Share This

Friday, 11 June 2010

Bondholders: Don't Fear Rising Rates

Many advisors and their bondholder clients are fretting about rate hikes. Here's why they should relax.

Beginning in June 2004 the Federal Reserve raised interest rates a record 17 times in a row, from 1% to 5.25%, over a two-year period ended June 2006. How badly did bond investors do in this period of time? The answer will be disclosed near the end of this article--don't cheat and jump ahead, read the article first, for your own investing good!

Perhaps the question most often presented to us today is, "How will you manage portfolios if interest rates rise?" Of course the fear is that interest rates will not only rise, but rise considerably. Here is what I think:


--An old Wall Street adage says that most of the people are wrong most of the time when it comes to predicting the investment future. Be wary of the investor's epidemic! When just about everyone fears rates will spike tomorrow, our adage tells us that such a dramatic change is highly unlikely to occur.

--Did you know that the 300-year average inflation rate in the United States is less than 1.9% per year? Low inflation is common, not uncommon. We are in a period of low inflation.

--Inflation and interest rates historically move together. With the current lower-than-low interest rates, and without forecasted rises in inflation, we have a long way to go before seeing higher inflation (and therefore higher interest rates).

--Unemployment has a negative correlation with inflation; high unemployment is associated with low inflation. This is because wages contribute such a large amount of overall product and service costs. Unemployment is high and will remain high for a long time to come. Result: continued low inflation and low interest rates.

--The period 1970 through 1990 saw uncommonly high interest rates. Even the 1990s had high rates by long-term comparison. Many of today's investors have grown up in this high interest rate environment. Many homeowners in the 1980s had mortgage rates as high as 16% (yes, 16%, not a typo). Think about that experience and their lifelong perspective on the fear of rising interest rates.

--Safety should keep investors hungry for U.S. Treasuries and help keep interest rates low.

--When interest rates do rise, there is no indication they will rise considerably.

--When interest rates do rise, they usually do not rise in a straight line; they go up a little, down a little less, up a little more, down a little less. To state another Wall Street adage, "there are no straight lines on Wall Street," which applies to the direction and flight of interest rates as much as anything.

--Rising interest rates is not necessarily a bad thing. On the contrary, rising rates would potentially be an indication that sustained economic growth is back. There is also the benefit for fixed income investors to consider--they will be receiving a greater yield!

--Many portfolio managers "ladder" portfolios, which can provide them with a steady stream of maturing bonds to re-invest at the higher interest rates.

Now that I have made the case for a continued low inflation rate, and therefore low interest rate environment, let's ignore that and look at a rising interest rate environment that occurred from June 2004 to June 2006. This is not to say that the past experience will be replicated precisely, but instead for this review is for discussion purposes only.

Special Offer: Richard Lehmann's 2009 total return on his medium-risk fixed-income portfolio was 58%--triple the Dow's return--and it still yields 8%. Click here for new buys and sells in Forbes/Lehmann Income Securities Investor.
 
Below is a chart of the Federal Reserve Fed Funds Target Rate for the period June 2004 through July 2006. As you can see, the Federal Reserve increased interest rates seventeen times during this period, starting at a Fed Funds rate of 1% and ending at a Fed Funds rate of 5.25%.

0611_forbes-fan-chart_565.gif

Now the answer to the quiz. Below is a listing of various Morningstar U.S. open-ended bond mutual fund categories and their respective annualized rates of return for the period June 30, 2004, to June 30, 2006. Clearly you can see that during this unprecedented rising interest rate time period, bond investors held their own quite nicely.

High Yield Bonds: +6.89%
Intermediate-Term Bond: +2.54%
Short Government: +1.68%
Intermediate Government: +2.05%
Long Government: +3.55%

Are the above outstanding rates of return? No. But investors should never take epidemic, sky-is-falling paranoia as an investment strategy. Interest rates are not going to the moon anytime soon, and if they do rise, investment success is still quite possible--even if your portfolio is brimming with bonds.

By Sean Hanlon, CFP, is the founder, chairman, CEO and chief investment officer of Hanlon Investment Management, a registered investment advisory with $1.8 billion that employs tactical active allocation strategies.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Google testing Google News tweaks

Google is testing a couple of new features on the Google News page, revamping the way users see stories presented on the page and adding content selected by actual human beings.

Perhaps the most striking change (see below) is one observed by Search Engine Land, in which Google is experimenting with a blog-like design that lists news stories by category in a single column, rather than the two side-by-side columns currently used on the page. Within that column, users can set preferences as to which stories they'd like to see the most and Google will also display a "Spotlight" on certain stories across a variety of topics.

But Google News--which debuted with the promise that all stories on the page were selected by algorithms--is also trying out a section called "Editor's Picks," where editors from a small group of publications can display five stories they've chosen to highlight. The publication highlighted in that section will change with each visit to the page, with companies such as Reuters, US Magazine, and The Atlantic among the initial partners according to The New York Times.

It's just the latest move in Google's continual dance with the news industry. There's no shortage of news executives who think Google is a pox on their industry, "stealing" their headlines and content in Google News. But Google is sensitive to those concerns, having pointed out several times that it drives an awful lot of traffic to news sites and is working with news publishers to help them get their content online in a way that makes sense for editors and readers.

Not all visitors to the page will see either or both of the tests, as Google follows its usual practice of "bucket testing" new features with small audiences to get a sense of whether the changes make sense.


By Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom.
Newscribe : get free news in real time

Thursday, 10 June 2010

Why Corporate Fraud Is On The Rise


Lax boards, equity-linked pay lead to rise in financial wrongdoing.







Newspaper headlines aside, only a fraction of corporate executives who manipulate or misrepresent their companies' performances get exposed by regulators for such misdeeds. My company, Audit Integrity, is in the business of uncovering such wrongdoing because it represents a substantial risk to stakeholders.

A subset of such manipulation and misrepresentation is securities fraud, which itself is so egregious that the Securities and Exchange Commission does prosecute some offenders civilly. An indication of just how common such behavior is appears in a study analyzing fraudulent financial reporting in the decade through 2007 that was recently released by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission.

It is important to note that, while auditors actively support fraud-detection research, they do not guarantee in their audited statements that they will uncover it. That's because auditors believe they too can be misled by clever fraudsters. I understand the auditors' reluctance; material manipulation and misrepresentation are difficult actions to uncover. Turning to the COSO report, the interesting conclusions include these:
--The number of fraud cases increased between 1998 and 2007 in comparison with the level in the prior 10-years studies.

--The dollar value of fraudulent financial reporting soared in the last decade, despite the implementation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

The Risk List

pic

--Companies involved in fraud were much larger than those observed in a 1988-1997 study.
--Fraud occurred most frequently in the computer hardware and software industries.

--The SEC cited a company's chief executive officer and/or chief financial officer for some level of involvement in 89% of fraud cases studied.

--The most common fraud techniques involved improper revenue recognition, followed by overstatement of assets and bogus expense recognition.

--Among firms involved in fraud, 26% changed auditors between the filing of their final clean financial statement and their final fraudulent financial statement. Sixty percent of the firms involved in fraud that changed auditors did so during the period the wrongful reporting was taking place; the remaining 40% changed auditors in the fiscal period just before the fraud began.
--Press reports of an alleged fraud resulted in an average 17% abnormal stock price decline in the two days surrounding the announcement. News of an SEC or Department of Justice investigation resulted in an average 7% abnormal stock price decline.

--Long-term negative consequences of fraud included bankruptcy, de-listing from a stock exchange or material asset sales.

--The most commonly cited motives for fraud included the desire to: meet earnings expectations; conceal the company's deteriorating financial condition; bolster performance for pending equity or debt financing; or to increase management compensation.


–The average period during which fraud occurred was 31 months.

The Risk List

pic

--There appears to be no difference between the number or character of frauds since the passage of Sarbanes-Oxley. (Note: the sample periods after 2002 are shorter than those prior to 2002.)

--Fraudulent firms disclosed significantly more related-party transactions than non-fraudulent firms.
--All 347 firms prosecuted by the SEC for financial fraud during the decade studied received unqualified opinions from their auditors for their final set of misstated financial filings.

--Financial statement fraud sometimes implicated the external auditor.

--The consequences associated with financial statement fraud were severe for the individuals allegedly involved. However, the severity of the penalties may not be a sufficient deterrent, the COSO believes.

--There were few differences in the boards overseeing companies involved in fraud and those that weren't.
Audit Integrity's independent findings largely mirror the COSO's conclusions. From our perspective, four important issues stand out:

1. Fraud continues to increase, despite Sarbanes-Oxley.
2. The motivations continue unabated.

The Risk List

pic



3. The methods of committing financial fraud have not materially changed.
4. Traditional measures of corporate governance have no impact on predicting fraud.

While the COSO study does not categorically state that fraud has increased (or, at least, has not diminished) since the implementation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, it does confirm that there is no evidence Sarbanes-Oxley has had any impact on the commission of fraud.

We are highly doubtful that additional analysis would show any decline in the fraud rate. As mentioned in the COSO report, 89% of the fraud cases implicate the CEO and/or CFO. Sarbanes-Oxley's primary focus is on establishing more rigorous internal controls (Reg. 404); those controls are targeted at multiple levels of management but only indirectly at the C-suite. The board of directors is responsible for protecting stakeholders; it is our opinion that until corporate directors are held to a higher standard, fraud will continue regardless of the rigor of internal controls.
As the economy has faced mounting stress, many companies have been feeling pressure merely to survive. This pressure may lead to fraudulent behavior to mask decaying operations, the COSO points out.
The COSO and our analysis concur that the methods of committing fraud remain unchanged: The majority of the fraud metrics included in Audit Integrity's Accounting and Governance Risk (AGR) model have remained relatively stable over the past decade.

0608_chart-fraud-cases_565x232.jpg
0608_chart-fraud-techniques_565x350.jpg

Revenue recognition, asset/liability valuation and expense recognition are the keystones of the AGR model.
It is interesting to note that insider trading was involved in 24% of the cases; insider trading is a key high-risk metric in assessing potential fraud.

In contrast, board composition resulted in no significant difference in the prevalence of fraud, the COSO found. Audit Integrity's research likewise indicates that board composition plays a very small part in predicting fraud.

We do, however, believe certain governance metrics that are independent of accounting metrics do have an impact. These include frequent amendments to financial filings; boards chaired by the CEO; prevalence of incentive pay vs. annual pay for the CEO and CFO; a high ratio of CEO to CFO total pay; large volumes of stock sales by top executives, relative to market capitalization; frequent legal and regulatory issues; and frequent officer changes.



Among the important conclusions that could be used to curb future fraudulent activity are the following:

--Fraud will persist until boards of directors are held more accountable for their actions.

--If the economy remains under pressure, fraud will continue to increase.

--The 347 cases of fraud prosecuted by the SEC between 1998 and 2007 represent a small number and a nadir during which a blind eye was often turned to fraudulent activity. Under Chairman Mary Shapiro, the SEC appears to have "found its legs." We believe the number of enforcement actions will increase substantially in the coming years.

--The 347 companies prosecuted in the decade through 2007 represent a small fraction of the number of financial fraud cases that occurred. Very few frauds result in SEC enforcement action; many more are adjudicated by class actions. Most are recorded only in stakeholder disappointment, large price drops, bond defaults and insolvency.

James Kaplan is cofounder and chairman of Audit Integrity, a financial research firm based in Los Angeles.

Newscribe : get free news in real time