent. If a fund was coming public at $10 per share, an 8-percent underwriting fee would be 80 cents per share. Read the rest of this entry »
The ease of adapting Drach’s methods to closed-end funds is based on the similarity of scanning for relative discounting. The essence of the timing technique is to attempt to expand common stock investment when the overall market is relatively low, confining investment interest to stocks that qualify for the Master List, which appear relatively discounted to the others.
Scanning for the most appropriate closed-end fund based on discounts has the same objective: isolating the cheapest. In Drach’s objectives, he is searching for specific stocks that are overly discounted. In Herzfeld’s closed-end fund analysis, he is searching for the most discounted fund. The focus of both techniques is to isolate excessive discounts relative to historical/statistical norms.
A significant differential between Drach’s concentration on specific stock and Herzfeld’s concentration on specific funds is that the funds, by their structure, involve diversity in the number of different positions. Read the rest of this entry »
Two things must be kept in mind when establishing a long position in this kind of hedge. First, since Treasury bond futures contractsrepresent face value of $100,000 worth of Treasury bonds, the investor will want to go long approximately $100,000 worth of closed-end bondfunds. When it comes to trading closed-end bond funds, I do not recommend buying more than 2000 or 3000 shares of a single fund for a short-term trade. That is why we would go long several different closed-end funds, representing positions of from $31,000 to $34,000 and amounting to approximately $100,000. That $100,000 long position offset the short position of 1 September U.S. Treasury bond futures contract at 100.18, priced at a 7.943 yield.
On February 10, 1978, with the Dow Jones Bond Average down to 89.79, two significant changes had taken place since we established our theoretical long and short positions: (1) The long positions in the bond funds had become profitable, and (2) so had the short position in the Treasury bond futures contract. For example, JHS was selling at 175/8, up from 167A; DBF was up to 165/8 from 161/2; and PAI had gone from 135/8 to 1334. The net asset values of all three funds had declined but the discounts, as predicted, narrowed more than the decline in net asset values, resulting in the profits. Read the rest of this entry »
In the common stock investment techniques, the most obvious hedging strategy might be to be long the stocks that are relatively discounted and sell short those that appear most overpriced. However, the process is not so simple.
Because of the composition of the Master List, the stocks as a group tend to do significantly better than the market as a whole. Consequently, although the long positions have significantly outperformed the broadly based market, the short positions, if sold, will likely provide lesser returns than the overall market.
It is because of the Master List’s positive bias that in hedging accounts Drach utilizes writing index call options as a substitute for the short side. This substitution both eliminates the effect of the Master List’s upside bias that would be experienced in attempting to short Master List stocks and provides added profitability for the short side because of premium capture. As discussed in Chap. 9, the method of going long the selected Master List issues and proportionately shorting (selling) index call options is a lethargic process, which has so far produced a constant annualized return of about 15 percent irrespective of overall market conditions. Read the rest of this entry »
Empirical evidence suggests that stocks experience momentum and reversals in returns depending on holding periods. Generally, there is momentum in short-term returns of about one month and also in the medium term of about one year, but reversals in longer periods of three to five years.
The most successful momentum strategy is to buy stocks that have performed the best over the past three to twelve months, and short-sell stocks that performed the worst over the same period. If these positions are held for the next three to twelve months, the positions generate an abnormal return of about 12 percent per year. Momentum strategies seem to be adopted extensively by mutual funds and other institutions.
Over longer periods, studies find that the returns reverse, that is, past winners become losers if held for three to five years and past losers become winners. According to long-term studies, 25-40 percent of the future return is predictable based on past returns.
Unlocking Value Around Expiration of IPO Lockups
Read the rest of this entry »
Nearly all of the mutual fund families offer multiple funds that are geared toward international investing. The different kinds of funds can be categorized into index funds, international funds, regional funds, country funds, emerging market funds, and global funds. International mutual funds have higher expense ratios than domestic mutual funds to cover higher trading costs and higher management fees. The funds also tend to have redemption fees to control frequent trading. Examples of funds offered by major mutual fund companies are given below.
* Index funds. These include Fidelity Spartan International Index Fund, Vanguard Developed Markets Stock Index, Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index, and Price International Equity Index Fund.
* International funds. These funds do not invest in the domestic market. Funds include Fidelity International Growth, T. Rowe Price International, Fidelity Overseas, Vanguard International Growth, Fidelity Diversified International, and so on.
* Global funds. These funds invest in all countries, including the domestic market, and include Templeton World, GT Global Worldwide, Dreyfus Global, Vanguard Global Equity, Price Global Stock, and so on. Read the rest of this entry »
