Interest rates have been steadily declining over the past decade and have had an impact of asset values world-wide. In this week’s TT we are going to look at the impact of falling interest rates on share prices with Hugh Dive from Atlas Funds Management.
Touch (APT) goes through the Quality Filter Model with Hugh Dive Interest rates have been steadily declining over the past decade and have had an impact of asset values world-wide. In this week’s TT we are going to look at the impact of falling interest rates on share prices with Hugh Dive from Atlas Funds Management.
The S&P/ASX 200 A-REIT index had a weak month in April falling by -2.6%, the sector’s first fall since November 2018. Given the Listed Propery sector’s very strong performance in 2019 it is not surprising to see the sector take a step back.
The Atlas High Income Property Fund declined by -1.2% in April with weakness in domestic retail landlords being offset by gains in Unibal-Rodamco-Westfield. In weak markets such as we saw this month; the Fund’s risk management strategies acted in-line with expectations and reduced volatility.
Go to Monthly Newsletters for a more detailed discussion of the listed property market and the fund’s strategy going into 2019.
In 2019 we
have seen the Australian 10-year bond rate fall from 2.75% to 1.75%, a
significant move given that in April 2018,
the market was expecting that interest rates would be rising throughout 2019
and 2020. While this sounds a bit esoteric, falling bond rates depresses term
deposit rates. At the moment the market expects that the RBA will cut the cash
rate later on in the year (currently at 1.5%), possibly at their meeting on
Melbourne Cup Day in November.
Further cuts to the interest rate will only intensify the hunt for yield among investors, especially those in pension phase looking to live off the income delivered by their investments. As term deposits roll off and investors are faced with pretty meagre reinvestment options, we would expect investors to rotate investments out of cash and into other yield assets such as shares and listed property trusts. In this week’s piece we are going analyse what to look for when assessing the sustainability of a distribution from equities.
Financial Repression
Financial
repression is a term used to describe measures used by governments to
boost taxation income, economic activity and demand for government debt. These
measures include attempts to hold down interest rates to below inflation and represent
a tax on savers, conferring a benefit on borrowers. The positive impact of
these measures is that it becomes cheaper
to borrow money to invest possibly boosting economic growth, however this effectively
becomes subsidised by the nation’s savers.
Over the last month the falling bond yields have filtered through to term deposits rates with some major banks cutting six-month term deposits to rates to around 2%, with one major bank even as low as 1.2%. Even at interest rates around 2%, even wealthy retirees who have amassed $1 million in a superannuation account face a very meagre retirement, if they are looking to live off risk-free income rather than eat into capital. Indeed according to the Australian Council of Social Service’s Poverty in Australia Report, this fictional retired couple with $1 million in term deposits who own their own home would be surviving on an annual income of $20,000, which is below the poverty line of $33,748!
While the 2% rate on one-year term deposits in Australia looks grim (especially in light
of inflation running at 2%), spare a thought for investors in other major
Western nations. Retirees in the USA
are currently being offered 0.03% from Bank of America, in Germany a touch higher
at 0.05% with HSBC in the UK offering 0.55% all for the same six-month term deposit. Near zero rates in
Europe, Japan and the US (and historically low rates in Australia) are positive
for middle-aged borrowers, asset owners and corporates refinancing debt at
lower rates; but represent a significant negative cost for savers.
Stable and Growing Distributions
When we look at dividend-paying stocks and high-yielding listed property trusts we are not overly concerned with the trailing or next period payment, but rather in understanding whether a company can maintain their distribution over the long term and importantly grow it ahead of inflation. Indeed, picking a basket of stocks or trusts solely based on their historical dividend yield has been a path to under-performance. When looking through the list of the highest yielding securities in the ASX200, a common factor is usually a high payout ratio (dividend per share divided by earnings per share).
Payout Ratios too high
Companies
with a high payout ratio generally possess fewer options to grow a distribution
or maintain it over a variety of market conditions. High payout ratios are often attributed to companies that are
either mature or in operate in low-growth
industries with few investment opportunities to grow their business, or
management looking to maintain the dividend in an environment where the
company’s earnings are deteriorating and thus prop up the share price. In some situations, these companies are even
borrowing to pay their dividend may be
retaining insufficient cash to maintain their assets. This was the case with
Telstra for several years, until they bit the bullet and cut their dividend from
28 cents per share to 22 cents per share in 2018.
Looking at
other well-owned high yielding stocks on the ASX, it is tough to see NAB maintaining
their dividend in the future. In 2018,
NAB paid a dividend of $1.98 on cash earnings of $2.02 per share, given NAB has
just taken on a new CEO and need to build their capital position by retaining
earnings, we would be very surprised if the bank does not cut their dividend later
on in 2019.
Maintaining asset quality for property trusts
When
assessing the quality and sustainability of the distribution of a property trust
you have to look at the percentage of the distribution covered by earnings less
the costs of maintaining the quality of the trust’s assets such as replacing
lifts, escalators and indeed incentive payments necessary to retain tenants. Before the GFC a large number of property trusts
were paying out virtually all of the rental income they collected and were not
retaining sufficient funds to cover maintain the quality of their assets. Trusts with higher distributions saw their
share prices re-rated higher. In the
short term these capital improvements were covered by borrowing money and
issuing new equity, but eventually these high distributions proved to be
unsustainable and were cut.
Franked dividends = tax payments
Franked dividends have a tax credit attached to them which represents the
amount of tax the company has already paid on
behalf of their shareholders for the profit they have earned in any given year.
While companies can make a range of
aggressive accounting choices that can boost their earnings per share (and dividend per share), a company is extremely
unlikely to maximise the tax that they
pay to the government.
Firms that
pay franked dividends have significantly more persistent earnings than firms
that pay unfranked dividends, as it indicates that a company is building up tax
credits by generating taxable earnings in Australia.
A great example of the role that franking plays
in indicating the sustainability of a dividend occurred in 2014 where steel
company Arrium paid unfranked dividends in 2013 and 2014. Despite paying
dividends and reassuring the market as to the company’s future, Arrium conducted
a massive capital raising in late 2014 to shore up a shaky balance sheet and ultimately
went into administration in 2016 with debts of $4 billion. Here the lack of
franking could be viewed as an indicator that the quality and sustainability of
the company’s dividends was not high. However, this measure is not useful for companies such as CSL and Amcor who generate large proportions of their profits outside
Australia are unable to pay fully franked earnings.
Our
View
When
constructing a portfolio designed to deliver income above the meagre returns
being offered by term deposits, Atlas see that
it is not enough simply to pick
high yielding securities. In selecting yield stocks investors should make a detailed assessment of the ability of a company to continue paying and growing
distributions ahead of inflation.
Demographic
change will see more investors are moving from the accumulation to the retirement
phase, which will increase demand for equity fund managers to deliver income to
investors. This could be very interesting
as in the fund’s management world, the
vast majority of the focus is on growing capital by buying stocks that the fund manager
believes will rise dramatically. This growth approach typically results in swings
in the value of portfolios and minimal dividends. Alternatively an “income
approach” to investing involves thinking about how an investor’s capital can be
deployed to deliver ongoing income necessary to fund a comfortable retirement.
The S&P/ASX 200 A-REIT index had a very strong month in March returning +6.2%, a significantly better outcome than the overall ASX200 that gained 0.7%, aided by falling bond yields globally and once again large price gains in the stock prices of the developers.
The Atlas High Income Property Fund gained 4.9% in March which was ahead of our expectations given the Fund’s conservative stance and low beta compared to the index. Over the last three months, the Fund has gained +7.3%, which we believe is close to the maximum achievable through a buy-write strategy utilising capital protection.
For comparative purposes this month we have compared the returns against RBA cash rate +3% (see table below), as the Fund is primarily managed towards delivering consistent quarterly income with lower volatility to investors, rather than mimicking an index which is increasingly being dominated by trusts with characteristics outside the Fund’s investment strategy.
Go to Monthly Newsletters for a more detailed discussion of the listed property market and the fund’s strategy going into 2019.
IOOF (IFL.ASX), the vertically integrated financial advice and financial services supermarket, was beaten an battered throughout the RC. Yet in February, IFL became the top performing stock in the ASX 100 in February 2019 gaining 36% after the Hayne report did not provide negative recommendations around vertically integrated financial advice.
IOOF (IFL.ASX), the vertically integrated financial advice and financial services supermarket, was beaten an battered throughout the RC. Yet in February, IFL became the top performing stock in the ASX 100 in February 2019 gaining 36% after the Hayne report did not provide negative recommendations around vertically integrated financial advice. Is IFL a buy?