Healthway Medical: Turning positive.

Healthway Medical closed at 16c today on low volume.  This is the highest closing price in a month or so.  MACD has crossed above zero, marking the return of positive momentum.  The MFI has crossed 50% and is rising.  This indicates positive buying momentum.  OBV rises ever so slightly, indicating accumulation.  The trading volume has to expand to make any upward movement in price sustainable.

In the near term, any upward movement in price should meet with initial resistance at 17c, followed by 17.5c.

Genting SP: An oasis or a mirage?

Genting SP experienced a white candle day on lower volume.  The MACD is still declining and being below zero, the positive momentum is well and truly over.  MFI has dipped into oversold territory although the stochastics look like it might rise somewhat in the oversold region.  With the momentum oscillators in oversold territory, the counter might attempt a rebound but any rebound should meet with resistance at 98.5c, which is where we find the 200dMA in the daily chart. 

Over the week, we should find resistance at 93.5c, this is where we find the 50wMA on the weekly chart. 

So, on a daily basis, there is a probability that it might hit 98.5c but over the week, 93.5c would probably assert itself as a stronger resistance.  Therefore, expectation is that any upmove to 98.5c, if it happens, would be short lived and would see much selling both by stale bulls and short sellers. 

An upmove this week is most probably not a chance to load up as the downtrend is clear unless the upmove is accompanied by higher volumes which might indicate a budding reversal which remains unlikely.

High yields: Successes, failures and the in betweens.

In this post, I shall share some personal experience with high yielding trusts and provide some numbers in the process for the purpose of illustration.

High yielding trusts which have done very well for me are those which meet the selection criteria I have talked about so many times before for REITs.  Investing in such trusts is mainly about generating a steady passive income (cash flow) and to do this well, we have to look for low gearing, high yield and attractive discount to NAVs. These factors will ensure that the trusts' distributions are meaningful and sustainable.  Here are some which have done well for me:

First REIT:  I first bought some in 2007.  It had low gearing, high yield but did not have a great discount to NAV.  My initial purchase price was in the mid 70c.  The dpu was about 6c per annum.  As prices slumped during this last crisis, I bough more at 42c.  The dpu has risen to almost 8c per annum in the meantime.  First REIT didn't have to issue any rights or do any share placements as its gearing was relatively low and still is.  The unit price of the REIT now is 82c thereabouts.

LMIR:  I first bought some in 2007, not during the IPO at 80c, but after the price dropped to 70c days after.  It had low gearing, an attractive yield and trading at a discount to NAV.  During the last crisis, I bought more and the lowest price I bought more at was 18c.  The dpu is now almost 5c per annum.  It didn't have to issue any rights or do any share placements as its gearing was very low and still is.  The current unit price is about 48c or so.

Suntec REIT:  I always wanted some Suntec REIT units but looked on in amazement as the price hit $2.00 at one stage.  I bought some at $1.03 during the downtrend.  It went on in the coming months to make a new low at 50c or so, if I remember correctly.  As the price recovered, I bought more at an average price of $1.00 or so.  NAV per unit was almost $2.00. So, the discount to NAV was very attractive. The dpu is about 10c and provides a handsome 10% yield for me.  Gearing level is not very low though. 

Hyflux Water Trust:  A business trust, not a REIT.  This is an investment which many of my friends remember because I was talking about it a lot early last year.  They listened politely mostly.  I was always interested in this trust as it has regular cash flow through its exposure to the water sector in China.  In January 2009, I looked at it again in greater detail as the price was so low.  I found the yield to be almost 20% then.  Gearing was non-existent and it was trading at a very nice discount to NAV.  The unit price was 30c or so at that time.  I went on a buying spree.

I did not keep all of these investments bought at low prices. I sold most of them for very nice capital gains, cycling the funds into laggard counters like Healthway Medical to make more money.  I kept, on average, 10% of my original positions in each of these investments to collect passive income in perpetuity.  It would have been nice if I had been able to keep my investments in these trusts in full and yet have more money to invest in laggard counters but, unfortunately, my resources are limited.

As you could probably tell, I was not always rigorous in making sure that all three criteria I talked about were met in choosing a trust.  In part, such trusts did not present themselves all the time and I had to make do with the best choices available.  This last crisis, however, was an opportunity of a lifetime.

It was also because I was not rigorous that in my early years with trusts, I made many mistakes in my choices. What we must always remember is not to focus solely on yields.  Also, do not invest in anything without doing our own FA. Here were some of my mistakes:

MPSF: It just got suspended today. This must have been my worst mistake. I listened to a very young "analyst" who said it gave upwards of 10% in yield and that the yield was sustainable. I invested a five figure sum without doing any analysis of my own. I later found out that MPSF invests in other REITs in Australia and as some of these REITs are private in nature, they could gear up to 80%! MSPF froze all distributions with the credit crisis but what is worse is the complicated situation it is in with so many cans of worms. There is no passive income for unitholders and, as far as I can see, there is no clarity as to its future. Must remember not to be swayed by sweet talking analysts. Always do our own homework.

FSL Trust: A friend introduced me to shipping trusts saying that I should diversify my passive income stream. He also introduced me to Rickmers and PST but I only have a position in FSL Trust. I still get passive income from the cash flow generated by its business and I receive  >8% yield per year based on my average price. High gearing in excess of 100% and the fact that its assets depreciate whether or not the economy does well make this a mistake for me.

CitySpring: This is a business trust. I was emboldened by the fact that this has the backing of Temasek Holdings. It had very high gearing but the management (headed by Sunny Verghese) said that they did not have to issue rights and people who thought they had to didn't understand their business. A few months later, they issued rights. The yield plunged and unitholders became poorer as they subscribed to the rights. It yields an average of 6.5% per annum for me.

There are a few others but the essence of the negative experience is more or less the same. For examples, with FCOT (previously Allco REIT) and MI-REIT (now AMPS AMP Capital Industrial REIT), I overlooked their high gearing levels at the time of purchase.  This is also a reason why I tell people to be cautious with Cambridge Industrial Trust (CIT) which I am vested in as well as its gearing is still in excess of 40%.

As creating a significant stream of passive income is still a very important objective for me, trusts with high yields must still play a part in the grand scheme of things. Rather than remember the pain and avoid these trusts altogether, I choose to remember the pain and find a way to achieve mastery over them. I hope that by freely sharing what I have realised to be the right way to approach REITs (and other forms of trusts) here in my blog, other investors who might not be in the know would not have to suffer like I did.

Conspiracy of the Rich.

On my way home after Chap Gor Mei dinner (home cooked food by my mom and sis is the best!), I made a detour and visited Borders as a friend told me they are having a 20% storewide discount.  The first book I picked up was a book by Robert Kiyosaki, titled "Conspiracy of the Rich".  The title was intriguing and captured my attention.

As I flipped through the book, I was actually thinking of buying it until I reached a section which made me put it back on the shelf.

Robert says that most people are lacking in financial education or do not have the right financial education.  Having the right financial education gives people an unfair advantage.  That, I agree.

Robert went on to say that there are many ways to build passive income, which is true.  He went on to say that running businesses (and by that he meant big businesses with hundreds of employees) to generate passive income requires the greatest financial intelligence.  This is followed by investments in real estate but as most people do not have a high level of financial intelligence, they opt to invest in real estate mutual funds known as REITs.  This is followed by paper investments such as stocks, mutual funds and the likes as paper investments require the least amount of financial intelligence.

Now, I will not discuss his choice of words (stylistics) here although that particular section was somewhat disturbing as I sensed snobbery in the writing.  Maybe, I am too sensitive.  So, I shall just discuss his contention that since most people do not have a high level of financial intelligence, they opt to invest in real estate mutual funds known as REITs instead of actual real estate.

Personally, I think investing in real estate is a good way to build our wealth if we know how to.  I have been very open about it in my blog and I have shared my experience.  Definitely, collecting rent is another way to build passive income.  However, I also enjoy investing in REITs.  Not all REITs, mind you, but REITs which meet certain criteria: low gearing, high yields and trading at an attractive discount to NAV.

Now, let's go through these three criteria one by one:

LOW GEARING
When we invest in a piece of real estate, we put down 20% of our own money and borrow the rest.  The idea is to make sure that we borrow at a low rate of interest and let the rental income cover the monthly repayment of the loan and still have money leftover.  We are talking about a gearing level of 0.8x here in such a case.

REITs would probably have borrowings but for listed REITs and in the current environment, it is hard to find a REIT with a gearing level higher than 0.4x (well, CIT is an exception).

Robert talks about good debts and bad debts.  This is something many of us are familiar with but most would agree that less debt is rarely a bad thing.  Many, in fact, work towards reducing debt in their lives.

HIGH YIELDS
If we decide to buy a condominium, for example, what kind of yield could we expect?  Let's say it is a $1m studio apartment somewhere near town, the yield is probably something close to 3.5% per annum.  Not fantastic and even in a low interest rate environment, the returns would not be attractive.

Now, if we look at some of the REITs available in the stock market here in Singapore, there are some REITs with yields of 10% or so.  Attractive?  You bet.

DISCOUNT TO NAV
When we buy a piece of real estate, we are usually buying it at valuation or above valuation (just look at the COVs being asked for HDB flats!) and during bad times, we might just get a bargain at below valuation.

With REITs, we have an opportunity to own real estate at a discount to their NAVs in most cases.  We do have a few REITs which are trading at or above their NAVs (and I don't invest in those).  I like to ask my friends, if a nice condominium in a good location is valued at $2.9m and is now being sold to you for $1.6m, would you buy it?  The answer is always a unanimous "YES!".  It's a no brainer.

Perhaps, the book is meant for an American audience but I do not know how Robert arrived at the conclusion that people with lower financial intelligence invest in REITs instead of actual real estate.  For me, it's just a simple case of value for money.  I invest in the REITs that I do today simply because they provide extraordinary value for money.