Barrons : Preferred Stocks Offer a Better Way to Bet on Banks

Preferred Stocks Offer a Better Way to Bet on Banks

One normally staid corner of the financial markets—preferred stock—has been rattled by the Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank seizures, and that has created opportunities for investors.

Preferreds are a senior form of equity whose dividends come before those of common stock. Preferred shares issued by banks, however, account for about two-thirds of the $400 billion market and the twin bank failures have highlighted the credit risk in these securities.

In fact, the preferreds issued by SVB Financial Group and Signature Bank, the failed banks’ parents, might have little or no recovery value. Trading in their New York Stock Exchange–listed preferred and common shares has been halted. And an unlisted SVB preferred issue aimed at institutional investors was fetching about 10 cents on the dollar late this past week over the counter.

While this is certainly worrisome, preferreds still offer a lower-risk way to invest in banks than common shares, and some pros say they now look especially appealing. After its 8.5% drop this month, the sector’s largest exchange-traded fund, the $12.4 billion iShares Preferred and Income SecuritiesPFF +0.43% (ticker: PFF), yields 6.5%. What’s more, preferreds issued by most banks now yield over 6%, a nice premium to the 3.7% on a 30-year Treasury bond.

“This is a great time to step into the market,” says Allen Hassan, head of preferred trading at Ziegler.

Preferreds have long been popular with retail investors because of their combination of relative safety, solid yields, and liquidity. Most are issued with a $25 face value and trade on the NYSE. There also are institutional preferreds, with a $1,000 face value, that mainly change hands over the counter.

Dividends on most preferreds are taxed favorably, like those on common stock. Companies are loath to miss preferred payouts because they can’t issue common dividends without first paying preferred holders. However, as equity, preferred has more risk than debt.

Newly issued preferred stock can be problematic; it can’t be redeemed at face value for five years, limiting the immediate upside, while the downside is unlimited. But now, many $25 face-value preferreds are trading under $20, making the risk/reward proposition far more appealing.

“There is uncommon value in the preferred market,” says Phil Jacoby, chief investment officer at Spectrum Asset Management, a preferred specialist. Yields are near their highest levels in more than 10 years, he observes, and spreads to yields on risk-free Treasuries are historically wide.

As for the risks, he takes comfort in federal regulatory support for banks on deposits and a new Federal Reserve program that lets banks borrow against their bond holdings.

Spectrum manages the Nuveen Preferred & Income SecuritiesJPS –3.39% closed-end fund (JPS), now trading around $6. It has an 8% yield, reflecting leverage, and changes hands at a 13% discount to net asset value.

His investment firm also runs the Principal Spectrum Preferred Securities ActivePREF –0.24% ETF (PREF), which focuses on institutional issues and yields 5%.

Individual investors might also want to consider the preferred stock of top banks, such as JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Bank of America (BAC), Wells Fargo (WFC), and Morgan Stanley (MS). These and some others are considered systemically important financial institutions by Uncle Sam, and so carry more capital and are more strictly regulated than regional banks. And, lately, they generally have benefited from deposit inflows shifted from smaller rivals.

Preferreds from the country’s biggest bank, JPMorgan, offer the lowest yields—its 4.2% series M issue yields 5.6%. Bank of America preferreds, like the 4.25% series Q, yields almost 6%, while Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley preferreds yield close to 6.5%.

(Some investors would rather buy big-bank common shares, currently yielding 3% to 5%, because they have more upside potential.)

Regional banks can offer larger payouts, but also more danger. Investors appear unperturbed about preferreds from Fifth Third Bancorp (FITB), Regions Financial (RF), and Cullen/Frost Bankers (CFR), which yield about 6.5%, only slightly more than some of their too-big-to-fail peers. Higher yields also are available on the preferred of New York Community Bancorp (NYCB), which is buying assets of Signature Bank. Its 6.375% preferred has fallen to $19.45 from $25 and yields 8.6%.

Then there’s First Republic Bank (FRC). It has inspired some of the worst jitters, even after a $30 billion deposit infusion from JPMorgan and 10 other large banks. Its common trades at $12.50, down 90% this month, while its preferred fetches about $6, well below its $25 face value.

Although it suspended its common payout, the bank is still paying preferred dividends. There’s risk here—big risk—but investors could benefit if the big banks inject equity into First Republic or if the preferred is converted into common shares on favorable terms.

That bet is suitable only for investors with cast-iron stomachs. Everyone else should stick with the biggest banks.

FT : How millennial faces fell out of fashion

How millennial faces fell out of fashion
Even online influencers are falling foul of changing taste in enhanced features and cosmetic treatments

Online beauty standards have developed a taste for the gothic. Pillowy faces are being replaced by a gaunt, hollowed out aesthetic. Those not blessed with the requisite bone structure have found the solution in a gruesome cosmetic procedure called buccal fat removal.

The question is what to do when sculpted faces become less popular, as they inevitably will. When cherubic cheeks are back in vogue, what then?

For years, a particular type of cosmetically-enhanced, homogenous beauty has reigned supreme for women in the western world. The big lips, contoured nose, high cheekbones and wide, uplifted eyes make up a look that writer Jia Tolentino dubbed Instagram Face — a reference to the social media platform’s ubiquity and editing tools. Like Instagram, it is now falling out of fashion.

Beauty ideals are out of reach by design. Achieve one and the next will escape you. Pencil thin 1990s eyebrows make way for fluffy laminated brows. Athletic silhouettes are replaced by curves. But it all becomes more fraught when cosmetic treatments are added to the mix, promising to help clients inch closer to the ideal — if they have the money, time and pain threshold. Following trends by swapping skinny jeans for straight legs or long hair for choppy cuts is easy enough. Reversing changes made to the shape of your face is not.

This is a problem for the influencers who make money uploading selfies. Reality TV star Kylie Jenner, one of the most famous examples of Instagram face, has made a fortune using her own image to sell her beauty products online. Earlier this month, however, the newsletter Garbage Day featured digital strategist Leila Brillson, who highlighted research in which young internet users said that they did not connect with Jenner because her face was too “millennialized”.

Brillson finds it inevitable that the cosmetic procedures used to obtain a perfect, Instagram-ready face would lose popularity. “The beauty standard for millennial women — that unobtainable, curated look — I think the generation behind us are looking at how that ages and are choosing a different path.”

Social media amplifies the effect of punishing ideals. Along with Instagram face there was the “Zoom boom” in cosmetic interventions for people unhappy with how they looked on video calls. Snapchat dysmorphia describes users who wish they could look like their online selves.

I blame filters. In 2015, social media company Snapchat bought San Francisco company Looksery, using the company’s face tracking tech to map augmented reality images on to the user’s image. Since then, social media photo filters have gone into overdrive. The earliest added dog ears and rainbows. Now they are designed to be hyper-realistic and show users what they would look like with aesthetically enhanced features. You no longer need FaceTune or other digital editing tools. Filters can give you a sharper jaw, better hairline and clearer skin in an instant.

The rise of high street clinics offering non-surgical treatments can make those digital images real. Syringes full of Juvéderm and Botox freeze and fill features, moving contours and erasing wrinkles. Thanks to injectables, you can change the entire shape of your face.

It is hard to overstate how normalised this has become. Magazines that once reviewed face creams now brief you for your first lip filler appointment. Young customers are encouraged to freeze their face now in order to prevent wrinkles later. They are indoctrinated into an expensive, never-ending habit. The American Society of Plastic Surgeons reports that in 2020, some 12,000 cosmetic botox injections were carried out on teenagers.

If they follow the trend, those numbers will rise. An annual audit by the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons shows that cosmetic procedures doubled in 2022 compared with the year before. This is partly pent up demand thanks to Covid. But procedures are up on pre-pandemic levels. The association cites social media. “Knowledge of plastic surgery has traditionally been through word of mouth, but this has now risen exponentially through digital word of mouth via Instagram,” says former president Rajiv Grover, who compiled the audit.

Non-surgical treatments are even more popular. The International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery’s Global Survey recorded some 17.5mn carried out worldwide in 2021, a third more than surgeries.

Even this does not come close to the true number. There are no reputable figures for so-called tweakments made on the high street, sometimes by practitioners with minimal training. In San Francisco, I walk past a tiny shop every day that opens straight into the street and offers on the spot injections to passers-by.

Nothing lasts. If you freeze one set of wrinkles, others appear. Filler can migrate. Lip injections can transfer above the mouth — an unfortunate phenomenon known as filler moustache. Trendsetters will turn up their identikit noses and move on. Just don’t expect them to embrace a natural look. The era of millennial face may be coming to an end but extreme beauty standards are going nowhere.

FT : SEC raised concerns over hedge fund Rokos after losing bond bets

SEC raised concerns over hedge fund Rokos after losing bond bets
US regulator contacted UK authorities after large collateral calls

The US Securities and Exchange Commission has raised concerns over Rokos Capital Management after the hedge fund was forced to hand over large amounts of cash to its banks as collateral when an outsized bet on US government bonds backfired earlier this month.

SEC chair Gary Gensler brought up the hedge fund during calls with UK regulators this week after it faced larger margin calls than peers, according to people familiar with the conversations.

The US regulator does not supervise London-based Rokos but is on high alert for tensions in financial markets after a spate of recent blow-ups in the banking sector. UK regulators agreed to keep an eye on the hedge fund, one of the people said.

The conversation points to regulatory fears that the rapid unwinding of concentrated hedge fund bets could exacerbate strains in the US government bond market, which forms the bedrock for asset prices around the world.

The episode stems back to the failure of Silicon Valley Bank earlier this month and concerns around the broader health of the US regional banking system. After SVB collapsed, investors snapped up Treasuries, as they bet that the US Federal Reserve would slow the pace of interest rate raises to shore up financial stability.

When bond prices climbed, many hedge funds were wrongfooted in the rally, but industry participants say Rokos was one of the biggest short-term losers. The fund, which manages about $15.5bn, was down by 12.5 per cent for the month, the Financial Times reported on March 17, when multiple counterparties requested that it put up more assets to meet margin calls, said two people familiar with the matter.

However, counterparties contacted by the FT said they were not concerned about Rokos’s ability to meet the margin calls.

Unlike many other macro hedge funds, which tend to be more diversified, the vast majority of Rokos’s leverage is in government bond markets.

Billionaire Chris Rokos, who co-founded hedge fund Brevan Howard before striking out on his own, hit the headlines in late 2021 when he was caught out by a huge sell-off in short-term government debt. He subsequently reduced the amount of market risk he was taking and made more than 50 per cent last year, before this month’s losses.

Rokos, the UK Financial Conduct Authority, the Bank of England and the SEC declined to comment.

Barron’s : How FreshDirect Is Benefiting From Lower Inflation

How FreshDirect Is Benefiting From Lower Inflation

The rising cost of food, the impact of Covid-19, and a price war in Belgium weighed on Dutch retailer Koninklijke Ahold Delhaize in 2022, dragging its stock down almost 8%.

But the grocer, which owns Stop & Shop, Hannaford, Food Lion, and online grocery-delivery operator FreshDirect in the U.S., is a strong defensive play because it is well-placed to combat a recession after posting an upbeat outlook. Its shares (ticker: AD. Netherlands) are up 14.4%, to 30.71 euros ($32.91), this year and could rise further.


While inflation is a key worry for European food companies, Ahold is in a better position than most because up to 63% of its sales—and 70% of its operating income—come from the U.S. (The grocer has American depositary shares that trade under the ticker ADRNY.)

The U.S. saw lower inflation than Europe in February. Profit margins at grocers are some of the thinnest in retail, so lower inflation will drive down costs.

“Cost inflation seems to have peaked at last in the U.S., which is the most important region,” Clément Genelot, an analyst at investment bank Bryan Garnier, wrote in a note. “Oil prices are flowing back, and the freight trucking index is falling.”

Analysts at Berenberg estimate that cost-saving could go some way toward offsetting increased expenses caused by inflation and other costs, but Ahold will still have to pass on some price hikes to customers.


The company has a cost-reduction target of €1 billion ($1.08 billion) for 2023, which seems achievable after it trimmed €979 million in 2022—€100 million more than forecast. Berenberg lead analyst Fulvio Cazzol wrote in a February note, “This suggests that management will need to implement average price increases of around 5% in 2023 to maintain comparable operating profit at the 2022 level. “We continue to believe that this will be achievable, owing to the company’s portfolio position (its geographic profile, store format, and competitive price points on everyday products).”

Genelot estimates that the stock could rise 13.52%, to €34, while ING has a €32.50 price target.

Ahold, which dates back to 1867, has a market value of €28.5 billion and employs more than 400,000 workers. It fetches a multiple of 11.5 times this year’s expected earnings and is valued in line with its peers.


The company posted net annual income of €2.5 billion for the year to Jan. 1, 2023, up from €2.2 billion for the same period in 2021. Net sales increased to €87 billion from €76 billion. Ahold has previously announced a €1 billion share-repurchase program for 2023.

CEO Frans Muller said in a statement this month that the company had made “substantial progress” in e-commerce and digitalization. He tells Barron’s that “we have a healthy outlook for 2023, with good momentum, and I am confident we will navigate whatever challenges and opportunities come our way.”

Ahold was a pioneer of ready-made meals in the Netherlands, and the scale and quality of its European private-label business adds value to its stock. A key advantage to having its own well-developed brand label is the flexibility to cut prices or make higher profit margins.

Cazzol wrote, “We think that the company can defend its market share through its smaller store formats and competitive pricing in its private label.”

Meanwhile, Ahold has put plans on hold for an initial public offering of its Bol.com e-commerce site, citing market conditions. Bol.com serves 13 million customers in the Netherlands and Belgium, says Ahold’s website. Much of the upside of a potential IPO had been priced into the stock, despite the pause.

>>> US Close Dow +0,41% S&P +0,56% Nasdaq +0,31% Russell +0,85%

Closing Stock Market Summary

The stock market closed out the week on an upbeat note, but things didn't start out that way today. Initially, investors were weighing concerns about the banking industry, again, after reports indicated that Deutsche Bank's (DB 9.35, -0.30, -3.1%) cost of default insurance jumped to a four-year high.

German Chancellor Scholz and European Central Bank President Lagarde both attempted to calm markets after the DB news, but stocks were still under pressure this morning despite their efforts. The S&P 500, which fell below its 200-day moving average (3,932) right after the open, was down 1.0% and hit 3,909 at its low for the day. The Nasdaq and Dow were down 1.0% and 0.9%, respectively, at their lows for the day. 

The tone in the market shifted markedly, however, around the time that European markets closed despite Germany's DAX (-1.7%), the U.K.'s FTSE 100 (-1.3%), and France's CAC 40 (-1.7%) all registering sharp declines. The tonal shift also coincided with panicky buying interest in the Treasury market subsiding.

The 2-yr note yield, which fell to 3.56% this morning, settled at 3.77%. The 10-yr note yield, which declined to 3.29% at its low, settled the session at 3.38%.

Many stocks moved higher with today's rally, which saw the S&P 500 close above its 200-day moving average (3,932). The Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) was up 0.9% while the market-cap weighted S&P 500 had a gain of 0.6%. Even Deutsche Bank, which was down as much as 8.3%, pared its losses to close down 3.1%. 

Nine of the 11 S&P 500 sectors closed with a gain. Utilities (+3.1%), real estate (+2.6%), and consumer staples (+1.6%) led the pack while the consumer discretionary (-0.4%) and financial (-0.1%) sectors were alone in negative territory. 

  • Nasdaq Composite: +13.0% YTD
  • S&P 500: +3.4% YTD
  • S&P Midcap 400: -1.1% YTD
  • Russell 2000: -1.5% YTD
  • Dow Jones Industrial Average: -2.7% YTD

Reviewing today's economic data:

  • Durable goods orders fell 1.0% month-over-month in February (consensus 1.6%) following a downwardly revised 5.0% decrease (from 4.5%) in January. Excluding transportation, durable goods orders were unchanged month-over-month (consensus 0.3%) following a downwardly revised 0.4% increase (from 0.7%) in January.
    • The key takeaway from the report is that it could invite questions about the strength of the manufacturing sector since it showed an unexpected decrease in headline orders while the January decrease was revised even lower.
  • The IHS Markit Services PMI rose to 53.8 in the preliminary March reading versus the prior reading of 50.6. The IHS Markit Manufacturing PMI rose to 49.3 in the preliminary reading versus the prior reading of 47.3.

There is no notable U.S. economic data on Monday. 

WSJ : Crypto Faces Legal Reckoning as SEC Prepares Action Against Coinbase

Crypto Faces Legal Reckoning as SEC Prepares Action Against Coinbase
Potential lawsuit against largest U.S. crypto trading platform could upend investors’ access

WASHINGTON—The Securities and Exchange Commission and Coinbase COIN 1.69% Global Inc. appear headed for a legal showdown that stands to have outsize consequences for both sides.

The SEC notified Coinbase that it plans to sue the firm for allegedly violating a range of investor-protection laws, the firm said this week. An eventual SEC lawsuit against the largest U.S. crypto exchange could help determine the future shape of the business of exchanging dollars for digital tokens such as bitcoin, ether or polkadot.

It would also be the SEC’s most significant move yet to rein in an industry that Chair Gary Gensler has described as rife with noncompliance—and one that would leave the agency with a black eye should it fail in court.

Coinbase has taken an increasingly defiant stance, publicly criticizing the SEC and urging regulators to write new rules for crypto rather than enforce existing ones. Coming into SEC compliance, the firm says, would effectively mean shutting down its business.

“The implications for the crypto business are very significant,” said Neel Maitra, a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati who previously served at the SEC as a crypto specialist. “Much will depend on the precise form that the SEC’s potential action takes.”

Regulators have come under intensifying pressure to crack down on crypto since the collapse of FTX, whose founder, Sam Bankman-Fried, aggressively lobbied policy makers last year. Crypto-friendly lawmakers blasted the SEC for failing to spot the problems in FTX before it blew up—though some of them had also criticized the agency’s investigations earlier last year.

Since 2021, Mr. Gensler has warned platforms such as Coinbase that they were breaking the law by letting investors trade cryptocurrencies that should have been registered as securities, the legal category that includes stocks and bonds. He has demanded the firms comply with SEC rules by registering as securities exchanges and separating parts of their business that create potential conflicts of interest.

Now, the SEC is preparing to test Mr. Gensler’s view in court. While a lawsuit could still be many months away—or averted entirely—the formal process that began this week could potentially end in a court’s ordering Coinbase to shutter or restructure key parts of its business in the U.S.

SEC staff say they could seek remedies including injunctions, cease-and-desist orders and fines—penalties that could threaten the company’s ability to operate in its current form. If it registered as a securities exchange, as Mr. Gensler has demanded, Coinbase would be able to list only SEC-registered securities. Yet no major cryptocurrencies—nor any of the 242 assets currently listed on Coinbase—are currently registered with the agency.

Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal said Wednesday that Coinbase representatives had met with the SEC more than 30 times over nine months and spent millions of dollars working on proposals to register parts of its business. That process appeared to end when the SEC canceled a meeting with Coinbase in January and shifted to enforcement, he said.

After disclosing the Wells notice on Wednesday, Coinbase executives expressed disappointment but said they had been preparing for litigation.

“We’re very, very confident that we’re going to be able to defend these claims, not just for Coinbase but for crypto as a whole,” Mr. Grewal said Thursday.

The firm has accused the SEC of stifling innovation and spent millions of dollars lobbying Congress in hopes of bypassing regulators through new legislation. It has also stepped up its political organizing, seeking to rally its users to write lawmakers and donate to pro-crypto candidates.

Fighting the SEC could be expensive at a time when Coinbase’s business is already under pressure from a downturn in crypto markets. Ripple Labs Inc., a crypto firm that is defending itself against an SEC lawsuit filed in late 2020, expects to rack up $200 million in legal bills before the case is decided, according to people familiar with the matter.

The first cryptocurrency, bitcoin, was designed to be a peer-to-peer payment system. But so-called centralized exchanges—platforms operated by firms such as Coinbase, Binance and the now-defunct FTX—have become the keystones of the crypto industry. By using a combination of bank accounts and blockchain addresses, they serve as the main access points for individual investors to trade dollars for cryptocurrencies, or vice versa. That is why Mr. Gensler shifted the SEC’s enforcement focus to such intermediaries shortly after taking the helm.

“This is the largest target that the SEC could go after,” said Kristin Smith, head of the Blockchain Association, a trade group of which Coinbase isn’t a member. “Your average American who buys or sells cryptocurrencies, they tend to do that through Coinbase.”

To date, the SEC’s enforcement actions in crypto have been more incremental. It has brought dozens of cases against individual token issuers for offering unregistered securities. In the past year or so, it has sued or settled with several crypto lenders, and in February the SEC settled with Coinbase rival Kraken over the firm’s so-called staking product.

The SEC notice comes as disparate parts of the federal government—from the White House to the Federal Reserve—have signaled growing skepticism of crypto as an asset class following the sudden collapse of FTX in November.

On Tuesday, President Biden’s annual economic report to Congress included a 35-page section focused heavily on crypto’s risks to investors and the industry’s noncompliance with regulations. “Crypto assets currently do not offer widespread economic benefits,” the report said. “They are largely speculative investment vehicles.”

FT : EU leaders remain deadlocked on classification of nuclear energy

EU leaders remain deadlocked on classification of nuclear energy
France and Germany clash over whether atomic power should be treated as equal to renewables

The EU remains deadlocked over whether to recognise nuclear power as equal to renewable energy, as France and Germany sparred over new allies at a summit on Friday.

French president Emmanuel Macron, whose government has led a push for more favourable treatment of nuclear energy, discussed the handling of the fuel with German chancellor Olaf Scholz at a breakfast meeting on Friday as the two sides clash over the treatment of the fuel.

Following the meeting, the French president told journalists that he was hopeful of finding an agreement with Germany, which is one of several countries opposing French efforts to have nuclear recognised in multiple legislative files related to the green transition.

“I think we’ll find an agreement, we’re in the process of finding one on hydrogen and on other topics in order to preserve technological neutrality,” Macron said.

The recognition of nuclear power as a low-carbon energy source is a key fight for France as it tries to ensure more funding can be directed towards its existing nuclear fleet. Almost half of its 56 reactors had to be closed last year for extensive maintenance work to mend cracks. Nuclear power plants generated close to 70 per cent of France’s electricity in 2021.

Ursula von der Leyen, European Commission president, said on the first day of a two-day EU leaders’ summit in Brussels on Thursday, that nuclear could “play a role” in Europe’s decarbonising effort, adding that only “cutting edge” nuclear technology might get access to simplified rules and incentives in the EU’s recently launched draft net zero Industry Act and that it would not be eligible for all the benefits of the legislation.

The kind of technology she was referring to are the small modular reactors that are under development in several countries including France.

Germany is similarly cautious. It is not opposed to the use of nuclear in the production of hydrogen — which was the topic of a joint declaration with French ministers on January 22 — but Berlin is not willing to treat nuclear energy as equivalent to renewables such as wind or solar, which would give it privileged access to EU funding.

Belgian’s prime minister Alexander De Croo told the Financial Times that countries should take a “pragmatic” approach, but Austria and Luxembourg are ideologically opposed to nuclear power and are suing the commission for giving nuclear power a “green” label in its framework for sustainable investments.

In France’s camp, Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki told the FT that nuclear power should be eligible for EU financing.

Nuclear energy “absolutely should be given the same status [as solar and wind power] because we do not have technology to store energy from renewables”, he said.

Warsaw last year discussed partnering with the US and France to develop nuclear power in Poland in line with its plans to commission its first nuclear plant in 2033.

He slammed the EU’s efforts to decarbonise its economy, however, saying that the bloc should slow down its efforts to reach net zero emissions in line with countries such as Russia and China.

“Europe’s emissions of CO₂ is approximately 8 per cent of the entire globe. And if we reduce it by 1 per cent with huge effort, and there is a carbon leakage and lots of jobs lost from Europe. And at the same time, in India and China and in Russia, new coal power plants are being opened . . . It’s not making huge sense.”

The EU has set itself a target of reaching net zero emissions by 2050, while both Russia and China have committed to reaching the same goal 10 years later.

A senior German official said this week that the Franco-German joint declaration in January, while acknowledging the role of low carbon sources of energy such as nuclear, stressed how important it was to “safeguard . . . the overall ambition level of the renewable target”.

“In other words, if we were to make nuclear energy equivalent to renewables, we’d reduce the ambition level of renewables,” he said. Nuclear could, he said, contribute to decarbonisation efforts, “but it’s just not a source of renewable energy. And France signed up to that.”