Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View laterre's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • The End Of Western Asset Mortgage's 20% Dividend Yield [View article]
    @JHH Alpha

    Actually, in the interest of being 100% accurate, the loans they've acquired are higher in quality than agency mortgages, they're just non-conforming (i.e. loan balances too high to qualify for agency purchase). It's not a bad market, actually, as the borrowers are tightly underwritten and have large downpayments and lots of skin in the game. These are typically the kinds of juicy home loans that banks like to hold on their own books. They're also usually 5/1 or 7/1 ARMS which helps to cut down on the IR risk.

    Don't disagree with your point about overall riskiness, though. WMC's a great company, but anyone playing with mbs at 6 or 7 times leverage is by definition taking some kinds of risk.
    Mar 2, 2015. 02:58 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The End Of Western Asset Mortgage's 20% Dividend Yield [View article]
    Your characterization of their move into whole loans is misleading. What they're buying--at least as they've described it--are *not* subprime but Alt-A loans. This isn't semantics, as there's a huge distinction in terms of credit quality.

    Subprime are typically deadbeats with 600 credit scores buying 100K bungalows with 5% down. By way of contrast, the kinds of whole loans they're targeting are rich, self-employed people with 750 credit scores who are putting down 30% cash toward a $2.3 Million place in Palo Alto or Miami Beach. Credit risk, yes, but apples and oranges in terms of the loans, and it's technically wrong to refer to these as subprime.

    Presumably once they've assembled enough of these whole loans the plan is to securitize them into MBS, keep the unrated backends for themselves, and profit from the cheap, guaranteed term financing of the securitization.
    Mar 2, 2015. 02:48 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Western Asset Mortgage: Best-In-Breed Status? [View article]
    I like these guys a lot, and think they're doing an awesome job. But running above a 7:1 leverage on a hybrid portfolio (as they did at some point in the Q before taking something off at the end) is aggressive. They're still preponderantly an agency portfolio, so it's not apples to apples, but compare that leverage to other "hybrids" such as TWO, MFA, or CIM and you can see how they're throwing off so much spread income compared to peers. They'll probably be fine, but given how much prices on the new GSE risk-sharing securities have bounced around, and that they're moving into illiquid stuff like whole loans and European CMBS, I kinda wish they'd dial it back a little bit....
    Mar 1, 2015. 12:11 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Western Asset Mortgage: Are You Ready For The 20% Dividend Yield? [View article]
    Happy to have been wrong on the earnings, but looks (at a very quick glance) like they were over-hedged. NIM and spread income look great. Most importantly, market likes what it sees :)

    Trimmed my position 20% today (trading shares, bought in the high 13s) on the big bounce.
    Feb 27, 2015. 03:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Buying LQD Is A Waste Of Time [View article]
    Agree with the author's main thesis about LQD, and generally support the notion of buying individual bonds as opposed to an ETF or OEF wrapper. If you're concerned about duration/ IR risk, and are content to "lock-in" a given yield by holding to maturity, this is unquestionably the way to go.

    But Unknown Investor nails the bigger problem spot-on. Even for widely traded and *relatively* liquid issues, unless you're trading in blocks of 100K and with a loyal broker dealer who values your repeat business, you're going to get murdered in terms of bid-ask spreads and forget about liquidity when you need it most. If you *truly* intend to hold a bond to maturity, this isn't a huge deal. You get gigged a quarter or half point or so going in, and by the time you amortize this across the life of the bond, it's no biggie. But woe to you if you need to unload an odd lot of something in the meantime, even if it's IG and generally liquid. One round trip in and out of a single bond can eat up as much as the annual fees for a whole portfolio invested in LQD. Word to the wise: that liquidity will not be there when you need out. The better brokers will allow you to show a solid offer out to the market directly, but many/ most will make you solicit bids even if there's an outstanding bid in the market. I've seen normally benign bid-ask spreads explode so wide you could drive a truck between them on a moment's notice. And this is all for plain vanilla IG corporates. For munis or anything high yield, forget about it. You will be crucified if you need to sell an odd lot.

    Also, part of the reason why it might be advantageous to own multiple issues from a single credit is diversification of maturity (not just issuer).

    Another advantage of actively managed OEFs is that they're going to get a look at a wider range of credits than retail investors will ever see. And once you get down beneath the IG credits, what you as a retail investor "see" on offer or in dealer inventory is generally what the smart money no longer wants. It's adverse selection bias. Whenever you see a big bundle of some new B-ish credit suddenly appear in the market, you can be sure that someone else knows something you don't know, and that they're trying to get out before the deluge.
    Feb 25, 2015. 03:06 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Annaly Capital Management's (NLY) CEO Wellington Denahan on Q4 2014 Results - Earnings Call Transcript [View article]
    "[I]n a perfect world we would love it if we could time these things perfectly where we put all of our swap book on when rates are low and then buy all of our assets when rates are high. Unfortunately that is not how it goes."

    LOL, understatement of the day by Welli! Betcha they wish they could have a do-over on Fall 2012 through end of 2013, rather than having gotten it exactly backward. Any least they weren't alone.
    Feb 25, 2015. 01:16 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Seeking Baupost: 'Feel-Good' Bubble Disturbs Hedge Fund Yeti - Part II [View article]
    "Klarman and Buffett talk about value investing in basically the same way..."

    This is an interesting suggestion, and I'm far from an expert on either one of them (so happy to stand corrected or initiate a discussion here).

    But I've never had this impression. Both purport to "buy things cheap" and take advantage of behavioral disconnects e.g. "fearful when others are greedy, and vice-versa" etc. But Klarman (at least based on my recollection of MOS) seems to be more like the original Buffet, that is, buying things that are deeply out of favor (and sometimes for good reason) but for which there is little or no downside in something approaching the absolute worst case, or, alternatively, where the upside is so great that it massively outweighs the downside (asymmetric risk-rewards where "heads I win a little, or at least don't lose everything, tails I win a whole lot"). I'd imagine that LNG, OCN, and a lot of those mysterious biotech names would fit into that basket.

    By contrast, at least by my reckoning, the later Buffet is more concerned about great franchises, moats, and paying a reasonable price for reliable growth. He's not out there picking up cigar butts or applying the Kelly Rule to place surgical bets on unusual situations and off-the-run instruments where the facts are hard or not widely understood.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I see their styles as very different, though both broadly focused on finding "value" and avoiding large drawdowns.
    Feb 25, 2015. 10:32 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Seeking Baupost: 'Feel-Good' Bubble Disturbs Hedge Fund Yeti - Part II [View article]
    Lots of asymmetric risk-rewards, which may be the best you can do in a market where virtually nothing is strictly speaking "cheap." Agree that LNG is a bit speculative in that it's heavily forward-looking, but assuming that things line up the way they're projecting in the next 2-3 years, it has monster potential; it's also a derivative of natural gas that's been historically depressed, and takes advantage of the behavioral distortion that most investors are time sensitive and price insensitive. So I don't see LNG as so far outside his sweet spot.
    Feb 24, 2015. 07:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Walter Energy's Q4 Results: Pure Disappointment [View article]
    I'll take a look at the terms if I have time, but I'd argue that any buyback of the unsecureds is now a fraudulent conveyance. They won't make it another year, and the only "value" the unsecureds have is the future value of the expected coupons (maybe one or two more coupons at most?). Paying any more than the price of 1 coupon is a a waste of cash, and secured lenders should rightly object.
    Feb 19, 2015. 08:23 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Walter Energy's Q4 Results: Pure Disappointment [View article]
    They missed the window for some kind of soft restructuring back when it was a reasonable strategy for survival. Time for a debt to equity swap has long since passed--who'd agree to take their common stock now as anything other than a sweetener alongside cash?

    And as for an outright purchase for $, I think the legal issue at this stage of the game is probably a matter of fraudulent conveyance. If I'm a secured creditor, first thing I argue in BK is that this cash out the door to the unsecureds needs to be rolled back. I'm also assuming that the senior secured lenders would have some say-so in nixing $120M (or 25% of their remaining liquidity) waltzing out the front door. They must surely be operating on covenant waivers by now?

    Ugly situation all round in coal-land, but WLT prob won't be the last.
    Feb 18, 2015. 06:52 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Keeping Up With The Contrarians [View article]
    "Betting on Ocwen now is extremely risky, not to mention immoral."

    Classic! And yet you did it anyway, LOL!!! Tsk-tsk-tsk, for shame ;)

    When somebody finds an opportunity to invest in puppies (humanely bred, of course!), orphan children, and smiley unicorns that offers 3-4 times upside and a margin of safety in a runoff, give me a call. I won't be holding my breath waiting...

    Long OCN (and much worse)
    Feb 18, 2015. 06:29 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Strong bounce for nonbank servicers continues [View news story]
    I think they continue creeping upward into the very low teens, then the stock plateaus for a while until there's a material development. Once the shorts clear out of the name, there's a ceiling unless/until they can get off the regulatory s-list and start acquiring new MSRs. It's going to take some time to clean up the regulatory and legal issues and get them back into a growth mode.

    Also long OCN.
    Feb 18, 2015. 10:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pacific Coast Oil Trust: 6.5% Yield With Income Upside [View article]
    Actually, not really. For some general ideas, feel free to scan through my comments ca. Dec 2014 on stress-testing the energy space, especially the independent oil service names, but I'm not going to post a bunch of illiquid CUSIPS it took me months of labor to spread and stress. As an asset class, you might also start by considering the better-hedged and less indebted MLPs, who've been taken to the woodshed and are highly leveraged to a recovery in oil prices.
    Feb 17, 2015. 11:39 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pacific Coast Oil Trust: 6.5% Yield With Income Upside [View article]
    Once again, I'm not disputing that Casey is a good writer or that he's a valuable contributor to SA. Mad props to the man for all he does.

    But where I consistently disagree (and have done so from $15 or so on downward, for the record) is the notion that ROYT is a good investment. If it were a great property with a bright future, they would have kept it for themselves, no?

    The more general point of my post above (and something that I personally struggle with as an investor) is that you have to be constantly aware of the opportunity cost of capital allocations and be open to switching horses, even when it means cutting ties with a loser. When things are toppy, it makes sense to gravitate to low beta names, and, conversely, when things have tanked at the bottom of the cycle (assuming we are indeed at the bottom), that's the time to move into higher beta names. Odds are that Casey is right: ROYT is close to a bottom, and does indeed have a margin of safety in the $5 range. But if you buy Casey's background thesis that we've hit a bottom, there are so many other opportunities out there with margins of safety whose upsides are multiples of ROYT. Other than sunk costs, why stay in this name?

    Do as you like--I'm not selling anything--but there's a broader lesson in behavioral investing to be gleaned here for those who are willing to look.
    Feb 17, 2015. 08:29 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pacific Coast Oil Trust: 6.5% Yield With Income Upside [View article]
    I'll defer to you as to the legal niceties and issues of bankruptcy remoteness, whether PCEC remains a guarantor subsidiary of any of BBEP's outstanding debt after the spin-off, etc., but you're aware that PCEC is a related entity to BBEP, right? Washburn and Breitenbach are CEO and Chairman, respectively.

    "Pacific Coast Energy Company LP offers oil and gas exploration, development, and production services. The company was formerly known as BreitBurn Energy Company L.P. and changed its name to Pacific Coast Energy Company LP in December 2011."

    The original spin of the trust was a top-of-the market garbage dump from Breitburn.
    Feb 17, 2015. 08:10 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment