FT : Hybrid bonds pose dilemma for borrowers and debt investors

Hybrid bonds pose dilemma for borrowers and debt investors
Rising interest rates make businesses wary of dipping back into €175bn European hybrid market

European companies face a dilemma over their hybrid bonds, as sky-high interest rates make businesses wary of dipping back into the €175bn market.

Borrowers are expected to repay about €11bn in these instruments — which are considered part equity and part debt by rating agencies — in the coming six months. Typically they would do just that — handing money back to investors in a process known as calling, and then borrowing fresh funds to replace it.

In theory, companies can just leave the debt in investors’ hands. This option has rarely been used by companies, because they hope to keep debt investors on side.

Companies that decide not to call a hybrid would “certainly annoy investors . . . and put pressure on the ability of that credit to come back into the hybrid market in the future”, said James Vokins, an investment grade portfolio manager at Aviva Investors.

But in a new era of sky-high interest rates, borrowers may want to avoid issuing new hybrids to avoid paying hefty yields.

Hybrids allow businesses to raise cash without damaging their credit rating or diluting shareholders’ stakes in businesses. Their flexible nature also means they offer higher yields than normal credit, which is attractive to investors.

They have routinely been used by large utilities and telecoms groups to bolster their balance sheets without weakening their credit rating. But they have become popular among other companies, including in the real estate sector, as low interest rates have encouraged companies to borrow.

Volkswagen and EDF have led the way, with more than €15bn and €13bn in hybrids outstanding each, according to calculations by a European bank.

Companies issued hybrids at low yields in recent years but they will struggle to price new hybrids at this level, now that higher interest rates have made the cost of borrowing more expensive.

For this reason, “the correct economic decision will be not to roll them over [rather than recall them and issue fresh hybrids]”, said Gordon Shannon, a portfolio manager at TwentyFour Asset Management.

The prospect of taking a hit on hybrids is particularly worrying for companies that are vulnerable to the economic downturn, such as real estate groups. Hybrids at risk of not being called have traded well below face value in recent months.

Decision time for issuers
Aroundtown, a Luxembourg-based real estate business, is being closely watched by investors as its hybrid matures in January.

Oschrie Massatschi, its chief capital markets officer, recently told investors that Aroundtown was “still observing the market situation before taking a decision on the treatment of our January hybrids”, indicating that the high borrowing costs of calling its hybrids would weigh on the company’s decision.


But market watchers expect many large borrowers to call their hybrids to keep their investor base on side. Earlier this month, Spanish utilities group Naturgy announced it would call its €1bn hybrid, due on November 22.

The price of the instrument had fallen to 97.55 cents before the update but shot back to face value after the news, offering reassurance to investors who had closely watched the company.


Energy companies that have benefited from high oil prices and Volkswagen, flush with cash from the initial public listing of Porsche, could also choose to buy back their hybrids without reissuing. French utilities group Engie said on October 12 that it would buy back a tenth of its hybrid bonds.

Investors will watch businesses with outstanding hybrids closely because there is a risk of a “knock-on effect”, where one company or several companies deciding not to call hybrids could pave the way for others to follow suit, said Aviva’s Vokins.

This would leave investors nursing losses and stuck with an unwanted asset.

Alberto Gallo, co-founder of Andromeda Capital Management, said “many bond structures” are negative for investors at present. “Low-coupon hybrids and [convertible bank bonds] sold over the past few years are the worst, potentially leaving investors with [an asset] yielding below inflation,” he added.

FT : Welcome to the world of the polycrisis

Welcome to the world of the polycrisis
Today disparate shocks interact so that the whole is worse than the sum of the parts

Pandemic, drought, floods, mega storms and wildfires, threats of a third world war — how rapidly we have become inured to the list of shocks. So much so that, from time to time, it is worth standing back to consider the sheer strangeness of our situation.

As former US Treasury secretary Lawrence Summers recently remarked: “This is the most complex, disparate and cross-cutting set of challenges that I can remember in the 40 years that I have been paying attention to such things.”

Of course, familiar economic mechanisms still have huge power. A bond market panic felled an incompetent British government. It was, you might say, a textbook case of market discipline. But why were the gilt markets so jumpy to begin with? The backdrop was the mammoth energy subsidy bill and the Bank of England’s determination to unwind the huge portfolio of bonds that it had piled up fighting the Covid-19 pandemic. 

With economic and non-economic shocks entangled all the way down, it is little wonder that an unfamiliar term is gaining currency — the polycrisis.

A problem becomes a crisis when it challenges our ability to cope and thus threatens our identity. In the polycrisis the shocks are disparate, but they interact so that the whole is even more overwhelming than the sum of the parts. At times one feels as if one is losing one’s sense of reality. Is the mighty Mississippi really running dry and threatening to cut off the farms of the Midwest from the world economy? Did the January 6 riots really threaten the US Capitol? Are we really on the point of uncoupling the economies of the west from China? Things that would once have seemed fanciful are now facts. 

This comes as a shock. But how new is it really? Think back to 2008-2009. Vladimir Putin invaded Georgia. John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. The banks were toppling. The Doha World Trade Organization round came to grief, as did the climate talks in Copenhagen the following year. And, to top it all, swine flu was on the loose. 

Former European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, to whom we owe the currency of the term polycrisis, borrowed it in 2016 from the French theorist of complexity Edgar Morin, who first used it in the 1990s. As Morin himself insisted, it was with the ecological alert of the early 1970s that a new sense of overarching global risk entered public consciousness. 

So have we been living in a polycrisis all along? We should beware complacency. 

In the 1970s, whether you were a Eurocommunist, an ecologist or an angst-ridden conservative, you could still attribute your worries to a single cause — late capitalism, too much or too little economic growth, or an excess of entitlement. A single cause also meant that one could imagine a sweeping solution, be it social revolution or neoliberalism. 

What makes the crises of the past 15 years so disorientating is that it no longer seems plausible to point to a single cause and, by implication, a single fix. Whereas in the 1980s you might still have believed that “the market” would efficiently steer the economy, deliver growth, defuse contentious political issues and win the cold war, who would make the same claim today? It turns out that democracy is fragile. Sustainable development will require contentious industrial policy. And the new cold war between Beijing and Washington is only just getting going. 

Meanwhile, the diversity of problems is compounded by the growing anxiety that economic and social development are hurtling us towards catastrophic ecological tipping points.

The pace of change is staggering. In the early 1970s the global population was less than half what it is today, and China and India were desperately poor. Today the world is organised for the most part into powerful states that have gone a long way towards abolishing absolute poverty, generates total global gross domestic product of $90tn and maintains a combined arsenal of 12,705 nuclear weapons, while depleting the carbon budget at the rate of 35bn metric tonnes of CO₂ a year. To imagine that our future problems will be those of 50 years ago is to fail to grasp the speed and scale of historical transformation. 

So, what is the outlook? In a world that one could envisage being dominated by a single fundamental source of tension, you could imagine a climactic crisis from which resolution might emerge. But that kind of Wagnerian scenario no longer seems plausible. Modern history appears as a tale of progress by way of improvisation, innovation, reform and crisis-management. We have dodged several great depressions, devised vaccines to stop disease and avoided nuclear war. Perhaps innovation will also allow us to master the environmental crises looming ahead. 

Perhaps. But it is an unrelenting foot race, because what crisis-fighting and technological fixes all too rarely do is address the underlying trends. The more successful we are at coping, the more the tension builds. If you have found the past few years stressful and disorientating, if your life has already been disrupted, it is time to brace. Our tightrope walk with no end is only going to become more precarious and nerve-racking. 

>>> US Research Calls


Research Calls

  • Upgrades:
    • First Solar (FSLR) upgraded to Outperform from Peer Perform at Wolfe Research; tgt $170
    • Gilead Sciences (GILD) upgraded to Buy from Hold at Truist; tgt raised to $91
    • Gilead Sciences (GILD) upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at Piper Sandler; tgt raised to $96
    • Intel (INTC) upgraded to Buy from Hold at Summit Insights
    • Intel (INTC) upgraded to Equal Weight from Underweight at Barclays; tgt $30
    • Intel (INTC) upgraded to Neutral from Underperform at KGI Securities; tgt $28
    • MYR Group (MYRG) upgraded to Outperform from Neutral at Robert W. Baird; tgt raised to $95
    • MYR Group (MYRG) upgraded to Overweight from Sector Weight at KeyBanc Capital Markets; tgt $99
    • Unity Software (U) upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at Piper Sandler; tgt lowered to $38
  • Downgrades:
    • Ardagh Metal Packaging S.A. (AMBP) downgraded to Market Perform from Outperform at BMO Capital Markets; tgt lowered to $5
    • Associated British Foods (ASBFY) downgraded to Hold from Buy at HSBC Securities
    • Axalta Coating Systems (AXTA) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Exane BNP Paribas; tgt $27
    • Banco Santander Brasil (BSBR) downgraded to Sell from Neutral at Goldman
    • Caterpillar (CAT) downgraded to Hold from Buy at Deutsche Bank; tgt raised to $221
    • Dana Inc (DAN) downgraded to Sector Perform from Outperform at RBC Capital Mkts; tgt raised to $16
    • Edwards Lifesciences (EW) downgraded to Perform from Outperform at Oppenheimer
    • Essex Property (ESS) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Sandler; tgt lowered to $250
    • H&M (HNNMY) downgraded to Reduce from Hold at HSBC Securities
    • Horizon Bancorp (HBNC) downgraded to Mkt Perform from Outperform at Keefe Bruyette; tgt lowered to $18
    • L3Harris (LHX) downgraded to Mkt Perform from Outperform at Raymond James
    • Marks and Spencer (MAKSY) downgraded to Hold from Buy at HSBC Securities
    • Meta Platforms (META) downgraded to Hold from Buy at Edward Jones
    • O'Reilly Auto (ORLY) downgraded to Buy from Conviction Buy at Goldman; tgt raised to $841
    • Paylocity (PCTY) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at DA Davidson; tgt $250
    • Stanley Black & Decker (SWK) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Robert W. Baird; tgt lowered to $80
    • Teck Resources (TECK) downgraded to Market Perform from Outperform at BMO Capital Markets
    • Travel + Leisure Co (TNL) downgraded to Underperform from Outperform at Credit Suisse; tgt lowered to $31
    • Trimas (TRS) downgraded to Mkt Perform from Outperform at William Blair
    • United Fire Group (UFCS) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Sandler; tgt lowered to $31
    • West Pharm (WST) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt lowered to $250
    • Western Union (WU) downgraded to Sell from Neutral at UBS; tgt $12
  • Others:
    • Amprius Technologies (AMPX) initiated with a Buy at EF Hutton; tgt $14
    • CinCor Pharma (CINC) initiated with a Buy at Goldman; tgt $67
    • Coastal Financial (CCB) assumed with a Strong Buy at Raymond James; tgt $57
    • Enovix (ENVX) initiated with a Buy at EF Hutton; tgt $25
    • ESS Inc. (GWH) initiated with a Buy at EF Hutton; tgt $6
    • Geron (GERN) initiated with an Outperform at Wedbush; tgt $5
    • Imago BioSciences (IMGO) initiated with an Outperform at Wedbush; tgt $25
    • Physicians Realty Trust (DOC) initiated with a Neutral at JP Morgan; tgt $17

>> US Gapping down

Gapping down
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • DVA -16.3%, PTCT -13.8% (also enters into strategic financing collaboration with BX; co to receive $350 mln in cash), AMZN -12.2%, EW -12.1%, MPWR -8.3%, CRI -7.6%, LYB -7.6%, NWG -7.3%, RMD -6.2%, DECK -5.8%, LMAT -5.7%, NATI -4%, ALRM -3.7% (announces upside Q3 revs; says VVNT has notified co it will stop paying license fees to Alarm.com), COF -3.6%, BIO -3.3%, ONTO -2.9%, LPLA -2.9%, VALE -2.8%, AON -2.8%, MHK -2.6%, GTLS -2.5%, FSLR -2.4% (also to invest $270 mln in R&D innovation center in Ohio), NOV -2.3%, AX -1.8%, GLPI -1.8%, WY -1.3%, X -1.1%, CL -1%

Other news:

  • BWMX -15.8% (names new CFO)
  • UFI -9.9% (to be removed from S&P SmallCap 600)
  • INO -4.9% (discontinues internally funded efforts to develop INO-4800 as a COVID-19 heterologous booster vaccine)
  • HII -4.4% (awarded $2.41 bln modification to previously awarded contract by the U.S. Navy)
  • EWTX -3.1% (initiates LYNX Phase 2 trial)
  • MATV -2.3% (COO to resign)
  • CMCT -1.5% (files for $1 bln mixed securities shelf offering)
  • VVNT -1.1% (will stop paying license fees to Alarm.com)

Analyst comments:

  • LHX -5.9% (downgraded to Mkt Perform from Outperform at Raymond James)
  • WU -3.2% (downgraded to Sell from Neutral at UBS)
  • AXTA -0.9% (downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Exane BNP Paribas)
  • CAT -0.7% (downgraded to Hold from Buy at Deutsche Bank)

>>> US Gapping up

Gapping up
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • EGHT +13.2%, PINS +12.4%, TVTX +9.7%, DXCM +9.2%, CUBE +9.1%, CWST +6.7%, INTC +6.7%, TFII +5.6%, DRQ +5.5%, GILD +5.2%, VRTX +4.9%, EQNR +4.5%, PFSI +3.8%, KNSL +3.7%, PXD +3% (also declares quarterly base-plus-variable dividend of $5.71/sh), TMUS +3%, AB +3%, TEX +2.5%, BLMN +2.5%, SWN +2.3%, SNY +2.3%, XOM +2.2%, CVX +2.1%, FHI +2%, B +2%, CHD +1.9%, WETF +1.9%, CASH +1.6% (also names new CFO), RSG +1.4%, LTC +1.3%, SKYW +1.2%, NVT +1.2%, BAH +1.2%, CHTR +1.2%, NWL +1.1%

Other news:

  • NUVL +11.1% (Preliminary Phase 1 Clinical Data from ARROS-1 Trial)
  • CFFN +6.7% (to resume repurchasing shares)
  • BFH +5.7% (moving to S&P Small Cap 600 from S&P MidCap 400)
  • ACGL +5.6% (to join S&P 500)
  • EPM +2.7% (names new CEO)
  • ARIS +2.7% (acquires IP rights from Water Standard re reuse of produced water in Permian Basin)
  • WTTR +2.5% (initiates regular dividend program)
  • LQDA +1.9% (LQDA: patent panel denies UTHR request)
  • BKR +1.7% (increases dividend and increases share repurchase auth by $2 bln to $4 bln)

Analyst comments:

  • U +2.7% (upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at Piper Sandler)

>>> Colgate-Palmolive beats by $0.01, reports revs in-line; guides FY22 EPS belo

Colgate-Palmolive beats by $0.01, reports revs in-line; guides FY22 EPS below consensus, reaffirms FY22 revs guidance
  • Reports Q3 (Sep) earnings of $0.74 per share, $0.01 better than the S&P Capital IQ Consensus of $0.73; revenues rose 0.9% year/year to $4.46 bln vs the $4.47 bln S&P Capital IQ Consensus.
  • Co issues guidance for FY22, sees EPS of 7-8% decline to ~$2.95-2.99 vs. $3.00 S&P Capital IQ Consensus; sees FY22 revs of in the middle of 1-4% yr/yr ($17.60-18.12 bln) vs. $17.88 bln S&P Capital IQ Consensus.

>>> Chevron beats by $0.71, beats on revs

Chevron beats by $0.71, beats on revs
  • Reports Q3 (Sep) earnings of $5.56 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.71 better than the S&P Capital IQ Consensus of $4.85; revenues rose 49.1% year/year to $66.64 bln vs the $61.44 bln S&P Capital IQ Consensus.
  • The company's third quarter Permian Basin unconventional production totaled over 700,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, up over 12 percent from last year's quarter.
  • U.S. upstream operations earned $3.40 billion in third quarter 2022, compared with $1.96 billion a year earlier. The improvement was primarily due to higher realizations and higher volumes, partially offset by the absence of third quarter 2021 asset sale gains.
  • U.S. downstream operations reported earnings of $1.29 billion in third quarter 2022, compared with earnings of $1.08 billion a year earlier. The increase was mainly due to higher margins on refined product sales, partially offset by lower earnings from the 50 percent-owned Chevron Phillips Chemical Company and higher operating expenses that were largely associated with planned turnarounds.

>>> Exxon Mobil beats by $0.65, beats on revs

Exxon Mobil beats by $0.65, beats on revs
  • Reports Q3 (Sep) earnings of $4.45 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.65 better than the S&P Capital IQ Consensus of $3.80; revenues rose 51.9% year/year to $112.07 bln vs the $102.96 bln S&P Capital IQ Consensus.
  • Upstream third-quarter 2022 earnings were $12.4 billion compared to $11.4 billion in the second quarter. Excluding identified items, earnings were $11.8 billion, an increase of $0.8 billion from the previous quarter.
  • Gas realizations increased 22% on European supply concerns and efforts to build inventory ahead of winter, more than offsetting the impact of decreasing crude realizations, which were down 12% on modest supply increases.
  • Earnings also benefited from higher volumes and improved mix from growth in the company's advantaged assets in Guyana and the Permian. Oil-equivalent production in the third quarter was 3.7 million barrels per day. Absent divestments and the Russia exit impact, sequential quarter volume growth was more than 50,000 oil-equivalent barrels per day. The Permian delivered record production in the quarter of nearly 560,000 oil-equivalent barrels a day.

>>> US Early premarket gappers

Early premarket gappers

  • Gapping up:
    • EGHT +13.2%, TVTX +9.7%, CUBE +9.1%, PINS +8.7%, EPM +7%, CWST +6.7%, DXCM +6.7%, NUVL +6.6%, PFSI +5.9%, TFII +5.6%, ACGL +5.5%, DRQ +5.5%, EQNR +5.2%, GILD +4.8%, VRTX +4.6%, INTC +4.6%, KNSL +3.7%, OIS +3.6%, BFH +3.5%, WBX +3.4%, TMUS +3.4%, ARIS +2.7%, WTTR +2.5%, TEX +2.5%, CVX +2.5%, SNY +2.3%, FHI +2%, LQDA +1.9%, SWN +1.8%, CASH +1.6%, CFFN +1.4%, RSG +1.4%, SKYW +1.2%, GSK +0.9%, AAPL +0.8%
  • Gapping down:
    • PTCT -13.8%, AMZN -13%, BWMX -12.4%, EW -11.9%, UFI -9.9%, NWG -9.4%, NATI -7.3%, MPWR -6.1%, DECK -5.8%, LMAT -5.7%, CRI -4.8%, HII -4.4%, FSLR -4.3%, INO -3.9%, ALRM -3.7%, COF -3.6%, MHK -3.4%, BIO -3.3%, EWTX -3.1%, RMD -3.1%, ONTO -2.9%, LPLA -2.9%, VALE -2.7%, WY -2.5%, MATV -2.3%, NOV -2.3%, BCC -2.1%, AX -1.8%, GLPI -1.8%, BKR -1.6%, CMCT -1.5%, TXRH -1.3%, STAG -1.3%, WKHS -1.2%, VVNT -1.1%, VICI -1.1%, X -1.1%