Brilliant marketing for yield-challenged investors

The chase for investment returns in our zero interest rate environment incentivizes the creation of all sorts of financial products to give one the perception of yield.

Indeed, I can promise you today a 10% yield. Just give me $100 and I will give you a 10-year yield of 10% a year, starting with a 10% distribution 365 days from now. Boom, guaranteed yield!

But hold on, it isn’t enough that I hold onto your capital for a decade, I want to charge some management expenses.

So how about you give me $100 today, and I’ll give you a target 8.5% yield. That might change if I can’t actually generate the returns, or if I can’t find more people to give me money to pay you.

A good example of yield-promotion financial instruments are split-share corporations, which appear to no longer be in vogue. There has to be new financial products that promote high yields!

Cue in the marketing geniuses at Hamilton, who have spammed the media with their “Target yield of 8.50% with monthly distributions” fund!

I couldn’t resist looking at the detail of the financial wizardry to make it happen.

This is a fund-of-funds:

And the strategy: “The fund seeks to replicate a 1.25 times multiple of the Solactive Multi-Sector Covered Call ETFs Index (SOLMSCCT), comprised of equal weightings of 7 Canadian-listed sector covered call ETFs.”

In other words, there is some person that puts in a buy order for 7 ETFs, and does it with 20% margin (i.e. buy $125 of funds with $100 of equity).

The geniuses at Hamilton don’t even have to program any software to manage the covered calls or the index balancing – they leave it to the constituent funds to doing so. The fine-print prospectus references a semi-annual rebalancing to equal-weight the funds, and to keep the leverage between 123% to 127%.

The 8.5% indicated yield is not in the prospectus, but it is clearly the marketing pitch. 8.5% divided by 1.25 is 6.8%, which is the basis for this yield claim.

For this, they charge 65 basis points.

A pretty good business for them.

I find this phenomena of covered call ETFs and the promotion of covered calls to be highly over-rated. Most retail people perceive covered calls to be free money (“even if I do get called out, it is at a price that I would have wanted to sell anyway”), but there is a significant exchange of future upside capital appreciation for a “yield” today. This yield is not free, especially during times of low volatility. Implied volatility of options tend to drop when the underlying price appreciates, and vice-versa. The best time to get the highest option yields (when implied volatility is the highest) is typically during a market crash, which is precisely the time you do not want to be selling the capital upside of equities.

Conversely, at that exact moment tends to be the ideal time to sell put options, but few people in the heat of a market crash want to do so, and indeed, selling puts during a market crash is not the most financially productive activity since the amount of upside you capture is limited to the put premium. There is no free lunch in this game although slick marketing makes it appear to be the case.

The TSX 60 currently yields around 2.7%. At 125% leverage, it would yield around 3.4% ignoring the interest cost. If you got rid of Shopify (about 10% of the index now!) that yield rises to about 3.7%. Is it a stretch to think the capital component of the TSX will rise 5% in the future? Maybe. But the sale of 2-month at-the-money covered calls on the TSX right now is 1.4% and that more or less locks in a (unleveraged) 4% return with only capital downside. The 2-month covered call option yield if you wish to retain about 2% capital upside is about 40 basis points. When you include a friction of 65bps MER, I don’t see how the math works at all.

Virgin Galactic – Cool but economically challenged

I wrote back in 2019 about the original SPAC that took Virgin Galactic (NYSE: SPCE) public and my thoughts haven’t changed much from today.

Indeed, they had their hype – astute traders gamblers have seen their capital go from $10 up to $35, down to $15, up to $60, down to $15, up to now $50, in what is oddly like the trajectory the Virgin Galactic spaceship flies itself.

Today the main headline is Richard Branson flying out in one of those spaceships, in what was a massive marketing exercise – I bet Branson was jealous of all of the hype that Elon Musk was stealing over the past few years.

Much to their credit, the rocketship flight made it – they got their 70 seconds of propellant out and made it to the height of about 280,000 feet (or about 85 kilometers above the ground).

The marketing exercise is caused by the perverse anticipation of disaster, similar to how some people watch automobile racing to see car crashes.

This is all great and everything, and SPCE is likely going to trade up Monday morning, but I deeply suspect it will be a great time to short the stock. I will not be – I only mentally trade these sorts of situations with a million eyeballs and daytraders that will inevitably be crowding around the stock.

The issue is that the while the venture tries to do cool things, from an engineering perspective sending a craft out 85 kilometers over the surface is much, much more trivial than it is to send it to a practical altitude (low earth orbit) with the energy required to keep it there – Virgin Galactic’s ship just requires it to go up, and it glides to the bottom. A rocket ship going into low earth orbit requires it to go up (for example, the international space station is about 420 km above the surface), but also horizontally (about 28,000km/h) to keep it in perpetual free-fall. This requires a lot more energy to perform, and a lot more engineering with the design frame and engines which need to scale up disproportionately in order to haul these loads into orbit (mainly to handle the amount of fuel required to get there). This isn’t a matter of “extending the frame” to fit further usages – that design is hard-wired.

Amazon’s Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin has a different system, the New Shepard rocket ship (which unlike Virgin Galactic, starts on the ground instead of on an airplane), which is designed to send people in a capsule up to around 105km – with a 110 second rocket burn. They will launch in just over a week. The same analysis applies to them as well. Scaling up to a point where you can do SpaceX-type activities requires a lot more engineering than slapping on a few extra engines and increasing the size of the fuel tank.

As such, the Virgin Galactic ship, as currently designed, has little use other than a tourism vessel. This was the intent of the design, the company was not meant to be other than an amusement factory. Cool but useless – and it’s a business model that almost guarantees there will be no repeat customers, similar to the skywalk at the Grand Canyon.

Late Night Finance with Sacha – Episode 14

Date: Monday, July 5, 2021
Time: 7:30pm, Pacific Time
Duration: Projected 60 minutes.
Where: Zoom (Registration)

Frequently Asked Questions:

Q: What are you doing?
A: Second quarter, 2021 results. Will discuss various portfolio on-goings and where I see things headed forward. This is in lieu of my typical lengthy quarterly report that I write up which I no longer make publicly available. There should be some time left for Q&A, so please feel free to ask them on the zoom registration.

Q: How do I register?
A: Zoom link is here. I’ll need your city/province or state and country, and if you have any questions in advance just add it to the “Questions and Comments” part of the form. You’ll instantly receive the login to the Zoom channel.

Q: Are you trying to spam me, try to sell me garbage, etc. if I register?
A: If you register for this, I will not harvest your email or send you any solicitations. Also I am not using this to pump and dump any securities to you, although I will certainly offer opinions on what I see.

Q: Why do I have to register? I just want to be anonymous.
A: I’m curious who you are as well.

Q: If I register and don’t show up, will you be mad at me?
A: No.

Q: Will you (Sacha) be on video (i.e. this isn’t just an audio-only stream)?
A: Yes. You’ll get to see me, but the majority will be on “screen share” mode with my web browser and PDFs from SEDAR as I explain what’s going on in my mind as I present.

Q: Will I need to be on video?
A: I’d prefer it, and you are more than welcome to be in your pajamas. No judgements!

Q: Can I be a silent participant?
A: Yes. I might pick on some of you though. Bonus points if you can get your cat on camera.

Q: Is there an archive of the video I can watch later if I can’t make it?
A: No.

Q: Will there be a summary of the video?
A: A short summary will get added to the comments of this posting after the video.

Q: Will there be some other video presentation in the future?
A: Most likely, yes.