Preliminary 1H Results

My apologies, but first half results will have a one week delay due to some dividends not crediting on Friday. These are primarily Canadian held in my taxable account – I’m thinking it’s a tax processing issue as the Canadian stocks in my IRA credited as normal. I do know the S&P beat me for the month but I’m slightly ahead for the year. Beyond that … there’s always next week.

This week, the President attended the G20 and had the anticipated meeting with Xi Jinping. The preliminary reporting by Eunice Yoon, CNBC’s Beijing correspondent was: (June 29, 2019 tweet)

  • By my tally, so far China gets:
    • -no new tariffs
    • -access to US tech for Huawei
    • -better visa treatments for Chinese students
    • -truce on tradewar (resumption of talks)
  • US gets:
    • -bigger purchases for farmers

My initial take was that China came out ahead due to the fact that their pork production has issues with a swine flu epidemic – meaning I think they used a weakness to their advantage. They probably had limited options. The Daily Beast concurs (although a little more stridently). But the futures market appears to be rallying – perhaps because it wasn’t worse? As Monday dawns here I’ll be looking at this a little closer.

Meanwhile, I’ll (finally) be making some moves in July, selling three issues – primarily dividend cut related. Since one of my core holdings is being acquired, a restructure of my top 36 is also in order. So my expectation is more than normal activity is on tap with a slight decrease in the number of my holdings (not the value) as well.

With it being a holiday shortened trading week in the US, I hope you enjoy and have a safe 4th!

Advertisements

Musings – June 22 version

Monday morning delivered the news of a merger announcement between two of my banks. It’s not often I get to play both sides of a deal, so I have to enjoy this one. PB was a hold in my portfolio representing about 1.7% where LTXB was a buy having risen to 1.8% on its’ way to a 3% maximum. My confidence was so bullish that LTXB was my one entrant in Roadmap 2 Retire‘s 2019 Contest. My confidence was inspired by Kevin Hanigan’s (LTXB President & CEO) response on the Q2 2018 Earnings call (July 18, 2018) response in the Q&A on the M&A topic, “We are trying to position the franchise to be the prettiest girl at the dance, whether we’re a buyer or a seller. And I think we’ll soon be a whole lot prettier, if not the prettiest girl at the dance.

Pretty they became as PB is paying 0.528 shares and $6.28 cash for each LTXB share. I plan to vote in favor of the transaction (on both sides), pocket the cash and sell the new shares – retaining the old. Moral to the story – you never know the gem you’ll find embedded in earnings calls.


My initial take with Facebook’s Libra Cryptocurrency is that it’s intriguing, plausible but comes with contradictions. Now – similar to the Mueller report – I’m still digesting the details, but the first two to jump out at me were:

  • Envisioned both as a Stablecoin (tied to a basket of fiat currencies) and a viable alternative to the unbanked masses, is to a degree, an oxymoron as I doubt the majority of the unbanked are versed in currency exchange fluctuations which could have either a positive or negative impact to their wealth.
  • The white paper addresses a goal of social goodness through ethical actors, yet a cursory review of the Founding Members reveals the following:
    • PayU (part of Naspers which had a controversial move from South Africa to the Netherlands – socially responsible?)
    • One founder is Thrive Capital – a VC firm run by Joshua Kushner (Jared’s brother), which would be a potential question mark worthy of further investigation

My interest lies more in the unnamed banks which will be holding all these low cost deposits, and I’m sure there will be more to follow …


The final point this week is on tariffs. Unless a country is self-sufficient, trade is not a zero sum game. There will be surpluses here and deficits there, the goal being all is basically even when viewed on a multilateral basis. My thinking is that the president has been one-upped in the trade war he started. If a measure of greatness is the wealth of a country, perhaps the campaign slogan should be “Making America Irrelevant Again“. China’s reaction (in the long game) to the tit-for-tat brinkmanship has been to reduce tariffs on other country’s goods when retaliating against US tariffs. Good luck getting these markets back …

My Updated Crypto View

Occasionally I use this space for further elaboration on topics that recently garnered my attention. I spent the better part of this past week on one such beast thanks to Caleb over at Buy, Hold Long. He recently added a You Tube channel to his site and the topic on crypto diversification got my attention (as well as a few views). I can’t say my opinion was changed (it wasn’t) as a review of my original thesis reflects (by chance) I pegged the top of the crypto market (almost). His approach though had me reflecting on the similarities to DGI strategies.

The BHL analysis essentially takes the top 100 currencies by market cap to determine the most profitable investing approach. One of the two Crypto ETFs awaiting SEC approval uses a similar methodology, albeit with the top ten. Some of the questions I posed to BHL are indeed reflected in the Bitwise ETF Trust‘s S-1. For instance, an inflation adjusted formula is used and trade suspensions and hard forks are addressed. Private keys and cold storage (security) have been anticipated and rebalances are monthly. The biggest difference between BHL’s Top Ten and Bitwise is that BHL is equal weight and Bitwise is more market cap (with some constraints) weighted. Additionally, Bitwise will carry a 2-3% fee.

There are some intricacies needing to be fleshed out notably in the KYC and FASB/IFRS space which may result in crypto purists losing faith primarily due to the potential loss of any remaining anonymity. Yet some (like me) may come around thanks to the ease of negotiating multiple wallets, exchanges, and yes, diversity. Until then, I’ll keep my head in the sand waiting for the day US investors have a legitimate crypto ETF alternative.

My final concern with the BHL study (date bias) can not be proven in my cursory review, as my question also reflected date bias. I can state the broader model outperformed as it did in BHL’s although with lower gains. Second was the Top Ten. I do think BHL may be onto something and encourage you to take a look at his efforts!

Mexican Standoff

A confrontation in which no strategy exists that allows any party to achieve victory. As a result, all participants need to maintain the strategic tension, which remains unresolved until some outside event makes it possible to resolve it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_standoff

On May 30th, the Trump administration announced stepped tariffs on Mexican imports under cover of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Once again it appears to have been a bargaining ploy using the American consumer and farmers as pawns in a game of Chicken as these were “indefinitely suspended” on June 7th – perhaps realizing the signature USMTA was now at risk by this action or the push back by the business community or the fact that Republican Senators realized they did indeed have a backbone (albeit, small).

While I’ve never been a huge fan of ETFs as my view is that an investor is consigning themselves to the average, my preference being to develop a thesis and buy individual companies in support of the idea – with the expectation being the return will be outside the norm (hopefully in a positive manner). That said, I realize ETFs can – and do – serve a purpose and as such I have five in my portfolio, one being iShares MSCI Mexico Capped ETF (EWW). This issue peaked at $44.54 on May 30th before bottoming at $42.64 on June 3rd which is precisely where my order to add executed. Yes, it was luck calling a bottom but it was also a validation of the Headline Risk concept.

One of the first analyses published was that of a short-seller, BOOX research. He does present a decent argument on all counts, save one. This was followed by Liumin Chen’s analysis which missed the same issue. To be fair, I’m now operating in hindsight – post Trump’s reversal, but I did spend most of last weekend forming my conclusion which was the negative tariff impact to EWW was overblown due to one factor. One where you can’t just look at the forest without reviewing the respective trees.

One uncertainty I have with BOOX is his view of a pending peso devaluation as that would likely torpedo any trade agreement and give rise to currency manipulator status. More important is the view that the Consumer Staples exposure is a negative. While it is true that this sector comprises 30.5% of the ETF, only one of the top ten (Walmart de Mexico) has significant Mexican domestic consumer exposure where US imports (tariffs) could be in play. The other two Staples either don’t interact with the US (Fomento Economico Mexicano) or has significant US operations in their own right (Grupo Bimbo with 22,000 US employees). My take is tariffs would slow – but not cripple – the Mexican economy.

Indeed there could be a silver lining for Mexican multinationals that do not import US products. Some brands at the forefront are Tracfone (America Movil), Groupo Mexico (Southern Copper) and the aforementioned Bimbo (Thomas, Entenmann’s, Mrs. Baird’s). Basically these entities could be repatriating US gained profits in inflated USD to Mexico as artificially depressed MXN. A possible spread play that is typically the province of banks and insurers – and an untended consequence that probably escaped the purview of the experts running this show. The icing on the cake? Cemex with 11 plants and 50 quarries in the US. What’s a good border wall without cement and concrete from a Mexican owned company paid for by US taxpayers?

So this is a contrarian play which – so far – is in the money. I believe the real pain would have been felt in the auto and produce industries which do have significant numbers of US workers. Hopefully this is a fire drill that won’t be reenacted any time soon.

May 2019 Update

It’s little wonder that a generally good earnings season was ignored due to rising questions about the economy for the remainder of the year. From the failed trade talks with China putting a damper on the beginning of the month, the president just couldn’t help himself and decided to intermix trade and policy issues on a second front, this time being tariffs on Mexico. End result was the DOW saw six straight weeks of losses and May was the longest losing streak since 2011. To this we can now add the uncertainty of the new NAFTA deal as it is trilateral as opposed to bilateral and the recipe is set for continued disruption. But of course, this could be simply a negotiating tactic in which the living standards of Americans are in play. This month the S&P lost 7.04% (almost erasing the gains for the year) while my portfolio lost 5.85%. For the year, I’m now ahead of the benchmark by 1.2%.

PORTFOLIO UPDATES

  • increased my BDX position

DIVIDENDS

While my primary focus resides on dividends with the goal being a rising flow of dividends on an annual basis, I’m placing less emphasis on the quarterly numbers as the number of semi-annual, interim/final and annual cycles have been steadily increasing in my portfolio.

  • May delivered an increase of 19.57% Y/Y, the largest impacts – essentially getting back on track after the earlier dividend cuts.
  • May delivered a 13.02% increase over last quarter (Feb) – slightly above announced (net) dividend increases.
  • Dividend increases averaged 9.22% with 48.02% of the portfolio delivering at least one increase (including 4 cuts (two being OMI)). This is off last years’ pace and I believe a new personal record for dividend cuts in a single year since about 1980.
  • 2019 Dividends received were 43.17% of 2018 total dividends putting me on target to exceed last years’ total in late October. The YTD run rate is 105.64% of 2018 slightly under my 110.0% goal.

Note: I updated my Goals page to provide a visual of these numbers.  Based on Mr All Things Money’s instruction set with a conversion to percentages.  My code only updates when the monthly Y/Y number is exceeded.  Otherwise, the prior year actual is used.

SPINOFFs

On Oct 4,2018 MSG filed a confidential Form 10 to spin the sports business

MERGERS

XRX merger with Fujifilm cancelled (still being litigated).

TSS to merge into GPN (all stock, .8101 sh GPN for each TSS sh) estimated to complete in October – Upon the announcement, I was prepared to sell my TSS position to book almost a triple in just over 4 years as GPN currently pays only a penny per share dividend per quarter. However, page 14 of their slideshow states: Dividend – maintain TSYS’ dividend yield. This would appear to indicate an increase in GPN’s dividend, so for now I’ll hold.

CORPORATE ACTIONS

  • FFIN declared a 2:1 stock split effective June 3rd

SUMMARY

The blog data conversion to 2019 is almost complete still being worked on. The most significant error is my cost basis (dividend date screen) which doesn’t yet account for all DRIP additions (so it is a minimal understatement – but I strive for accuracy). One more formula to construct to complete this effort.

Hope your month/quarter was a good one!