FT : Hargreaves Lansdown co-founder blames share slump

Hargreaves Lansdown co-founder blames share slump on former management ‘shambles’

As private equity circles, biggest shareholder says ‘non-productive parts of the business mushroomed’

The billionaire co-founder of Hargreaves Lansdown, the investing platform facing a takeover offer from private equity, has blamed former management for presiding over “a shambles” that halved the share price.

Peter Hargreaves, who is also the largest shareholder in the retail investing business, told the Financial Times that the company’s shares had come under pressure as profits have taken a hit.

“When I ran [Hargreaves Lansdown], it always improved its profit by more than 10 per cent,” he said. “If the profits are going up, the rate at which they’re increasing has a huge effect on the share price. A change from double-digit growth in profit to a reduction in profit is huge.”

the tenure of Chris Hill, chief executive from 2017 to last August, the shares rose to a high of £24 in 2019, before tumbling to £8. Profit before tax fell by 8 per cent to £182.5mn in the six months to the end of December compared with a year earlier.

The co-founder’s comments come shortly after Hargreaves Lansdown’s board rejected a bid from a group of private equity firms led by CVC Capital Partners — an offer that valued the company at £4.67bn. The approach, which emerged last week, boosted shares in the Bristol-based business above £10.

Hargreaves also blamed escalating costs for the company’s share price weakness in recent years. “The non-productive parts of the business mushroomed: marketing, HR,” he said. “[Management] didn’t know what they were doing, they hadn’t got a grasp on what was needed on the technology side. They had a lot of consultants who didn’t know what they were doing, either.”

Staff costs increased almost 200 per cent between 2013 and 2023, while revenues were up only up 93 per cent in the same period, according to FT calculations. Hargreaves Lansdown was ejected from the FTSE 100 at the end of last year for the first time since 2011. The company said in early 2022 it would spend £175mn over five years to upgrade technology and improve its efficiency.

Dan Olley, who took over as chief executive last year, has already reviewed technology spending and ditched some of the projects that were aimed at supporting its ability to give advice digitally. The share price has risen since the company’s quarterly results a month ago.

“Hargreaves Lansdown was never about advice; it was about giving great information,” said Hargreaves. “They lost sight of what they were supposed to be doing.”

FT : Boom in US penny stock trading prompts warnings of frothy markets

Boom in US penny stock trading prompts warnings of frothy markets
Volumes for some sub-$1 shares are above those of Tesla and Apple as retail investors target cheap but volatile names

A scrap metal merchant and an electric vehicle maker that has sold just four cars top the list of so-called “penny” stocks that are out-trading the likes of Tesla and Apple, prompting some analysts to warn that markets are becoming overheated.

Seven of the top 10 most traded US equities in May, as measured by the number of shares bought and sold, are penny stocks worth less than $1, according to Cboe Global Markets. None of the companies are profitable.

The huge volumes in so many little-known stocks suggest a renewed appetite among retail investors for cheap names in which they believe they can quickly make a lot of money.

“When markets get frothy, the speculative froth often hits penny stocks as well — this is a classic sign of market peaks,” said James Angel, a finance professor at Georgetown University.

“Penny stocks tend to be extremely volatile, so you can make or lose a ton of money very quickly,” he added. “That appeals to the speculative urge.”


The frenetic trading comes after a strong rally in US blue-chips over the past seven months, with tech stocks reaching a new record high this week, although on Friday the benchmark S&P 500 index recovered from early lows, but still suffered its first weekly decline in more than a month.

Scrap metal merchant Greenwave Technology Solutions, whose website proclaims “scrap is the new precious metal”, topped the leaderboard for May. It has 588mn shares outstanding, and a daily average of 510mn shares were traded during the month, according to Cboe Global Markets data.

Over that time, its market capitalisation swung between $4mn and $159mn and the value of its shares from 4 cents to 16 cents. The company did not respond to a request for comment.

The only large-cap company to make the top 10 most-traded was Tesla, a regular favourite among active traders. 

While, in value terms, trading in penny stocks is a tiny fraction of the turnover of mega-caps, investors’ increased interest has coincided with a resurgence in so-called “meme” stocks such as retailer GameStop and cinema chain AMC, which benefited from frenzied retail investor interest in 2021. 

AMC was the sixth most-traded US stock in May with volumes more than 7 times their recent average.

“Penny stocks are not the same as the meme stock phenomenon, but let’s say they rhyme. It’s people willing to put fundamentals aside and chase returns,” said Steve Sosnick, chief market strategist at retail broker Interactive Brokers. 

Sosnick’s own weekly scan of the most-traded stocks on Interactive Brokers’ platform has recently thrown up several lesser-known microcap companies.

“It’s emblematic of what I consider to have become a very frothy market,” he added.

Stocks that trade under $1 for a certain period are at risk of being delisted by exchanges and, for that reason, institutional investors tend not to touch them.

The rise in volumes has reawakened concerns about the impact of their financing methods on shareholders as well as the rules that allow them to remain listed. 

Several of the most traded stocks by volume in May have sold new shares recently. The deals, typically in the form of bonds that convert into stock at a discount to the market price, dilute existing shareholders and swell trading volumes when the new shares are resold, which often happens quickly.

Electric vehicle maker Faraday Future Intelligent Electric was the second-most-traded stock in May. Its 2023 accounts, filed this week after a delay due to staffing issues, showed sales of four cars and leases for a further six since a long-delayed launch last year. They also contained a warning that “it will likely file for bankruptcy protection if it is unable to access additional capital”.

Several posts on social media platform Reddit focused on the wild swings revealed in Faraday’s share count. This has soared from 57mn in November to 1.4bn by February, when it did a so-called “reverse split”, swapping three existing shares for one new one. Its latest filing shows 440mn shares outstanding.

Reverse splits have become a common tool for sub-dollar companies as a way of boosting share prices and warding off the threat of delisting. There are 471 companies currently with shares trading under $1 in the US, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence data, up from 125 a year ago.

More than 70 reverse splits have been announced so far this year, according to data provider Wall Street Horizon. The number of such share swaps roughly doubled in 2023 to 219 compared with the previous year despite a major rally in stock markets after a tough 2022.

Greenwave announced a 1-for-150 reverse split this week, effective from Monday. Faraday Future, which is still behind with its financial filings and whose shares have halved since it published its 2023 accounts, has appealed against a delisting decision by Nasdaq.

“The company expects its securities to continue to trade on Nasdaq in the normal course during the pendency of the hearing process,” it told the Financial Times.

BArrons : Utilities Are Hot. How to Jump In Without Getting Burned.

Utilities Are Hot. How to Jump In Without Getting Burned.

This is a story about something that isn’t supposed to happen in the stock market.

The utility sector, renowned for its stodgy performance, high dividend yields, and intense regulation, is outperforming the S&P 500, which houses the world’s most admired companies. Nvidia, Meta Platforms, Amazon.com, Apple, and other top technology companies dominate the benchmark index.

The Utilities Select Sector SPDR exchange-traded fund (ticker: XLU) is up almost 14% this year, compared with about 11% for the S&P 500. Some XLU components are operating at an even more feverish pace. NextEra Energy, which is based in Florida, is up almost 28% this year.

The relationship between the two proxies over the past year is more typical, though: The utility ETF is up 13%, compared with a 31% gain for the stock index.

But the future, not the past, is how we invest. The price divergence in the utility sector should prompt investors to reconsider their traditional view of utility stocks.

Some investors were early to recognize the role that utility stocks play in the nascent artificial-intelligence phenomenon. Others would do well to consider an options strategy that monetizes some of the fear and greed of the latecomers.

Computers that operate AI semiconductor chips use a lot of electrical power, creating intense demand for data centers. Conversations with data-center executives suggest that only a few states currently have enough utility system capacity to address AI-power demands. That makes picking specific utilities a challenge.

For that reason—and because the Utility 2.0 phenomenon is so fresh and so hot—investors interested in the theme might well be better served renting utility exposure via options than buying hot stocks that could revert to their usual behavior.

The traditional stock rental strategy is buying bullish call options. Should the stock price increase, the call follows. The allure is that calls cost a lot less than stocks.

When investors are willing to own the underlying stock—and utilities are worthy income stocks—there’s another approach: selling put options and buying calls. This so-called risk reversal—selling a put and buying a call with a higher strike price but similar expiration—monetizes the fear of a pullback and uses that to defray or entirely pay for the hope of an advance.

With the Utilities ETF at $71.44, sell the January $67 put and buy the January $74 call for about $1. The Jan. 25 expiration positions investors to buy XLU at $67 and to participate in gains above $75 (strike price plus the cost of position).

If the trade works, the call is worth $6 should the ETF trade to a new high of $80 by January’s expiration. During the past 52 weeks, it has ranged from $54.77 to $72.91.

If the ETF is below the put strike at expiration, investors must buy the shares or adjust the put to avoid assignment.

The XLU trade expresses a belief that utility management teams will use coming earnings reports to highlight and hype how their companies are linchpins in the AI revolution.

Since prices and liquidity aren’t great for XLU’s distant expirations, investors should use limit orders to pick their buy and sell prices to avoid being steamrolled by dealers who will otherwise execute orders at the obscenely wide bid and ask spread.

Investors need time to fine-tune their utility sector view. By January, the studs and duds will likely have been identified. The trade outlined above is a good wager until that time.

BArrons : Switzerland’s Central Bank Sold Apple Stock, and More. It Bought Virgi

Switzerland’s Central Bank Sold Apple Stock, and More. It Bought Virgin Galactic.

The central bank of Switzerland recently made some major adjustments in its portfolio of U.S.-listed equities.

The Swiss National Bank reduced its investment in Apple stock, slashed positions in Lucid Group and Shopify, and bought more shares of Virgin Galactic Holdings in the first quarter. The bank disclosed the trades, among others, in a form it filled with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The bank declined to comment on its investment changes. Swiss National Bank’s assets stood at $869 billion at the end of 2023, down $95 billion from a year earlier “mainly due to foreign currency sales,” according to its latest annual report.

Apple stock slipped 11% in the first quarter, compared with a 10% rise in the S&P 500 index. So far in the second, shares are up 11% while the index is 1.0% higher.

Shares soared after Apple reported a strong March quarter in early May, and expanded its stock-repurchase program by $110 billion. Some investors and consumers were disappointed that Apple ended its program to create a car, and that Xiaomi, a Chinese rival in smartphones and consumer electronics, managed to make one.

Swiss National Bank sold 4.9 million Apple shares in the first quarter to cut its investment to 44 million shares.

The bank sold 1 million Lucid shares to end the first quarter with 1.8 million shares of the maker of electric vehicles.

A disappointing first-quarter loss sent Lucid shares dropping earlier this month. Ford Motor just hired Lucid’s former chief financial officer Sherry House, who will become its new CFO in early 2025. House previously worked at Alphabet’s Waymo self-driving-car unit.

Lucid stock dropped 32% in the first quarter, and is down 2.5% so far in the second.

Shopify stock slipped 1% in the first quarter, and so far in the second it is down 26%.

Shares of the e-commerce platform crumbled earlier this month after Shopify warned of slower sales growth and narrower margins in the current quarter. Chief Financial Officer Jeff Hoffmeister noted that U.S. shoppers are resilient, but the outlook includes a stronger dollar, and softer spending in Europe.

Swiss National Bank sold 270,500 Shopify shares to end the first quarter with 3.6 million.

BArrons : Europe’s Telecoms Are Looking Beyond 5G and Debt. 5 Value Stocks.

Europe’s Telecoms Are Looking Beyond 5G and Debt. 5 Value Stocks.

European telecommunications providers are merging and acquiring like it’s 1999. That won’t return their downtrodden stocks to the glory days. But it may churn up value in particular companies.

Within the past few months, Swisscom agreed to buy Vodafone’s Italian business for eight billion euros ($8.7 billion), French champion Orange merged its Spanish operations with local operator Masmovil at a 19 billion euro valuation, and Telecom Italia sold its fixed-line assets to private-equity giant KKR for 22 billion euros.

The companies are trying to consolidate their way out of ruinous competition. Growth in their core cellular and broadband services has slowed to a crawl, while too many players—from an industry point of view—keep prices down.

“Overcapacity makes connectivity a commodity, and customers don’t care anymore,” Deloitte consultants concluded in a recent report.

Debt from building 5G networks has risen with interest rates. Remaining state stakes in former monopolies constrain cost-cutting, as governments want to maintain employment.

Stocks reflect these concurrent calamities. “Returns on most of these companies have been negative over the past 10 years,” says Javier Correonero, an equity analyst covering the sector at Morningstar.

The holy grail for telecom dealmakers is a “four to three” transaction. Having three rivals in a given national market offers a fair shot at profitability; quartets not so much.

Regulators tend to like competition, however. Even where they have permitted mergers, they take steps to bring in new market entrants. Spanish authorities cleared the Orange-Masmovil tie-up on condition that Masmovil yield spectrum to Digi Communications, an aggressive outsider based in Romania.

Not all European telecoms are equally afflicted, though, Correonero says. A few smaller markets do offer less ruinous three-way competition. These include the Netherlands, where he likes market leader KPN, and Sweden, where he favors Tele2. He’s also bullish on Deutsche Telekom, which retains exceptional brand loyalty in its native Germany, while its T-Mobile US unit gains market share in the U.S.

Fabio Caldato, an equities portfolio manager at AcomeA, sees broader positive trends in European telecoms. Capital expenditures should ease as the 5G build-out nears completion, and an expected fall in rates lightens debt burdens. Enough pricing power is returning to at least keep up with inflation.

“I think telcos will be a sector trade for the next year,” he concludes.

One of Caldato’s top picks is former U.K. monopoly BT Group, which has told investors it can cut capex by 35%, doubling free cash flow. He also flags Telecom Italia as a deep value play once it unloads debt through the KKR divestiture. The shares have lost half their value over the past five years.

Wheeler-dealer in chief on the European telecoms scene is Margherita Della Valle, an Italian who took over as chief executive of U.K.-based Vodafone last year. She is looking to exit both Spain and Italy, while pushing a four-to-three merger in the home market with CK Hutchison Holdings (brand name Three).

London’s Competition and Markets Authority may have other ideas. The combination “could lead to mobile customers facing higher prices and reduced quality,” it sniffed in a preliminary report. Caldato gives Della Valle an “A” for effort nonetheless. “Vodafone is finally focusing on efficiency, not an acquisition binge,” he says.

Investors haven’t quite gotten the memo; Vodafone shares have slumped another 20% since Della Valle took the reins last April.

A lesson for today’s market stars: No one stays hot forever.

FT : Making tracks: is Eurostar’s monopoly under threat?

Making tracks: is Eurostar’s monopoly under threat?
Companies are exploring rival operations to run trains through the Channel Tunnel

Eurostar has enjoyed a monopoly on passenger trains linking the UK to continental Europe since its first service left London Waterloo in 1994.

But today the operator is facing the most serious competitive threat in its 30-year history, with up to five companies looking at rival operations to run trains through the Channel Tunnel.

Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group; Evolyn, a Spanish-led consortium backed by the largest shareholder in Mobico, formerly known as National Express; and Dutch start-up Heuro have all in recent months said they are exploring opening new services. Industry executives say there are at least two other contenders.

“We have got more interest and more live conversations going on than we have ever had,” said Wendy Spinks, commercial director of HS1, the company that operates the high speed line linking London with the Channel Tunnel on the Kent coastline.

Access to some of the most lucrative rail lines in Europe is at stake, with new subsidies and simplified regulations freeing up the path. Eurostar’s cross-channel business made £122mn in net profit after tax from revenues of £1.3bn last year.

But the challengers’ route to success is fraught with the same financial and technical difficulties that have constrained Eurostar’s growth, and prevented any company from challenging it.

Among myriad hurdles, new entrants must buy trains that are compatible with the Channel Tunnel’s safety rules, and negotiate often expensive track access with infrastructure owners in multiple countries. Eurostar runs trains in five countries on four different traction systems and eight signalling systems.

There have been several false dawns in the past, most notably from German rail giant Deutsche Bahn, which abandoned plans to run trains between London and Germany in 2018 amid frustration over the difficulty of obtaining the necessary clearances.

HS1 and Getlink, the operator of the Channel Tunnel, want to encourage more trains on to their tracks, and are currently running at just half their potential capacity. But their access charges are also considered one of the biggest obstacles. HS1, for example, charges operators £119.95 per train per minute to run on its line.

Direct comparisons are difficult because of different charging calculations, but one railway executive said that was around seven times more than on the UK’s intercity lines. Both HS1 and Getlink expect their prices to drop if more trains run on their tracks.

Perhaps an even greater challenge is finding space in congested stations including London St Pancras, at a time when the border between the UK and EU is becoming more complex.

Eurostar ran some of its peak trains a third empty last year to prevent bottlenecks amid queues caused by post-Brexit passport checks. Complex new EU entry requirements including biometric tests loom from the autumn, potentially adding to delays, although Eurostar insists it can cope.

“St Pancras wasn’t designed for a hard border between Britain and Europe, it was designed for Britain in Europe with a light border. This is a major issue,” said Mark Smith, a former rail regulator who runs the international rail travel website The Man in Seat 61.

“You would have to be a glutton for punishment to want to run to and from London, rather than say running between Amsterdam or Paris to Brussels,” he said.


When the UK government was selling the vision of the tunnel to MPs in the 1980s, it conjured a vision of a far more extensive network of cross-Channel rail services than ever materialised, including trains from Manchester and Leeds and sleeper services from Swansea.

In the end, as costs rose and rivalry grew from low-cost air travel, Eurostar launched with just two core routes linking London to Paris and Brussels. It took 15 years to become consistently profitable, and 24 years for direct services between London and Amsterdam to launch.

But industry executives believe several factors have combined to make starting new services more viable.

The EU has liberalised its own cross-border rail services, encouraging competition on to busy lines to drive passenger numbers higher and eat into the low-cost air market amid pressure to cut carbon emissions from transport.

The high speed line linking London to the continent is now one of the very few in Europe without competition.

Increased environmental awareness has also left people willing to tackle longer train journeys, with routes of six hours or more now seen as competitive against flying. Getlink believes there is demand for 4mn rail passenger journeys a year from Germany and Switzerland to London.

The technical barriers to entry, while still formidable, have also lowered recently, according to Yann Leriche, Getlink’s chief executive. His company has earmarked at least €50mn to spend over the next five years on direct subsidies to support any new operator launching a service.

It has also worked to streamline the regulatory process to certify new operators to run trains through the tunnel.

Meanwhile new high speed trains developed by French manufacturer Alstom are designed to comply with the tunnel’s safety rules, meaning any new operator would not have to pay for a new train to be designed from scratch.

Taken together, Leriche believes it would take a new entrant five years to launch a rival to Eurostar instead of the previous 10. “There are still hurdles, but they used to be quite high and now they are very limited,” he said.

HS1, which owns St Pancras, is also preparing to commission studies into how to increase the capacity of the crowded station, where passengers go through airport style security and passport checks. The station runs at close to capacity at peak times, but Spinks said there is scope to increase throughput considerably by redesigning parts of it.

Roemer van den Biggelaar, co-founder of Heuro, estimates it would cost between €100mn and €150mn to set up its planned service, which includes 15 trains a day between London and Amsterdam, excluding the costs of the rolling stock.

He said the start-up, which is preparing a second funding round, has held talks with four train manufacturers, Talgo, Hitachi, Alstom and Siemens over a possible order. Evolyn, meanwhile, in October announced a preliminary agreement with Alstom to explore options for a train compatible with the Channel Tunnel, though it has yet to place a firm order. Virgin Group said it is studying the practicalities of launching its own services, but has yet to give details on any potential train order.

Perhaps the biggest problem for new operators will be Eurostar itself. Gwendoline Cazenave has made expansion her priority since she took over as chief executive in 2022. In May she announced plans to buy 50 more trains and explore new routes from London.

As an established operator, Eurostar could hoover up new capacity on its routes and shut any potential rival out of the market.

“It’s a race. The sooner the better. The market is pushing so hard, that we really need to see which manufacturer is going to be able to be ready as quick as possible,” Cazenave said of the new train order.

But for many, a new operator is important to drive competition and lower fares.

“Competition keeps everyone on their toes, and it is known to keep prices down . . . I think it will happen. But it wont happen quickly. The lead time is long and I think there’ll be lots of hiccups on the way,” Smith said.

Van den Biggelaar hopes that there are similarities between the growth of the cross-border rail market and the successful liberalisation of European aviation in the 1980s and 1990s.

“Forty years later . . . you see these train companies are the new easyJet, Ryanair or [US carrier] Southwest Airlines, going up against the big incumbents. If you look at that comparison I really think it is doable.”