Oil, Global Stocks Fall as Investors Cut | Stock Market News Today


Global stocks, oil and cryptocurrencies fell, as investors grappled with the prospect of higher interest rates and disappointing results from popular consumer tech stocks.

Futures tied to the S&P 500 fell 0.4%, pointing to an extension of Thursday’s drop, when the index closed down 1.1%. Nasdaq-100 futures declined 0.7%, suggesting more losses for technology stocks. Dow Jones Industrial Average futures ticked down 0.1%. 

Shares in Asia-Pacific and Europe broadly retreated. The pan-continental Stoxx Europe 600 fell 1.2%, while China’s Shanghai Composite Index and Japan’s Nikkei 225 declined 0.9%. 

Japan’s Nikkei 225 index shed 0.9% Friday.



Photo:

behrouz mehri/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

In off-hours trading,

Netflix

shares plunged over 20% after the company said it expected a slowdown in subscriber growth. Peloton rose 7.5%, recouping some losses after the stock tumbled nearly 24% Thursday on reports that the connected-fitness company was halting production. Its chief executive refuted these claims in a statement. 

“As we return to a more normal world, names like Peloton and Netflix being weaker or disappointing isn’t a surprise,” said Arun Sai, a multiasset strategist at Pictet Asset Management. “I think when the dust settles, we’ll have a reasonable set of numbers in Q4 earnings. Peloton and Netflix are more of a distraction than anything else.”

Investors’ increasing conviction that the Federal Reserve will have to raise interest rates several times this year to combat inflation has pressured stocks. Last week, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell called rapid inflation a “severe threat” to a full economy recovery, and data showed consumer prices soaring 7% on the year in December

This has hit growth stocks and put the Nasdaq in correction territory, as investors are dumping shares of unprofitable companies. Tensions between Russia and NATO are also weighing on market sentiment, investors said. The S&P 500 is down 3.9% this week, on track for the worst performance since Oct. 2020. 

“Geopolitical risk plays a role, repricing of [central bank] policy plays a role and the inflation mix in the sense of cost pressures. You put all those together and there is actually quite a change,” said Georgina Taylor, a multiasset fund manager at Invesco. “Risk premium for equities needs to go up.”

President Biden said on Wednesday that the U.S. is ready to unleash sanctions against Russia if President Vladimir Putin makes a move against Ukraine. Biden also laid out a possible diplomatic resolution. Photo: Susan Walsh/Associated Press

Investors’ bets on faster rate rises have driven up inflation-linked bond yields, seen as a benchmark for financing costs. The yield on the 10-year Treasury inflation-protected security rose as high as minus 0.526% Friday, the highest level since June 2020, before easing slightly to minus 0.536%. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note edged down to 1.792% from 1.833% Thursday.   

Cryptocurrencies tumbled, with bitcoin losing nearly 6.5% compared with its level at 5 p.m. ET Thursday. It traded below $38,300, the lowest level since August, before rising slightly to around $38,700. Ether fell 6.8%. 

Oil prices also declined. Global benchmark Brent crude fell 1.5%, trading at $87.03 a barrel, weighed down by a surprise increase in U.S. crude stockpiles, according to analysts at RBC Capital Markets. 

Data provider

IHS Markit,

oil services company

Schlumberger

and financial firms

Huntington Bancshares

and

Ally Financial

are set to report earnings Friday. 

Overseas, wind-power company

Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy

fell 10% after it posted an operating loss and lowered its guidance, citing supply-chain constraints. Shares of some Chinese drugmakers surged after they were selected to help make cheaper versions of Merck’s Covid-19 pill.

BrightGene Bio-Medical Technology

rose 20% and Viva Biotech advanced 14%. 

Write to Dave Sebastian at [email protected] and Anna Hirtenstein at anna.hirtenst[email protected]

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Dow Closes Lower as Bank Stocks Fall | Stock Market News Today


The stock market’s winter selloff deepened this week, pushing all three major indexes further into the red for 2022.

The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average both fell a second straight week, while the Nasdaq Composite has been down the last three. Investors continued to sell bonds, pushing the yield on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury note up for a fourth straight week, notching its biggest rise over that stretch since mid-March.

Investors were still assessing the outlook for interest rates and how fast the Federal Reserve will move to tame inflation, roiling the stock and bond markets. At the same time, a rise in Covid-19 cases has weighed on sentiment, although there are signs that infections may be nearing a peak.

The week started on shaky footing, with stocks broadly falling and the Nasdaq nearing a correction before closing slightly higher. On Tuesday, Fed Chairman

Jerome Powell

reaffirmed the central bank’s view that inflation will likely peak by the middle of the year, while also suggesting interest rates will remain low. That helped halt a streak of declines for the S&P 500 and Dow industrials. 

Stocks, especially hard-hit sectors such as tech, appeared to regain some ground. But new pricing data released Wednesday and Thursday showed inflation remained hot last month, complicating the outlook. Stocks dropped Thursday, led by a 2.5% slide in the Nasdaq.

Lackluster earnings from some big U.S. banks, along with weak retail sales and manufacturing data, sent most of the market lower again on Friday until a late-session buying rush pushed the S&P 500 and Nasdaq back into positive territory. The S&P 500 added 3.82 points, or less than 0.1%, to 4662.85, and the Nasdaq gained 86.94 points, or 0.6%, to 14893.75. The Dow fell 201.81 points, or 0.6%, to 35911.81.

“We expect a more volatile environment, with big up days and big down days. Perception of inflation will be a driving force in the direction of the market,” said

David Donabedian,

chief investment officer of CIBC Private Wealth US. “It will be a bumpy ride.”

The late Friday turnaround wasn’t enough to avert another down week. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq ended up falling 0.3% over the last five trading days, while the Dow shed 0.9%. Markets are closed Monday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day, shortening next week’s trading schedule.

The U.S. dollar last year saw its largest increase in value since 2015. That is good for many American consumers, but it could also put a dent in stocks and the U.S. economy. WSJ’s Dion Rabouin explains. Photo illustration: Sebastian Vega/WSJ

On Friday, the first dose of fourth-quarter corporate earnings reports gave investors a sobering outlook on corporate growth this year. Quarterly profits fell by double-digit percentages at

JPMorgan Chase

and

Citigroup,

ending a hot streak of big gains for most of 2021.

Shares of

JPMorgan Chase

slid $10.34, or 6.1%, to $157.89, and

Citigroup

dropped 85 cents, or 1.3%, to $66.93.

Wells Fargo

bucked the trend, adding $2.06, or 3.7%, to $58.06, after the bank reported that profit soared 86% in the final three months of 2021.

BlackRock

posted higher quarterly profit, and market gains lifted the investment firm’s assets under management above $10 trillion. Despite that, its shares declined $18.98, or 2.2%, to $848.60.

Still, analysts remain upbeat on corporate profits, predicting growth across the S&P 500.

Mark Haefele,

chief investment officer at UBS Global Wealth Management, said he expects another positive quarter, with earnings growth of 30% over the prior year.

Manufacturers, material firms and consumer discretionary stocks were also down following the economic data. Besides that,

Sherwin-Williams

declined $8.93, or 2.8%, to $308.46 after the paint maker lowered its guidance, citing a shortage of raw materials amid supply-chain and labor constraints.

Rising yields have motivated investors to rotate out of technology stocks.



Photo:

Courtney Crow/Associated Press

Some buying of large-cap growth stocks gave the market, and the Nasdaq, some support, as investors returned to a trade that tends to work well during periods of economic uncertainty.

Facebook

parent

Meta Platforms,

Microsoft,

Tesla

and

Netflix

all gained more than 1%.

Energy stocks jumped 2.4%, getting a boost from a climb in oil prices.

Casino stocks including

Las Vegas Sands

and

Wynn Resorts

jumped after Macau released a draft law that would cut the tenure for new casino licenses in half, but wouldn’t reduce the number of licenses. Las Vegas Sands added $5.33, or 14%, to $42.99, and Wynn Resorts gained $7.24, or 8.6%, to $91.47. 

Meanwhile, bond yields resumed their climb. Expectations for an interest-rate rise as soon as March have caused some investors to sell government bonds, pushing up yields. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note ticked up to 1.771% Friday, from 1.708% Thursday.

“Equity markets will continue to take their cues from the bond market,” said

Hugh Gimber,

a strategist at J.P. Morgan Asset Management. “What’s becoming clear is the Fed is realizing that inflationary pressures are larger and more broad-based than they previously expected.”

Cryptocurrency dogecoin jumped 12% from its 5 p.m. ET level Thursday after Elon Musk said Tesla was accepting payment for some merchandise with the currency, which was originally started as a joke. Bitcoin was recently down less than 1%.

Overseas, the pan-continental Stoxx Europe 600 fell 1%.

South Korea’s central bank raised interest rates to pre-pandemic levels to fight inflation, and signaled that more increases could come this year. The country’s benchmark Kospi index declined 1.4%. Other major Asian stock indexes also closed lower. China’s Shanghai Composite fell 1%, and Japan’s Nikkei 225 shed 1.3%.

Write to Caitlin Ostroff at [email protected] and Michael Wursthorn at [email protected]

Corrections & Amplifications
For the week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 0.9%, and the Nasdaq Composite fell 0.3%. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said it was the Dow that fell 0.3% and the Nasdaq that declined 0.9%. (Corrected on Jan. 14)

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

ETF Inflows Top $1 Trillion for First | Stock Market News Today


A historic surge of cash has swept into exchange-traded funds, spurring asset managers to launch new trading strategies that could be undone by a market downturn. 

This year’s inflows into ETFs world-wide crossed the $1 trillion mark for the first time at the end of November, surpassing last year’s total of $735.7 billion, according to Morningstar Inc. data. That wave of money, along with rising markets, pushed global ETF assets to nearly $9.5 trillion, more than double where the industry stood at the end of 2018.

Most of that money has gone into low-cost U.S. funds that track indexes run by Vanguard Group,

BlackRock Inc.


BLK 0.66%

and

State Street Corp.


STT -0.50%

, which together control more than three-quarters of all U.S. ETF assets. Analysts said rising stock markets, including a 25% lift for the S&P 500 this year, and a lack of high-yielding alternatives have boosted interest in such funds.  

“You have this historical precedent where you have tumultuous equity markets, and more and more investors have made their way to index products,” said

Rich Powers,

head of ETF and index product management at Vanguard.

Asset managers are looking to actively managed funds, some with narrow themes, in search of an unfilled niche not already dominated by the industry’s juggernauts, analysts and executives said. VanEck, for example, earlier this month rolled out an active ETF targeting the food industry. In March, Tuttle Capital Management launched its

FOMO ETF,

which is bullish on stocks popular with individual investors. 

Firms including Dimensional Fund Advisors have converted mutual funds into active ETFs. Meanwhile, bigger firms have rolled out ETFs that mimic popular mutual funds, including Fidelity Investments’ Magellan and Blue Chip Growth funds.

“We should have a broad offering of ETFs that stand alongside a broad offering of mutual funds,” said

Gerard O’Reilly,

Dimensional’s co-chief executive, of his company. “Choose your own adventure.” 

As ETFs, baskets of securities that trade as easily as stocks, have boomed this year, investors poured a record $84 billion into ones that pick combinations of securities in search of outperformance rather than tracking swaths of the stock market. That represents about 10% of all inflows into U.S. ETFs, up from nearly 8% last year, according to Morningstar. 

Asset managers long known for running mutual funds are rushing to take advantage of investors’ interest in active ETFs. More than half of the record 380 ETFs launched in the U.S. this year are actively managed, according to FactSet. Fidelity, Putnam and

T. Rowe Price

are among the firms that have rolled out actively managed ETFs in 2021. Firms new to ETFs have also entered the fray. 

The top 20 fastest-growing ETFs, largely run by Vanguard and BlackRock, this year pulled in nearly 40% of all flows, charged an average fee of less than 0.10 percentage point and tracked benchmarks of some sort. 

Many active ETFs remain comparatively small and charge fees higher than passive funds, putting a swath of new products at risk of closing over the next several years. ETFs usually need between $50 million and $100 million in assets within five years of launching to become profitable, analysts and executives say; funds below those levels have tended to close. 

Of the nearly 600 active ETFs in the U.S., three-fifths have less than $100 million in assets, according to FactSet data. More than half are below $50 million. 

“You’re going to see a lot of those firms take a hard look at their future,” said

Elisabeth Kashner,

FactSet’s director of ETF research.

The stock market’s bull run has helped buoy many ETF providers, Ms. Kashner said, adding that firms have in 2021 closed the fewest number of funds in eight years. But a market pullback, which most stock-market strategists anticipate, could flush out weaker players, she said. 

Vanguard has been a beneficiary of high inflows to funds that track indexes. A statue of founder John C. Bogle.



Photo:

Ryan Collerd for The Wall Street Journal

ETF closures generally climbed over the past decade, and firms closed a record 277 ETFs last year as the coronavirus pulled markets down. Many held few assets. About a third of all active ETFs are marked as having a medium or high risk of closure, according to FactSet data that take into account assets, flows and fund closure history. 

Factors that have helped stoke active launches, analysts and executives said, include rules streamlined by regulators in late 2019 that made ETFs easier to launch. The approval of the first semitransparent active ETFs, which shield some holdings from the public’s eye, followed.

Analysts also said the success of ARK Investment Management Chief Executive

Cathie Wood

in 2020 showed how active ETFs can score big returns and pull in substantial sums of money. Several of ARK’s funds doubled last year, and its assets approached $60 billion earlier this year, though many of its bets have slumped in 2021. 

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

How long do you think the boom in exchange-traded funds will last? Join the conversation below.

Most other active managers aren’t doing much better. Two-thirds of large-cap managers of mutual funds have fallen short of benchmarks this year, while roughly 10% of the 371 U.S. active ETFs with full-year performance data are beating the S&P 500. More than a third are flat or negative for 2021. 

“Active management is a zero-sum game,” said FactSet’s Ms. Kashner. “Beating the benchmark quarter after quarter, year after year, is a very difficult task at which active managers have traditionally struggled. The ETF wrapper doesn’t change that calculus.” 

Write to Michael Wursthorn at [email protected]

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

As Hedge Funds Endure Rocky Year, | Stock Market News Today


Investments in private companies are saving the year for stock-picking hedge funds.

Prominent managers that invest in both public and private companies in the same funds have seen their portfolio of public investments flail, weighed down by losses from January’s meme-stock rally and a retreat by fast-growing technology stocks. But soaring valuations of private companies and a hot U.S. IPO market have boosted their private wagers. That has helped mask their poor performance in public markets and driven up their overall returns.

Dan Sundheim’s $25 billion D1 Capital Partners, for example, is down 4% in its public bets for the year through September—but up 71% before fees in its private investments, said people familiar with the firm. The S&P 500 had a total return of 15.9% for the period.

D1 clients opt into share classes that offer varying levels of exposure to private investments. Clients in the share class that can invest up to 15% in private companies have seen gains of about 4.5%, after fees, for the period. The gains stand at 14% and 21% for clients in share classes that can invest up to 35% and 50% in private companies.

Meanwhile, Boston-based Whale Rock Capital Management was down 11.2% for its public investments in a hedge fund that can invest up to a quarter of its clients’ money in private companies, said people familiar with the fund. The performance of the fund’s private wagers shrank the fund’s losses to 3.3% for the year through September.

Hedge funds without private companies in their portfolios have had a rougher time. Palo Alto, Calif.-based Light Street Capital Management, which manages late-stage growth and other funds along with a hedge fund that only invests in public companies, is down 18.6% for the year through September in its hedge fund, said people familiar with the firm. That has brought the fund’s size down to about $1.7 billion. Its growth funds have fared much better, the people said, with Light Street’s first such fund, whose investments include the restaurant-software provider

Toast Inc.

and the software-development company

GitLab Inc.,

expected to have an internal rate of return of more than 100%.

The rush into private investing by public-market investors has helped fuel surging valuations for private companies. And as hedge funds, along with mutual funds and sovereign-wealth funds, deploy billions of dollars, they often crowd out venture and growth funds.

Hedge funds made up 27% of the money raised in private rounds this year through June, despite participating in just 4% of the deals, according to a recent report by Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

“These tech companies are growing exponentially, and managers want to capture that huge exponential growth for their clients,” said Susan Webb, founder and investment chief at the New York-based outsourced-investment firm Appomattox Advisory.

The higher-return potential is stark. Private-equity and venture strategies gained an average 14.2% a year in the decade ended in 2020, Goldman said, while hedge funds overall averaged half those annual returns over the period—and were subject to the stresses of regular redemption cycles.

Toast, a restaurant-software provider that went public last month, is an investment of a Light Street Capital Management growth fund.



Photo:

Richard Drew/Associated Press

Hybrid funds can offer distinct benefits, said Udi Grofman, global co-head of the private-funds group at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. “The beauty of the structure is that it allows the capital of the investors, in between being invested in private investments, to be exposed to public markets,” Mr. Grofman said. Clients typically sit on cash to fund capital calls by venture and private-equity funds.

Stock-picking hedge funds had a banner year in 2020, buoyed by markets that set new highs after bottoming that March.

Their fortunes in public markets have changed this year. The meme-stock rally in January, which sent the price of companies including GameStop Corp. and

AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.

to extraordinary heights, dealt losses to myriad hedge funds. Whale Rock gained 71% last year, while the D1 share class investing up to 15% of clients’ money in private companies climbed 60%; in January they lost about 11% and 30%, respectively, in just their public investments.

While D1 has almost recouped those losses, Whale Rock and other growth-oriented stock pickers have struggled. Fund managers say sector rotations that have alternately favored growth or value have made it difficult to navigate markets. Long out-of-favor sectors such as energy and financials have been on a tear.

Meanwhile, private markets have continued to be supportive. The U.S. IPO market is flourishing, and companies are continuing to raise more money in private markets than in the past. Hedge funds are contributing to the brisk pace of fundraising. D1 and Tiger Global Management, which manages a series of private-equity funds in addition to a hybrid hedge fund, have participated in private funding rounds this year through September at a pace of more than a deal a week for D1 and more than two deals every three days for Tiger, according to PitchBook Data Inc.

The 44-year-old Mr. Sundheim, who started D1 after several years as chief investment officer at Viking Global Investors, said at a recent capital-introduction conference that he hadn’t expected to get as big in private companies as he has. D1 is invested in 90 private companies, he said.

He said judgment was the only competitive advantage in public markets as private markets offered the additional benefit of firms’ reputations playing a role in gaining access to deals. He said D1 in its earliest investments acted as a resource to management teams so they would be strong references for D1. Mr. Sundheim also said he was confident in his portfolio of public investments over the next three to five years.

Write to Juliet Chung at [email protected]

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Robinhood Stock Sale Soured By Investor Confusion, Valuation | Sidnaz Blog


Robinhood Markets Inc.’s


HOOD 3.45%

bid to revolutionize IPOs has created losses for investors instead, after one of the year’s most highly anticipated listings fell flat.

In a regulatory filing in early July, the trading platform’s co-founders said they would open their initial public offering to customers on equal terms with institutional investors. They said they recognized it may be the first IPO many would participate in, and pledged to “never sacrifice the safety of our customers’ money.”

It now appears Robinhood’s commitment to “democratizing” the IPO process played a role in the offering’s big initial stumble Thursday. An innovative auction system sowed some confusion among investors, many already suspicious of the valuation of a business that has drawn scrutiny from regulators and criticism from customers, people involved in the process said.

The stock, initially priced at $38, the bottom of the target range, sits below that. It is a disappointing result at a time when IPOs are booming and investor appetite for new issues is robust.

Robinhood proudly tore up the traditional IPO playbook. It insisted a large chunk of its stock—in the end up to 25%—go to its individual-investor customers compared with the normal retail allocation of well under 10%. It said employees could sell a portion of their stock right away instead of being locked up for six months. And when it came to determining the price of its IPO, Robinhood decided to use a hybrid-auction process, which attempts to assign shares to investors based on what they are willing to pay, regardless of who they are.

Robinhood co-founder Baiju Bhatt, in gray suit, and CEO and co-founder Vladimir Tenev in the Wall Street area of New York City on Thursday.

The hybrid auction has worked in other IPOs in the past year. In typical listings, underwriters give their investor clients updates throughout the roadshow—the seven- to 10-day period in which a company pitches its stock. These updates typically include guidance on how much demand bankers are seeing for the shares and the rough price they ultimately expect to set.

In this case the company and lead underwriters

Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

and

JPMorgan Chase

& Co. gave few such updates, people familiar with the matter said. When some large investors called the other underwriters on the deal, some of those bankers pleaded ignorance.

The opaqueness of the process sowed suspicion among some investors who assumed the deal was going poorly and adjusted their orders accordingly, investors and bankers said.

Many had already expressed concern about how much of Robinhood’s revenue comes from a controversial practice called payment-for-order-flow, which the Securities and Exchange Commission is reviewing, people who attended the roadshow said. Others questioned what they saw as the high valuation the eight-year-old company was seeking—in excess of $30 billion.

Another concern: whether Robinhood’s controversial decision earlier this year to stop users from buying meme stocks like

GameStop Corp.

would prompt some to eschew the offering.

Wednesday night, as bankers met with Robinhood Chief Executive

Vlad Tenev

to set the price, some investors said they were only told it would be within the $38 to $42 target range. This surprised many large institutions, who are used to more guidance heading into a pricing meeting.

A Robinhood IPO event in Times Square.

An unusually large percentage of shares were set to be allocated to hedge funds, which are more likely to “flip” IPO stock on the first day of trading, according to people close to the deal. To bring in more of the biggest institutional funds who are viewed as “buy-and-hold” investors, Robinhood chose $38 a share instead of the higher price some funds were willing to pay.

The company and Goldman felt comfortable that the lower price was conservative enough that the shares would rise on their first day of trading, especially given the buzz around Robinhood in the lead-up to the listing, according to people close to the deal.

Instead, the stock opened at $38 a share, unusual at a time when big initial pops for hot IPOs are more the norm. It rose higher briefly, touching $40 before dropping through the IPO price. It closed down 8.4% Thursday.

The shares fell further still Friday morning before regaining some ground in the early afternoon.

The brokerage app Robinhood has transformed retail trading. WSJ explains its rise amid a series of legal investigations and regulatory challenges. Photo illustration: Jacob Reynolds/WSJ

Robinhood’s Stock Market Debut

Write to Corrie Driebusch at [email protected]

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Should You Be Buying What Robinhood Is Selling? | Sidnaz Blog


In rare cases, such pitches have paid off big time. More often, you’d have done yourself a favor by taking roughly half your money and lighting it on fire instead.

Just as Robinhood isn’t the first brokerage to offer commission-free trading, it isn’t the first to seek to “democratize” investing or to sell a piece of itself to its own customers.

On June 23, 1971, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. became the first New York Stock Exchange firm catering to individual investors to offer its shares to the public.

Thirsty for fresh capital in a struggling stock market, Merrill flogged its shares to its own customers, tapping the firm’s “awesome recognition among that vast segment of the population,” reported The Wall Street Journal the next day. “Primarily small investors, the type long championed by Merrill Lynch, quickly purchased the entire amount.”

Nearly 400 insiders at the firm unloaded a total of 2 million shares in the offering. From its initial $28 per share, the stock shot to about $42—a 50% pop—then closed around $39. That valued Merrill at 30.5 times its prior-year earnings, much higher than the overall stock market’s price/earnings ratio of 18.7.

Less than three weeks later, Merrill announced that its net earnings had fallen nearly 50% from the prior quarter.

For the rest of 1971, Merrill’s stock lost 9.4%; the S&P 500 gained 4%, counting dividends.

In 1972, when the S&P 500 rose nearly 19%, Merrill sank 7.7%. And in 1973-74, when the S&P 500 lost 37%, Merrill’s stock slumped by 61%. In its first three full years, Merrill’s stock lost three-quarters of its value; the S&P 500 fell only 5%.

Here in 2021, Robinhood’s offering is one of several trading and investing IPOs:

Coinbase Global Inc.,

the cryptocurrency exchange, went public in April, and

Acorns Grow Inc.,

which helps users invest in tiny increments, said in May that it expects to go public later in the year. Since its Apr. 14 debut, Coinbase is down about 27%. Robinhood fell 8% on its first day of trading Thursday.

One of Wall Street’s oldest and frankest sayings is “When the ducks quack, feed ‘em”—meaning that whenever investors are eager to buy something, brokers will sell it like mad.

Back in 1971, that was the brokers’ own shares. Roughly half a dozen major firms sold stock to the public soon after Merrill, including Bache & Co. and Dean Witter & Co. By 1974, according to data from the Center for Research in Security Prices LLC, several of them had dealt losses at least as devastating as Merrill’s.

In 1987, Jane and Joe Investor got invited to join in on the fun of Charles Schwab Corp.’s IPO, when roughly three million of the offering’s eight million shares were reserved for employees and customers of the firm.

Unlike Merrill, which was rescued from the brink of failure in 2008 when

Bank of America Corp.

bought the firm, Schwab went on to generate spectacular long-term performance. Over the full sweep of time since its 1987 IPO, Schwab is up more than 26,500%, or 17.9% annualized. The S&P 500 gained less than 3,500%, or an average of 11.3% annually.

However, Schwab went public in late September 1987. Only 18 trading days later, on Oct. 19, the U.S. stock market took its biggest one-day fall in history, plunging more than 20%.

Schwab’s stock got brutalized. In their first year, Schwab’s shares fell 59.1%. After three years, the market as a whole had gained 0.6% annually; Schwab’s stock lost an annualized average of 6.9%, according to CRSP.

How many of the original buyers in 1987 stuck around long enough to reap the giant rewards that came much later? That’s impossible to know, but the likeliest answer has to be: very few.

Every once in a while, outside investors in a brokerage IPO do well.

Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

began trading on May 4, 1999. If you’d bought Goldman stock in the IPO and held it ever since, you’d have earned 9.1% a year, versus 7.6% in the S&P 500, according to FactSet.

Yet Goldman was a giant then, as it is now; it was late to the IPO party because it had held on to its partnership structure for so many years. Most brokerage IPOs, like Robinhood’s, occur when the firms are younger and smaller.

That makes them typical. Companies selling shares to the public for the first time tend to be small, with minimal profits; they also require additional invested capital to sustain their rapid growth.

That’s what Savina Rizova, global head of research at Dimensional Fund Advisors, an asset manager in Austin, Texas, calls “a toxic combination of characteristics that points to low expected returns.”

On average, IPOs have severely underperformed seasoned stocks in the long run. And, history suggests, brokerages doing IPOs are better at timing the market for themselves than for you.

Write to Jason Zweig at [email protected]

More from The Intelligent Investor

The brokerage app Robinhood has transformed retail trading. WSJ explains its rise amid a series of legal investigations and regulatory challenges. Photo illustration: Jacob Reynolds/WSJ

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Smaller but More Frequent Catastrophes Loom Over Insurance Sector | Sidnaz Blog


Less devastating than mega events such as earthquakes and hurricanes, these secondary perils, as they are known in the industry, happen relatively frequently and include hail, drought, wildfire, snow, flash floods and landslides.

Climate change and urban sprawl are driving a jump in secondary perils losses, said Tamara Soyka, Head Cat Perils EMEA at

Swiss Re.

Insurers and reinsurers, who traditionally focused on predicting big weather events that can cause widespread damage, are increasingly incorporating secondary-peril models.

Swiss Re, for instance, last year started considering pluvial—that is, heavy rainfall, similar to the recent European floods—flood zones when assessing risks.

A storm system over Europe dumped heavy rains in recent weeks, causing heavy floods in Germany, Belgium and parts of the Netherlands and Switzerland. The German Insurance Association on Wednesday said it expects insured losses could hit nearly $6 billion as a result of the flooding in North Rhine-Westphalia and Rhineland-Palatinate. It doesn’t yet have estimates for the damage in Saxony and Bavaria.

Before-and-after images show the extent of damage in German towns hit by the region’s worst flooding in decades. Visiting one inundated village, German Chancellor Angela Merkel called for more effort to combat future climate-related disasters. Photo: Satellite Image ©2021 Maxar Technologies

This year is expected to be the most damaging for the country since 2002, when insured storm damage totaled about €11 billion, equivalent to $12.98 billion, the association said. While mostly all residential buildings have windstorm and hail coverage, only 46% of homeowners have cover for heavy rain and floods.

Heavy rain, hailstorms and wind in Germany and Switzerland in June have already cost the industry an estimated $4.5 billion, according to analysts at Berenberg.

Analysts at

Moody’s Investors Service

in a note this week said German insurers “may find it challenging to protect homeowners against climate risk without significant price increases.”

Insurers paid out $81 billion for damages related to natural catastrophes in 2020, according to reinsurance giant Swiss Re, up 50% from 2019 and comfortably topping the $74 billion 10-year average for such losses.

Secondary peril events accounted for more than 70% of the $81 billion in natural catastrophe losses last year, according to the data.

Firms expected to take hits to their earnings from the European floods include Swiss Re,

Munich Re AG

and

Zurich Insurance Group,

according to analysts. Spokespeople for Swiss Re, Zurich and Munich Re declined to give estimates of the potential impact.

UBS Group AG analysts project $6 billion worth of losses for the industry, split into $2 billion for primary insurers and $4 billion for reinsurers.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Have you been affected by a natural disaster? What was your experience working with insurance companies? Join the conversation below.

The prospect of more intense weather has insurers rapidly updating their risk-assessment models and recalculating the price of insurance. Property insurers faced an estimated $18 billion bill for damage to homes and businesses from the long stretch of frigid weather in Texas and numerous other states, the equivalent of a major hurricane, The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year.

In some cases, the increased frequency of extreme weather events can lead insurers to drop coverage altogether. Some insurers in California chose to not renew insurance policies for homeowners in high-risk areas for wildfires, the Journal reported in 2019. California wildfires the prior two years had killed dozens of people and racked up more than $24 billion in insured losses.

Analysts say the losses from the European flooding will be manageable for the industry. While they may dent quarterly or yearly earnings, they won’t have a seismic effect on their capital. If the coming U.S. hurricane season is a normal one, that will likely crimp earnings further for some.

Flooding in Altenahr, Germany. In some cases, the increased frequency of extreme weather events can lead insurers to drop coverage altogether.



Photo:

friedemann vogel/Shutterstock

The Euro Stoxx Insurance index is up 7.6% this year, trailing the broad Euro Stoxx 600 stock-market index, which is up nearly 15%. The insurance index has fallen 6.4% since March 30, which Berenberg analysts attribute to fears of potential dividend cuts due to recent natural catastrophes.

The costs of reinsurance in Asia and the U.S. went up over the past couple of years owing to hurricanes and wildfires, said Berenberg analyst Michael Huttner. But prices in Europe didn’t increase significantly over that period. The floods will likely help catastrophe pricing increase, said Mr. Huttner.

Will Hardcastle, an analyst at UBS, says this year is shaping up to be the fifth consecutive year that natural catastrophe losses will be above reinsurers’ budgeted level.

“The last five years would suggest you’re not getting appropriate pricing for it,” he said. “It’s always difficult to determine whether the trend is short term. Now at this point you have to be thinking it’s more structural” because of climate change, he said.

Write to Julie Steinberg at [email protected]

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Robinhood IPO Is No Giveaway | Sidnaz Blog


Robinhood Markets likes to give away free shares to attract new customers. Its public offering to investors is a different matter.

The offering bears some similarity to recent IPOs such as

Coinbase Global

and

Rocket Cos.,

which made their debut in the midst of crypto and mortgage booms, respectively. Investors had the challenge of trying to chart out a normalized earnings and revenue path. So far, neither of those prior examples have worked out for initial public investors.

Robinhood derives the vast majority of its revenue from trading by its customers, including in cryptocurrencies like Dogecoin. In this topsy-turvy market, it will be quite difficult to forecast what that activity level looks like a year from now. Plus, its primary trading revenue source is payment for order flow, one of the most hotly debated topics in finance and in Washington.

Amid that uncertainty, there is one measure that cuts through a lot of the noise: how much an investor would be paying at the IPO valuation per funded account. That is a way to benchmark Robinhood to established peers in the retail brokerage business.

At the proposed IPO price range set on Monday, a funded Robinhood customer account is worth about $1,500 to $1,600. Contrast that to a long-term average of about $2,000 for E*Trade over the past 15 years, before it was acquired for about $1,800 by Morgan Stanley, according to figures compiled by Christian Bolu of Autonomous Research. Charles Schwab, a much broader wealth- and asset-management business, has traded around $3,600 historically, and is closer to $4,000 today.

Vlad Tenev, co-founder and chief executive officer of Robinhood Markets. It will be Robinhood’s broad appeal that is most vital to justifying the IPO price.



Photo:

Daniel Acker/Bloomberg News

So that multiple isn’t by itself wild and suggests that, even if Robinhood has to alter its revenue model, it could still be a viable business just by virtue of the number of customers it has. But it also is giving Robinhood credit for a lot of growth it has yet to achieve. Consider that Robinhood’s typical funded account had about $4,500 worth of assets in custody at the end of the second quarter. The established retail brokers’ typical accounts are well into the six figures.

Yes, Robinhood’s accounts on average trade more. But overall, Robinhood still generates much less revenue out of its customers, in part because they are smaller. In the first quarter, average revenue per user was $137 at Robinhood. By contrast, TD Ameritrade and E*Trade were generating more than $500 around the time they were acquired, according to Autonomous. Charles Schwab was above $600 in the first quarter.

So the per-account price implies that Robinhood will either far better monetize its customers in the future, grow them at a much faster rate, or some combination thereof. Faster growth is much more likely, based on recent history: Schwab added 1.7 million net new brokerage accounts in the second quarter, while Robinhood added 4.5 million funded accounts on net. “Expanding the universe of investors has been, and we expect will continue to be, a significant driver of our market-leading growth,” Robinhood writes in the IPO prospectus.

Meanwhile, per-user revenue trends are already slowing. Preliminary second-quarter results given by Robinhood imply a drop-off in average revenue per user to under $120, with Robinhood noting that, while cryptocurrency and options trading are growing, equities trading activity in the second quarter was lower than it was a year ago.

The company can build on other revenue streams, which include margin loans to customers and cash management. But low pricing is a vital part of the company’s mission to expand its customer base. The company is still building out its securities lending platform, which could generate incremental revenue. In the face of slowing trading activity, though—and that includes crypto in the third quarter, according to the company—it is hard to bank on significant per-user revenue growth in the near future.

So it will be Robinhood’s broad appeal that is most vital to justifying the price. That makes the IPO itself a pivotal moment. Robinhood will be distributing potentially over 20 million shares to its own customers via its own platform. If the deal doesn’t perform well out of the gate for any reason, that could frustrate some of its most engaged customers.

Investors might have to wait for the dust to settle on this offering before thinking about nabbing any Robinhood stock for themselves.

The brokerage app Robinhood has transformed retail trading. WSJ explains its rise amid a series of legal investigations and regulatory challenges as it looks forward to its IPO. Photo illustration: Jacob Reynolds/WSJ

Write to Telis Demos at [email protected]

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Paytm and Zomato IPOs Point to Coming Wave of Indian Tech | Sidnaz Blog


NEW DELHI—India is gearing up for tech IPOs, including two worth more than $1 billion, as startups look to tap a stock market that has proved resilient despite Covid-19.

The initial public offerings reflect the maturing of a generation of e-commerce and digital-economy companies, bankers say, many of which have grown rapidly during the pandemic as well-off city-dwellers turn to them when purchasing products from milk to medicines.

On July 16, the operator of the Paytm digital-finance app, One97 Communications Ltd., filed a prospectus for what would be India’s largest IPO in local-currency terms. The group offers services such as a mobile wallet, loans and stock-trading, and is backed by

Jack Ma’s

Chinese financial-technology giant Ant Group Co. One97 aims to issue new and existing shares worth a total of up to 166 billion rupees, the equivalent of $2.23 billion.

Other companies considering IPOs include digital-payments platform One MobiKwik Systems Ltd., which filed its prospectus earlier this month, and logistics and supply-chain-services provider Delhivery Pvt., according to a company spokeswoman. Online cosmetics seller Nykaa E-Retail Pvt., API Holdings Pvt., the parent company of online pharmacy PharmEasy, and PB Fintech Pvt., the parent of insurance aggregator Policybazaar.com, are also considering listings, according to people familiar with their plans.

“This is the first set of these companies coming to the public market” in India, said

Kaustubh Kulkarni,

the head of investment banking for India at the local unit of

JPMorgan Chase

& Co.

Demand for the shares is likely to be strong, given the companies’ brand recognition, said Mr. Kulkarni, who is also the bank’s co-head of investment banking for South and Southeast Asia. “Most of these companies are offering products, services or capabilities which millions, if not hundreds of millions, of customers are utilizing on a day-to-day basis,” he said.

Last week investors placed orders worth 38 times the shares being offered by Zomato Ltd., India’s answer to

DoorDash Inc.

The food-delivery group raised around 94 billion rupees, the equivalent of $1.26 billion, and its shares are due to start trading on July 27.

Some market-watchers say Indian tech has plenty of room to grow, as more consumption shifts online. Earlier-stage investors have poured about $16 billion into Indian startups this year, creating 16 new unicorns—young private companies valued at $1 billion or more—according to data firm Venture Intelligence.

India’s unicorn population will rise to 150 by 2025 from 60 now, predicted

Gaurav Singhal,

the head of India consumer technology at

Bank of America Corp.

’s investment-banking arm. Many will eventually look to float, he said, translating into a big increase in market capitalization.

“India will see $300 billion to $400 billion of market-cap creation in the internet ecosystem in the next five years,” said Mr. Singhal.

The deals already under way show how India’s financial sector has been swept up in an international boom, even as the country records more than 30,000 new Covid-19 cases a day, among the highest daily counts in the world.

Already this year, India has hosted a rush of IPOs—joining a global surge fueled in part by tech companies from elsewhere in Asia, such as China’s

Kuaishou Technology

and South Korea’s

Coupang Inc.

The operator of the Paytm digital-finance app filed a prospectus for what would be India’s largest IPO in local-currency terms.



Photo:

Dhiraj Singh/Bloomberg News

India’s 22 IPOs in the first six months of 2021 brought in $3.7 billion, a record half-year haul, according to Prime Database Group, a research firm in New Delhi. Shares in some recently listed companies are trading at twice their IPO price.

At the same time, Indian stock indexes have soared as investors bet on big listed companies. The S&P BSE Sensex has hit a series of record highs, most recently on July 15, and international investors have poured about $7.7 billion into Indian shares this year, official data shows.

Millions of individual Indian investors are trading stocks for the first time, again mirroring trends seen in the U.S. and some other markets.

Harpreet Singh,

a 23-year-old from the northern city of Pathankot, started dabbling in the market last year while waiting for the chance to study abroad.

Relying on advice from videos on YouTube and Telegram, Mr. Singh said, he has lost money at times—but still finds trading stocks more appealing than getting a job in his hometown, where he said private-sector work pays barely 10,000 rupees a month, equivalent to about $134.

“If you have knowledge of stocks,” he said, “then in three to four months you can earn hundreds of thousands of rupees, sitting at home.”

Write to Shefali Anand at [email protected]

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Baby-Food Maker Little Spoon Raises $44 Million | Sidnaz Blog


Little Spoon Inc., a direct-to-consumer baby-food company targeting millennial parents, raised $44 million in a venture-capital funding round.

The so-called Series-B financing round values the company at roughly $200 million, people familiar with the matter said. It was led by Valor Equity Partners.

Little Spoon ships organic purées, toddler meals and vitamins to customers, bypassing grocery stores and other distribution outlets. Last year, Little Spoon launched Plates, its meals for toddlers and bigger children. The company also offers a virtual community that provides caregivers with a platform to connect and interact.

“Packaged baby food hasn’t evolved in line with the modern parent,” Chief Executive

Ben Lewis

said in an interview. “It was this glaring void that we couldn’t ignore,” added Mr. Lewis, who co-founded Little Spoon in 2017 with

Lisa Barnett,

Michelle Muller

and

Angela Vranich.

Little Spoon is one of several upstart baby-food companies to jump aboard the organic trend, aiming to attract the growing demographic of millennial parents. Recent reports of high levels of toxic metals in several top baby-food brands opened the door for new competitors focused on safety.

Co-founders Lisa Barnett, Angela Vranich, Michelle Muller and Ben Lewis.



Photo:

Little Spoon Inc.

Little Spoon also emphasizes that it is a mission-driven company. During the Covid-19 pandemic, it has donated more than $100,000 of its products to food pantries and introduced a program to supply the products at cost to first responders and anyone who experienced pandemic-related financial hardship, according to the co-founders.

“It’s exactly the kind of company we like to invest in,” said

Jon Shulkin,

a board member and partner at Valor Equity Partners, which also invested in Little Spoon during its Series A financing round. “They’re solving a problem and doing good work.” He said he is optimistic about the company’s growth prospects because there are “always ways to scale” for makers of baby and children’s food.

Little Spoon said it is growing quickly, delivering seven million meals since the onset of the pandemic out of the 15 million delivered since the company’s founding. Large baby-food makers have had to adapt as some parents make their own and others embrace baby-led-weaning, in which infants are served pieces of real food rather than purées.

While overall food sales surged during pandemic-related shutdowns around the U.S., the baby-food segment didn’t receive the same boost, according to market-research firm IRI. Sales of baby food dropped in the spring of 2020, and though they have climbed since, growth has continued to lag behind the broader food segment.

Write to Corrie Driebusch at [email protected]

Copyright ©2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8



Source link

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /