The Archives

Browse the content below to find what you're looking for.

Backtesting VelocityShares’ ZIV inverse volatility ETN to 2005

 
Thursday, June 30th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

All of the volatility based ETN/ETF products are new.  Barclays’ VXX and VXZ oldsters started less than 2 1/2 years old—just a few months before the end of the 2008/2009 crash.  This lack of historical data over full market cycles makes it hard to assess the risks associated with new products—such as VelocityShares’ ZIV (medium term inverse volatility) and XIV (short term inverse volatility) funds which are only 6 months old.

I have backtested ZIV starting from December 2005 (I ignored fees and treasury bill interest).  The results for this presumably tamer inverse volatility ETN, are shown below.  For a XIV backtest to 2006 see this post from Volatility Futures and Options.


Backtrack ZIV vs VIX, click to enlarge

.

.

.

.

..

.


.,

I was surprised at how volatile, and how low this hypothetical ZIV went during the recent bear market—losing 80% of its value from 2007  to 2008.   ZIV and XIV appear to be bull market only instruments and your investments in them should have bear market insurance (e.g., VIX or VXX calls, or OTM SPY/SPX puts) —unless you think you can predict the end of this bull market.

.

Dividends from IVV and VOO

 
Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

See this post for updated dividend information for IVV and VOO.

Whopper splits coming up for VelocityShares’ XIV and ZIV

 
Friday, June 24th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

Evidently the folks at VelocityShares decided that the shares of their inverse volatility offerings were way too pricey, because they are splitting their short term fund, XIV ten to one, and their medium term fund, ZIV by eight to one.  Based on today’s closing prices of 167 for XIV and 132 for ZIV, they will both end up priced at around $16.50 after end of trading this Friday, June 24th, when the splits become effective.

This move strikes me as a strategy shift to broaden the appeal of the funds.  They were introduced last November at around $100/share—not exactly cheap.

As long as an equity stays above $10/share I don’t much care what the price is.  I’m looking for percentage moves.  I question whether splits like this make much difference in the market.  It will be interesting to monitor the volumes, spreads, etc., to see what the effects are.

For more information about these splits, see this news release.

.

OILZ and GASZ—snacking on oil and natural gas contango

 
Monday, June 20th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

In the past I have been an active investor in oil via the USO ETF, but recently I stepped aside because of USO’s poor performance in tracking the spot price of oil.   The reason for the  poor performance was not a mystery—oil futures have been in steep contango,  with the front month price lower than subsequent delivery dates.  When USO rolls their contracts into longer dated contracts they have to sell cheap and buy dear.  The graph below shows the ugly result.

Crude oil spot vs USO, click to enlarge

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

UBS just introduced two ETNs that are designed to profit from persistent contango in oil (ETRACS Oil Futures Contango: OILZ) and gas (Natural Gas Futures Contango: GASZ)—by shorting the front month and going long on longer dated futures.   Their backtesting on crude oil futures over the last 5 1/2 years shows an average annual return of 6.58%, compared to 10.2% for crude oil, but with a lot less volatility.  In the OILZ prospectus they include the following backtest results.

Spot oil and natural gas compared to backtested OILZ and GASZ, click to enlarge

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

The natural gas results are even better, with an annualized growth of 17.58% compared to an overall drop of 12.8% in natural gas prices.

What are the risks?   The two that come to mind are:  the contango term structure goes away, and the price of these commodities dropping across the board.     Some comments about contango:

  • Contango is normal on commodities that have a significant cost-to-carry.  A barrel of oil takes up a fair amount of space, so storing it for a further out delivery date will cost more.
  • Some commodity ETFs avoid the problems with contango by physically storing the commodity themselves (e.g., Gold with GLD, and silver with SLV).  That way they can avoid the futures markets and the requirement to roll futures over time.  This is not practical for crude oil.
  • Short term shortages can boost short term prices.  If the shortage is perceived to be short lived the longer term contracts might not go up much
  • I haven’t investigated this, but some people claim the contango should only reflect carrying costs and that if it is higher it is due to speculation by hedge funds and other bad characters.   I wouldn’t be surprised if the dramatic rise in participation in commodities investment by people that have no intent of taking delivery has increased contango—reflecting the greater price uncertainty there is on longer term contracts.
Regarding the overall price of the commodity:
  • These funds are pretty insensitive to the price of the commodities because they combine both a long and a short position.   The backtesting shows that the severe oil and natural gas crashes of 2008 did not have much of an effect.

Because these funds have a short component, they have the potential to drop below zero if there wasn’t some sort of circuit breaker arrangement.  The fund value will never drop below zero, but the funds may be “accelerated” (terminated) if they drop in value below $5/share (they are currently at $25), or if they drop 60% or more from the previous day’s indicated value.   Because these fund both have a long component also I think this scenario is highly unlikely.

Overall I think these two funds are intriguing.  Betting on contango seems reasonable to me.

.

SPY’s June 2011 dividend payout is $0.6276

 
Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

For updated information, including 5 years of SPY dividend information, see this post.

.

A big bet on XIV

 
Thursday, June 16th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

It looks like someone big thinks the market is going to have a upswing today—buying 100,000 shares of  XIV in pre-market at 159.85 ($15.985 million).  It could have been a sale, but I doubt it.

The exchanges show XIV trading  over a million shares before market open today, but I’m assuming that’s an error because the only big trade that shows up is the 100,000 share block.    If the volume number is correct it would be XIV’s first day with over a million shares traded. Reaching the 1 million share mark for the first time in pre-market would probably be unprecedented in the relatively short history of ETF/ETN type equities.

In other volatility related events,  the June VIX options expired yesterday, with a settlement price (VRO) of 19.73 and the VIX index opening at 19.31.   July VIX options won’t expire until July 20th—it is one of those times when they expire later in the month than the equity options.   For tickers on VRO, VIX, and other  related volatility related products see volatility tickers.

.

ETF Tools

 
Saturday, February 25th, 2012 | Vance Harwood
 

Assets Under Management (AUM) ETFdb

Correlation ETF Screen

Dividend history  Dividend Investor   Graph+data table (SPDR & iShares only)

Fund Flows IndexUniverse

General Information  ETFdb  IndexUniverse  ETF Screen

Shares Outstanding  ETFdb

Short Interest ShortSqueeze

Top Funds ETFdb

Recovery from the Tech Crash v.s. the Great Recession

 
Sunday, June 12th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

Since November 2009 I have been tracking the sometimes eerie day to day correspondence between the current value of SPY and its value 6 years ago.    In 2011 the market moved up strongly in the first half, a performance considerably stronger than its counterpart 6 years ago.  No double dip, no “square root.”   This has been a powerful bull market.

SPY & VIX today vs six years ago, click to enlarge

.

..


.

..


.

.

.

.

One of the characteristic differences between these two markets persists—the VIX index, and actual volatility have been higher this time around.  Right now the market is nervous, and it wouldn’t be uncharacteristic for it to dive down below the 120 level to cross over with the old market levels once again.   I don’t think it will, baring an earthquake or a breakdown in Europe, but it could…

In April 2011, for the first time since the 2008/2009 crash the new value of the VIX dropped below the old—briefly.   I don’t expect this to happen again for several months at least.

.

IVOP and XIV termination events

 
Tuesday, September 20th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

In the prospectuses for IVOP and XIV, there are some disconcerting discussions about termination events. In the case of IVOP, it occurs if its value drops below $10 and for XIV it is triggered if the daily percentage drop exceeds 80%. I did some digging into these events to try and figure out how likely they are to occur.  If you’d like to read a more general discussion about these two ETNs you can read this post.

First of all the IVOP and XIV provisions for termination/acceleration relate to volatility futures not the CBOE’s VIX index. The VIX relates to the instantaneous implied volatility of the S&P 500—which is a different thing. Volatility futures have contracts with different expiration dates. Typically the further out their expiration dates (e.g., 6 months from now), the slower they react to the day-to-day moves of the market. IVO and XIV are based on the two futures contracts that are closest to expiration, the administrators for these funds adjust their positions in these contracts daily to achieve an effective average time till expiration of 30 days.

VXX does the same thing, except it is trying to be long volatility, not short/daily inverse % of volatility. When trying to understand IVOP or XIV you can view them as being a short position in VXX (IVOP), or tracking the opposite daily percentage move of VXX (XIV).

VXX is not as volatile as the VIX index. On a day with sharp market moves VXX will typically move about half the percentage move of what VIX does. VXX can still make big moves however—one day during the May 2010 Flash Crash, it jumped almost 25%—the VIX on that day jumped 46%.

Now we can talk about termination / acceleration. I think it is reasonable to assume that the goals of the ETN providers in including these measures are to:

  • Prevent the ETN value from going negative (they specify in these prospectuses that the value will stay positive)
  • Protect the provider from undue market risk in hedging these products during volatile times

IVOP is essentially a short position in VXX, and Barclays doesn’t want to ever lose more than was put into it, so they liquidate the fund if it drops below $10 on the market. This termination would occur if VXX climbs 50% above its value when IVOP was created—jumping from $41.55 to approximately $63.

With XIV termination (or “acceleration” in marketing speak) relates to daily percentage moves. If VXX jumped more than 100% in a day, then if VelocityShares didn’t terminate XIV its notational value could go to zero.   They avoid this particular unhappy situation by terminating the fund if the daily move of VXX is 80% or more—although losing 80% in one day would still be plenty traumatic.

Just to be clear, these funds aren’t tied directly to VXX, but rather the underlying futures contracts, but I believe VXX is a good proxy for the situation.

The termination risk for XIV appears to be limited to market crashes worse than the Flash crash. Two examples that come to mind are the 2009 crash and the October 1987 crash. VXX didn’t exist for either of these. I have analyzed VIX data (or simulated data) since 1992—there were 20 days with VIX jumping over 30% (previous day close to intraday high) during that period. The highest percentage jump over that period was 70.5% on February 27, 2007. There were three days with VIX jumps over 30% in the 2008/2009 crash, and during the Flash Crash.

If VXX had existed during this time span, and held to its typical behavior of 50% of VIX’s move it looks like the XIV termination event would not have occurred, but obviously it would have taken heavy losses on those days.

The termination risks for IVOP (and its fallen sibling IVO) are obviously higher.   All it takes is an absolute 50% rise in the SPXVSTR index from its value at IVOP’s inception to kill the fund.

In IVO and IVOP’s case it matters when the fund was initiated, because VXX going up 50% over the case of a correction/crash is common.  IVO started January 20th, 2011, when the VIX index was a relatively low 18.   The VIX index at IVOP’s inception was at 31,  so the timing seems to be better—assuming we don’t go into a 2009 style crash in the next 6 months or so.

If you are investing significant amounts of money in these products it looks prudent to at least hold some OTM VIX or VXX  calls. These would provide some insurance against these infrequent, but dramatic events.

Thanks to Steve, who commented on the first version of this post pointing out that the ETN providers were probably not looking out for the investor, but rather for their own hides in incorporating these termination events.

.

select defect update

 
Sunday, June 26th, 2011 | Vance Harwood
 

Notice: There is a new xversion (build 1.6.16.0)  of StreetSmart Edge available on the Schwab web site.  If you are using an older version I recommend you upgrade—Schwab has fixed a fair number of problems with this newer release.  You don’t have to remove your current version of Street Smart Edge, you can just download and install the new version.   Your current version shows up in the upper right hand corner of the application (see the picture below).

See here for an May 2011 review on Street

Smart Edge.

.

..

Early observations:

Schwab beat their “Coming in March” claim by at least a day in introducing their new StreetSmart Edge product in February.

After a 16.5 MB download I was up and running—slowly.    My 3.3Ghz single processor machine with 900Meg of RAM does

not meet Schwab’s minimum requirements of a dual core processor with 2 Gigabytes of RAM.   They warned me and continued to load and run the program—which I appreciate, but clearly snappy performance is going to going to require a substantial hardware upgrade.    Even my 64 bit  2.4 Ghz quad core machine with 5 Gbytes of RAM falls slightly short of Schwab’s recommended configuration.

I only had a few minutes to try out this new platform, but there were a couple of pleasant surprises.   Schwab has included the notion of midpoint pricing into their quotes.  So instead of just getting the bid and ask prices, they also provide the price halfway in between.   This can be very useful with lightly traded stocks and options.   Also there are option charts,unfortunately limited to no finer than daily frequency, but still a step forward.

Two quick disappointments: their VIX options chains are still pretending the cash VIX index (Schwab symbol $VIX) is their underlying rather than the volatility futures they are truly based upon (this totally corrupts their Greeks) , and there doesn’t appear to be a way to easily download chart data into a spreadsheet.

A couple things I’ll look at next:

  • Are watch lists/settings  dedicated to specific computers, or are they tied to the account?
  • Are the Greeks on weekly options calculated correctly?

.