CategoryNon-equity assets

Over optimizing the portfolio

O

I have often been asked by subscribers – what fixed income option would I recommend for the cash they hold?

My response is that I usually hold my cash in short term FDs or at the most in short term debt funds with high rating and from a well-known fund house.

The main criteria I use in selecting a fund are
           Fund should have a high AUM (> 1000 Crs) for liquidity purpose
           Should be from one of the well know fund house, preferably backed by a bank
           Should have a low expense ratio (as far as possible)
           Should have a 3-5 year operating history or more

You may have noticed that I have made no reference to returns. This is by design as I am looking at high safety of capital and liquidity in this case. The entire point of holding cash or equivalents is that it should be secure and can be accessed at times of market stress without any loss.
Some of you may be unhappy that these options provide ‘only’ 4-5% returns which are quite meager.
Do the math
Let’s do some math. I usually hold somewhere between 10-20% cash in my portfolio. In a crazy bull market such as now, it may go upto 30% level, but on average it hovers around the 15% mark. Let’s assume I get very creative and aggressive with the cash holding and can earn around 10% returns on it. Keep in mind, that the level of risk rises exponentially in case of fixed income instruments. A vehicle giving 10% when the risk free rate is 6%, is not 60% more risky, but carries several orders of magnitude higher risk.
Let’s say, that I still decide to move forward and invest all the cash in such a vehicle. So in effect I have made 4% extra on the 15% cash holding which translates to an extra 0.6% return on the overall portfolio. This additional 0.6% would translate to roughly 7% additional return over a 10 year period.
Is it really worth the risk? Does one really need the extra 0.5- 1% return when rest of the funds are already invested in equities?
There is no free lunch
One of the reasons for holding cash and equivalents is to lower the risk of the portfolio, especially when it is high in the equity market. If you are attempting to get higher returns via fixed income instruments, then you are just changing the label of the investment, but not the level of risk in the portfolio as a whole.
A fixed income label does not change the nature of risk. It is the characteristics of the instrument and its past behavior which defines the same. The worst aspect of investing is to take on higher risks unknowingly and then get shocked when it comes back to bite you.
Please always keep in mind – there are no free lunches in the market. There are absolutely no ‘assured’ high return fixed income options (the term itself would be an oxymoron). If someone tries to sell you one, please run away from the person as fast as you can.
It is not a race
I will never tell anyone of you what to do as you need to make your own decisions. However, let me share what I have been doing for the last 10+ years – I have my funds in safe and relatively secure FDs earning pathetically low rates of returns. This allows me to sleep soundly and have one less thing to worry about. If the equity portion of my portfolio does well, then I don’t need the extra 0.5%. If it does badly, the 0.5% will not save me.

In the end, investing is not a 100 meter dash where the winner gets a gold medal and the fourth place goes home dejected. As a long as I can make a decent return (being 18 %+) over the long run, I would rather exchange a few extra points for much lower risk. The journey would be far more pleasant and I will still reach my financial destination (maybe a year later).

Ps: This does not refer to any investment options such as real estate from a diversification point of view. This is mainly about the desire to optimize the cash portion of the portfolio.

—————-
Stocks discussed in this post are for educational purpose only and not recommendations to buy or sell. Please contact a certified investment adviser for your investment decisions. Please read disclaimer towards the end of blog.

Evaluating various personal finance schemes

E

I typically don’t write much on personal finance. The key reason is that it does not hold much interest for me and does not challenge me. After you have spent 1-2 years reading on investing, evaluating a scheme is quick and easy. In addition, there are a lot of other blogs and magazines which do a better job of explaining personal finance for the lay investor.

Let me a list a few criteria I use to arrive at a decision on any personal finance instrument

– What has been the performance of the instrument in the past? If this is a new instrument of scheme avoid
– Has the instrument or scheme out performed a benchmark? If it is related to equity, has it outperformed the index for the last 3-5 years. If not, avoid
– What are the costs involved ? what is the expense ratio, sales load, exit loads etc. The total of all costs should not exceed 2% (typical of most open ended mututal funds which in itself is too high). If the expenses per annum exceed 2%, avoid
– What is the lock in period ? I typically avoid products with lockin periods. Product with high lockin periods do not necessarily perform better than open ended product. They just tie your money up and you can lose flexibility if the performance is poor
– What is the kind paperwork involved ? can I do it online ? I personally hate paperwork and have no interest in running to the bank to fill up forms and fill up paperwork every year.

I finally don’t care what is pedigree of the fund house or whether the fund or instrument is from a reputed bank or AMC. In addition I don’t care if the name sounds good or the sales person is a cute looking girl. I will open up my wallet only if the instrument meets my criterias listed above.

Finally you can see this post where I have listed how I select equity based funds. As you can see, it is not complicated to decide on a personal finance instrument. Most of the times, I don’t bother to look for one and tend to buy mutual funds, stocks or ETFs online directly.

Real estate – current reality and some thoughts

R

I had written about real estate and its valuation a year back. I would suggest reading the earlier post before proceeding on this one.

The usual approach to valuing real estate is to look at the rental yields.

Rental yield = net rental after all expenses / capital value.

Investors expect yields to be in the range of 4-6%. This equates the capital value to around 16-25 times the rentals being received on a property.

Ancedotal evidence
I have a few friends who have trying to rent out their apartments in bangalore. They are finding it diffcult to get a rent of 11000 per month on a 2 bedroom, 1200 sqft apartment. Supposedly the apartment is worth between 40-45 lacs (atleast, depending on who you ask).

So based on the valuation thumb rule, either they should get a gross rental (excluding expenses) of around 16000-20000 at a minimum or the property value should be around 25-30 lacs.

Now I can consider my 2 bedroom dinghy, a tajmahal and value it at 50 lacs, but the value has to be backed by rentals. I personally think the litmus test of property values is the rentals one can receive on it. Property values are like stock prices. They have an element of underlying value (cash flows in stocks and rentals in case of property), but at the same time there is a speculative element too. The speculative element appears as a part of the quoted price – stock price or property value.

When investors are optimistic, stock prices are bid up and when they are pessimistic they bid them down. Simple isnt it ? well almost everyone forgot this basic idea for real estate. Property prices rose 2-10 times across the country depending on the location and type of property

Is the valuation approach correct ?
Now you can say that this valuation approach is incorrect. Consider this – if I have to invest in an illiquid asset, will it not expect 14-15% returns over the long term ? So if I am getting 2-2.5% via rentals, then my property should appreciate by 12-13% p.a over the long term to get decent returns.

Well, globally over a range of markets, real estate is known to return 2-3% returns over inflation ( so around 7-8 % in case on india) over the long run.

You may argue, as several of my friends have – this time it is different. India is doing well, incomes are rising, there is limited land and huge demand etc etc. Well, to that I can say, please read the history of the real estate boom and bust in japan in late 90s, in california and florida in 80s and check what is happening in the US, dubai and other markets. Similar faulty logic was given to justify the inflated prices, till the bubble burst and prices returned to reality.

Hope and belief does not count
Investing in any asset, stock or real estate cannot be based on borrowed wisdom. If you want to make money, use common sense and read about it before taking a plunge.

Unfortunately a lot investors in the US and maybe in india got greedy and speculated in stocks, real estate and other assets in the last 2-3 years.

Real estate like any other asset is known to get overpriced from time to time. I strongly felt that the huge surge in global liquidity from 2003 drove the interest rates down in india and pushed the stock and real estate prices up.

All talk ?
You may be thinking – everyone is smart after the fact. If you were so smart, what did you do about it ?
For starters, I was not smart about it. I avoided being greedy and tried to use common sense. I personally like to run my finanical affairs with a margin of safety. For example, when buying an apartment, my primary considerations were the following

– can I afford the EMI – I tried to keep the EMI at 40% of my current gross income (not future income)
– would I be able to keep the house if the worst case scenario happened, such losing my job or loss of income.
– What would my debt equity ratio after buying the property (see this post for more details of my logic)

2003-2004 was a great time to take housing loan. Banks and HFC were giving variable rate loans at around 7.5% and fixed term loans at 7.75%. I had no idea whether the real estate prices would boom or go down. However what was obvious then, was that banks were underpricing debt. Let me explain my logic for the same

A loan by a bank is basically a product which has a cost and a profit margin for the bank.

So interest charged = bank’s profit margin + cost

Cost = interest paid by the bank + loan losses due to bad loans (typically around 1-1.2 %) + overheads (typically around 0.5%)

The interest rates paid by the bank is dependent on the inflation.

So for a 7.75% charge, the bank was assuming a cost of fund of 6% (7.75 – 1.2-0.5 %). This was too low. This is the cost at which the Indian government is barely able to borrow, much less the banks.

The subsequent events have borne out the above logic. The loan losses were underestimated by the banks and the cost of funds was underestimated too. As a result, bank have now repriced their loans and are not likely to underprice them as low as 2003-2004 time frame.

During the 2003-2004 time frame, I strongly felt that the loan rates were too low. In response to that, I refinanced my loans and increased the duration from 15 to 20 years (see an earlier post on the same). The key was to focus on what I know (loan rates were low) and avoid speculating on what I could not know (real estate prices would rise or fall)

Have I gloated enough?
The above thought process turned out to be too conservative. Others who took higher risks in 2003-2004, were rewarded handsomely. So, my decision was not some unqualified success. However I am still very happy with decision as my conservative approach has helped me in avoiding losses in the past.

Being rational and avoiding greed is like virginity. Either you have it or you don’t.

Collateral damage
Not everyone who is suffering in the US or india was greedy or speculated in real estate. Some of the buyers in the US were first time buyers who bought property as their first home at speculative prices. These people are now facing ruin due to drop in home prices. One feels sorry for them.

What does the future hold ?
I don’t know 🙂 ..what one can do is to look at history and try to learn from it. History does not always repeat, but it is good starting point. In most of the real estate bubbles, the market takes upto a decade to recover the earlier peaks.

One should also remember that real estate typically gives a few percentage points over inflation. If you speculate in an illiquid asset, by buying it on debt, you are asking for trouble.

Analysis : BEL annual results

A

Read my earlier analysis of BEL here

Results summary
The company had an average year in 2007-2008. The sales growth was around 7% and the profit growth was around the same. The net profit margin improved to around 20%. The company maintained the ROE numbers at the 25%+ levels and continues to be a zero debt- cash rich company
The open order book has now increased to 9586 Crs with around 3100 Crs executable in the current year. This provide visibility to around 80% of the annual revenue.
The business is skewed to the fourth quarter due to the projects nature of the business and hence the company accrues almost 60% of its profit in the last quarter.

The positives
The company maintained its ROE, margins and other key performance indicators such as order book, Fixed asset Turnover ratio, Raw material costs etc.

In addition the company is now spending almost 5.1% of revenue on R&D and plans to increase it to 8-9% of sales. This is a very positive development as R&D is crucial in this business . BEL is among the very few indian companies which spend on R&D and may have the highest spend in terms of sales. The company has been developing a lot of new products and now gets almost 83% of the turnover from indigenously developed products

The company has conservative accounting for foreign exchange (Company has no derivatives) and charges all changes to the Profit and loss statement.

Finally the company continues to be a debt free company with almost 2400 Crs in cash on the books. Net of cash, the ROE numbers of the company are fairly high, which reflects the strong competitive advantage of the company.

The negatives
The number that concerns for me is the high level of recievables. The recievables have shot up from around 1000 odd crores in 2005-06 to around 2080 Crs in 2007-08. As a result recievables have consumed almost 60% of the free cash for the last 2 years. This is very discomforting and will have to watched closely. The management has indicated that they are planning to bring it down, however I am still concerned about this number which is now a red flag.

The other concern is the very high skew for the fourth quarter. It is not very healthy to book so much business in a single quarter, especially the year end to make the numbers. Projects type business (for ex: blue star) have higher skews in Q4, however such skew results in poor recievables turns, bad debts and other issues (more on that later).

The valuation
The company now sells at around 6 times earnings (net of cash). So the market is clearly expecting the company to perform pretty badly. Now this is a company earning very high return on capital, growing in mid to low teens and in a business which is pretty immune to the economy (defence spending). In addition, though private companies are now being allowed in defence since 2001, BEL has been able to do well.
Other than the fact that the company is PSU, I cannot find a reason for almost a 50-60% drop in the stock price (other than that the market as a whole has declined).

Added note : I would not read too much into the Q1 results. As I said earlier in the post, if the company books too much revenue in Q4, the next years Q1 results get impacted.

I have loaded the a detailed analysis of the company in google groups.

A question on trading

A

06/27

some more observations from an outsider

– i have generally noticed that the younger crowd is more attracted to trading. that does not mean older people dont trade. just that if you talk to 100 young guys who are interested in stock market, a sizeable numbers would be into trading
– A lot of my friends who are into trading have a bias for action. There is the thrill of being right and knowing that pretty soon.
– there is more sense of company. you get to discuss about it with more people. value investing is pretty lonely. you buy ugly beaten down stocks. who wants to discuss companies no one has heard of ?
– media and the environment like brokers also encourage trading. no one will recommend buying a stock and sleeping on it for 5 years.

if you are a trader, please do not take this as a criticism of trading. These are just neutral observations (maybe incorrect) of an outsider. I may have bias against trading, but not a bias against people who do trading.
————————————————————————————————
I have noticed in general that the number of people interested in trading are far more than those interested in long term investing or value investing. For ex: there are far more blogs on trading than say value investing. There could be an overlap between the two groups too. I however have no aptitude for trading and it does not fit my temprament. I have said so in the past.

I can understand why there are more folks interested in trading. Trading does have an element of excitement. You get to do something quite often, whereas value investing or long term investing is as exciting as watching grass grow or paint dry. So this is my question – What are the average non – leveraged returns experienced by traders over a multi year period ..say 5-6 years (including a bull or bear market) ?

I agree there are several trading strategies and so to lump all of them under ‘trading’ is not smart. But at the risk of sounding dumb (which I am in terms of trading), I was curious to know what kind of returns do most people get ?

Real estate valuation – Random thoughts

R

I have been reading the book ‘Seeking wisdom – From darwin to munger’ which talks of various mental models and applying them to a problem to analyse it in detail.

The book is itself inspired by charlie munger and his
lecture on the same topic. I have attempted to apply some models to valuing and analysing real estate.

The first post was valuing the real estate as a financial asset like stocks and bonds

The second post was trying to invert the problem.

The third post was looking at psychological baises in valuation of real estate. I will follow up with more posts on the same topic with other models.

I would like to add a personal approach for a first time buyer (buying for personal use)

If you are buying a house to stay (not investment), the maximum value of the investment would be driven by two numbers – EMI and personal debt to equity.

Let me explain
Suppose I earn 40000 as net income. My current networth ( all stocks, bonds, cash etc) is 10 lacs (10 lacs = 1 million). To be on the safe side, I would look at a house where my EMI is around 16000 / month (40% of net income)
So based on the above EMI, I can afford a loan of around 16 lacs at an interest of 10% for a 20 year tenure.


Assuming I have to put up 20% of the value of the house, I would look at a maximum investment of 20 lacs (2 million).
For a 16 lacs loan, my personal debt to equity is around 1.6 (16/10). This is higher than what I am comfortable. However it is not too high if you are in your 20s or 30s and have a long career ahead.

The above is a very simplistic approach and may sound conservative. But I prefer to plan for adversity and for a situation where things can go wrong. Buying a house as a first time buyer is less of an investment for me and more of having a roof on my head (in worst possible situation).

Some bad reasons for buying real estate
– Because the price has risen a lot lately or because the broker is predicting a rise.
– Because one can never lose in real estate
– Because your friend is buying it
– Because you can get a loan to buy it
– FII / Institutional investors are investing money – This is really a strange reason. FII/ foreign investors may have a good reason or maybe they are just following the herd. Just because an investor is an FII does not mean they have extra brains. Sometimes they are worse than an ordinary investor

A few links to value real estate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_estate_appraisal
Real estate valuation and analysis – read on the Cap rate which is similar to the P/R ratio
Deepak shenoy’s real estate cash flow calculator – Excellent worksheet to value real estate. Please read his terms.

Real estate valuation – Psychological biases

R

I think there are several psychological baises working in case of real estate. The first is incentive caused bais. Typically real estate is sold via brokers or by sales agents of the builder. They have an incentive to sell the property and typically earn a commision based on sale price. It is quite obvious that the broker or sales agent would be motivated to sell at as high price as possible. In addition it is likely that he will give you a bullish outlook for the property prices.

The second strong bias is social- proof and deprival super reaction tendency. You see you friend buy a property and make easy money. At the same if you have not invested money and feel deprival super reaction tendency as everyone one else is making easy money.

So these two tendencies work together and motivate us to look for a property. Combine this with the incentive caused bias where the broker is constantly trying to create a scarcity (he will tell you that he has a lot of buyers and even you don’t buy now then the price will go up), lack of information and overoptimism on our part and this creates a combined effect. All these factors add up and can cause the buyer to become irrational.

I personally think the risk of bubbles are higher in real estate for the following reasons
– the common notion that real estate cannot lose value and represent something limited which is land
– High amount of leverage. Typically loans on a property is around 20%
– Lack of transparency and information in this market.
– All the above psychological factors

Real estate valuation – Inverting the problem

R

As Charlie munger says, it is useful to invert a problem and think through. So let me try that and please bear with me on the mental acrobatics.

In the last post, I developed the basic logic that real estate valuation depends on the rentals. Lets say you are looking at a property valued at say 50 lacs (5 million) . Now the reason to invest in this property is that you expect to make more than fixed income. Lets say you expect 15% p.a.

So the property should be worth 1 Cr (10 million) in the next five years. Such a property to sell at 10 Million, should atleast yield a rent of 40000 Rs/ month (assuming a P/R of 20). For some one to pay a rent of 40000/month, that individual should be earning atleast 170000 rs / month pre-tax.

How did I come up with number? assume a 30% tax rate and that a person would not prefer to spend more than 30% of his net income on rent in the long run. So we are talking of a person making 20-22 lacs per annum.

I agree salaries in india are rising and will continue to do so, but think of it this way – How many people can earn 20-22 lacs per annum (or 50000 usd ). To give a comparison, 50000 usd income is around the median income in the US too. On the flip side, with dollar depreciation and margins of IT/BPO companies getting squezed do you think it is feasible for indian companies to keep increasing salaries at 15% for the next 5-6 years and still be competitive?
Going one step further, if the investor thinks he can sell the property for 10 million , the person buying it will have to do a similar math. If the next investor expects 15% p.a , then he may agree to buy the property for 10 Million at a P/R of 20. However the property should then be 20 million, 10 years from now and needs a tenant making 40 lacs p.a (100000 dollars) to support the rents.
At any point during the next 10 years, if the above assumptions break, due to drop in salaries or recesion, the P/R (like P/E of a stock) could fall and returns could drop. I would agree that in the above scenario there are a lot of assumptions and ifs and buts. However one should think hard before going ahead with a big investment decision.

Please note that I am not talking of local knowledge of real estate. If someone has special knowledge of an area and knows that the area would develop in the next few years, then that person has an information edge and can make high returns. My example is of a general case of an apartment in a city which is what most of the investors put their money in.

Real estate valuation – I

R

If like me you believe the basic definition that the intrinsic worth of an asset is the sum total of all the cash flows one would receive out of an asset from now onwards, then real estate could be analysed using the same approach as stocks or bonds.

Using that logic, we can say that there are two components to the cash flow
1. Rent which is equivalent of dividends
2. Final sale price of the asset (real estate) which is the same as the sale price one would get from a stock or bond

Like stocks, it is easy to get the value of rent (or dividend), but difficult to get the final selling price. In case of real estate the final selling price would depend on the state of real estate market, interest rate, economic activity of that area and location of the real estate. This is similar to stocks where the final selling price depends on a large number of factors, most of which cannot be predicted.

Using the same analogy, if it is possible to value a stock roughly, if not with precision, then one should be able to get some idea whether the real estate asset is under valued, over valued or fairly priced.

I recently read an article in fortune on real estate valuation, current pricing and likely future of the same in the US
Real estate : Buy hold or Sell

I have included a few paras from the article which are very relevant for valuing real estate

Many factors determine the value of a house. A family would consider the quality of local schools, the number of bedrooms, the size of the yard. Economists assessing a region look at interest rates, employment, and population growth. But over time the most reliable guide to home values is rents.

In most markets people won’t lay out much more in monthly costs to own a house or condo than they would to rent a similar property unless they expect a huge profit when they sell. Indeed, speculators chasing quick profits did a lot to inflate the recent bubble.

But once the fervor fades, prices must fall to restore their normal, long-term relationship with rents. Rents exercise a kind of inevitable gravitational pull on prices. The ratio of prices to rents “behaves much like price/earnings ratios for stocks,” says Yale economist Robert Shiller. “Like P/Es, price-to-rent ratios are mean-reverting.” In other words, while prices soar from time to time, sending the ratio to exceptional heights, sooner or later the relationship is bound to return to its historical average.

The last para above is very important. Kaushik in his blog has posted several times on the rent for several properties in places like bangalore. Although this is anecdotal evidence, I would not discount it completely.

So based on this evidence if the rent is say 20000 per month, we are talking a valuation of 48 lacs for a 3 bedroom apartment ( 1 lac = 100000)
Rent = 20000/ month = 2.4 lacs p.a. For P/R ( price to rent like PE ratio) of 20, the valuation is 48 lacs.


The only variable in the above equation which can be debated is the P/R ratio. I will discuss about this in more detail in the next post, but think of it this way – the inverse of P/R is the yield on the real estate. For P/R of 20, the yield is around 5%. Globally, most investors demand a yield of 5-7% on an average. So a P/R ratio of 20 is around the average and may not be too low.

Net post : Looking real estate valuation using the ‘invert the problem’ approach.

Subscription

Enter your email address if you would like to be notified when a new post is posted:

I agree to be emailed to confirm my subscription to this list

Recent Posts

Select category to filter posts

Archives