Rate Jitters Resurface

It’s been a good year so far for MLPs, the sector handily beating the stock market at its mid-year peak and then bouncing right back from its early August correction. In fact, as of Sept. 11 the Alerian MLP index had returned 18% year-to-date including distributions and was less than 1% from a record high set two weeks earlier.

And then came Friday’s 2% kick in the shins, presumably on the combination of higher interest rates and lower crude prices.

Brent crude was down to $97 a barrel, a two-year low, on worries about slippage in global demand as Chinese and European purchases have slowed. Meanwhile, the 10-year Treasury is now yielding 2.61%, up from 2.35% at the end of August.

Is that quarter-point of a rise in the benchmark yield germane to MLPs’. Despite the latter’s record-low distribution yields, probably not. The German 10-year Bund is at 1.08%. Japan’s 10-year government bond yields 0.57%. And while MLPs are not even remotely competing for the same pool of investment money, the collapse in developed economy rates overseas probably does limit how much Treasury yields might rise from here.

In any case, yield accounts for well less than half of historic MLP returns. So long as domestic shale drilling continues to increase, midstream infrastructure should remain primarily a growth story.

Is it a story jeopardized by $90 crude? The fact that this is now seen as cheap mostly shows just how comfortable the world has become with the doubling of the oil prices over the last decade. For the moment, shale drilling in North America is providing all of growth in global supply, and $80 crude would likely bring that growth to a halt within a year or two.

Saudi Arabia, the only foreign producer with much slack, has already begun cutting production and needs crude close to current levels or higher in order to maintain the spending that keeps the lid on its subjects’ discontent.

Meanwhile, the International Energy Agency’s global demand forecast still sees next year’s consumption more than 2 million barrels above that in 2013. That means that this year and next the world will still have to add the annual output of two Bakkens to meet the growth in demand.

Because we’re discussing financial markets, it must be said that almost anything is possible, for crude as well as rates. But odds are this one bad Friday will not mark the end of MLPs’ impressive winning record over the long haul.

Our portfolios continue to outperform the MLP space, keyed by the strong gains of such 2014 picks as UGI (NYSE: UGI; 27% since February), SemGroup (NYSE: SEMG; 24% since June) and Boardwalk Pipeline Partners (NYSE: BWP;  35% since April). Two of these are sponsors of MLPs rather than partnerships and a third was picked up in the wake of its huge drop earlier this year. Several other of our relatively recent general partner  recommendations, notably Energy Transfer Equity (NYSE: ETE), Alliance Holdings GP (NYSE: AHGP) and Targa Resources (NYSE: TRGP) are also thriving.

This month we’re adding another corporate MLP sponsor to our portfolio in Canadian midstream giant TransCanada (NYSE: TRP). Its 3.2% dividend yield is now competitive with what MLPs offer, yet TransCanada spends only a third of its cash flow on dividends, leaving the rest available to finance its large slate of lucrative growth projects. Please see New Buys for details.

Rapid growth is also the order of the day in the Eagle Ford, where midstream operators are trying to keep up with booming shale production. This month’s In Focus reviews the growth plans of several of the major players in this play, which are well represented in our portfolios.

Portfolio Update provides some context for the recent weakness in Kinder Morgan (NYSE: KMI) and the summer strength of MarkWest Energy Partners (NYSE: MWE).   The bigger picture here is that things are going about as well as could be hoped, notwithstanding one late-summer Friday.

Stock Talk

Thomas Mclaughlin

Thomas Mclaughlin

Igor,

During your September web chat, at 4:03 P M you made a comment about the safety ratings in the “how they rate” section of your monthly publication. This comment is quite disturbing to me as I am a conservative investor who is retired and investing for income. The safety rating is very important to me in developing my buy list. Would you please elaborate further on your comment ? Thank you

Igor Greenwald

Igor Greenwald

Thank you for giving me another opportunity to clarify where we stand on the safety ratings. We’re phasing them out over the next month in favor of more detailed information that you should find more useful in assessing the safety of your MLP investments. Notably, in the next issue of MLP Profits we will provide updated distribution coverage and debt leverage information on all of the securities we recommend in one of our three actionable portfolios: Conservative, Growth and Aggressive. Associating each of our recommendations with one of these portfolios already implies a judgement on their degree of safety, ranging from the safest in the Conservative portfolio to the riskiest in the Aggressive basket. And I feel the additional coverage and leverage data will be more useful than a safety rating derived from a formula. As I pointed out in April, (here: http://www.investingdaily.com/mlp-profits/articles/20002/no-safety-in-a-number/ ) the current safety rating system would not have flagged the two biggest MLP disasters we sidestepped last year, nor would it have helped us compile our superior performance record last year or in 2014. We will be deleting Safety Ratings from the How They Rate table next week as part of the process. Our team has chosen to concentrate our research on the securities we recommend or are considering recommending rather tahn trying to opine on every one of what are now more than 100 MLPs based on cursory math. I hope and believe subscribers will find the new methodology more useful and transparent.

peppi

peppi

GETTING MORE CONCERNED ABOUT NMM. I HAVE A SIZEABLE POSITION. PERSONL FINANCE TOUTING NMM. OTHERS WARNING OF MLP DISASTER. PLEASE GIVE ME YOUR BEST SHOT OF WHAT TO DO. THANKS IN ADVANCE.

Igor Greenwald

Igor Greenwald

Not sure who these other panic mongers are or why you’re growing more concerned now with the unit price somewhere in the middle of its yearlong range. We have NMM a Buy below $17.70, which would equate to a 10% yield based on the current distribution rate and makes it effectively a Hold for now since it’s trading above that price. You can always find a current buy limit for our recommendations in the appropriate portfolio table, in this case within the Aggressive Portfolio: http://www.investingdaily.com/mlp-profits/portfolio/dynamic/aggressive/

Add New Comments

You must be logged in to post to Stock Talk OR create an account