FT : October was worst month for hedge funds in 7 years

October was worst month for hedge funds in 7 years
Only one in four fund managers achieved positive returns

Hedge funds suffered their worst month in October in seven years as equity strategies were hit by a sell-off in technology stocks.

Hedge Fund Research’s index that tracks all strategies was down about 3 per cent, its worst monthly decline since September 2011, the data provider said. That brings the index’s performance to negative 1 per cent for the year.

HFR’s equity hedge fund index fell 4.25 per cent in October — its worst performance in nearly three years — while the index that tracks funds that invest in technology stocks fared the worst, with a decline of 4.7 per cent.

Those strategies weren’t even the worst performers for the month. That title went to HFR’s index that tracked funds that invest in energy stocks, which was down just over 8 per cent for October. Meanwhile, the activist index was down 5.43 per cent, and the macro active trading index was down 6.5 per cent.

“Financial market volatility spiked in October as global equity markets experienced a violent reversal, with many entering correction territory in only several weeks, contributing to the worst month of performance for the hedge fund industry in seven years,” said Kenneth Heinz, the president of HFR.

Dispersion between the best- and worst-performing hedge funds also widened, with the top tenth returning 6.6 per cent and the bottom 10 per cent falling 13.7 per cent, HFR found. Only a quarter of hedge funds were positive for the month.

“Anticipating the market volatility which began in September and accelerated in October will continue into 2019, strategies positioned for this transitional market environment are likely to lead performance through year end,” Mr Heinz said.

FT : UK brokers/Mifid II: tombstoning

UK brokers/Mifid II: tombstoning
Research houses have been chasing an elusive quarry as pricing nosedives

Just like Wile E Coyote, UK brokers have been chasing an elusive quarry. Research payments from portfolio managers are required under the latest incarnation of UK securities regulation, Mifid II. Some brokers, such as Berenberg, prepared by hiring high-stepping staff in hopes of attracting research revenues. But research pricing has fallen by as much as four-fifths even as the market for initial public offerings has slowed.

The German private bank has found itself running furiously in mid-air with the canyon yawning below. On Tuesday, it cut about a tenth of its London staff of 350, mostly in research. Imperilled City analysts who saw it as a hirer of last resort should think again. Rumours abound of other culls.

Operating profits halved at Redburn, a well-known independent research house, in the financial year to March, according to filings. Cenkos reported sharply lower profits recently. At least the latter and Berenberg have banked some corporate finance profits. Even so, the European IPO market looks sickly. So far this year a third of IPOs have been postponed, notes Morgan Stanley. Well over half of the floats that went ahead were priced in the bottom third of the range, or even below the minimum.

Brokers and fund management have watched in horror as research pricing has nosedived. One can understand the initial optimism, given their skill in advising and underwriting European corporates. But it was a no-brainer that charging for analyst time would diminish demand for it.

Not only have research prices fallen, by around 80 per cent for online-only packages from bulge bracket outfits. So has analyst coverage. The average number of researchers covering a typical FTSE 250 mid-sized company has dropped 13 per cent since 2016 according to Hardman & Co.

Chasing business is part of the game for brokers. But that game moves faster than ever. Like that cartoon coyote, UK brokers can expect to eat lots more dust as they lope through the desert.

FT : Asda-Sainsbury merger would hurt competition and small retailers — BBG

Asda-Sainsbury merger would hurt competition and small retailers — BBG

The proposed takeover of Asda by Sainsbury will reduce competition, hurt smaller retailers, limit innovation and increase copying, according to a lobby group.

In its submission to the Competition and Markets Authority inquiry on the transaction, the British Brands Group said the combined market share of Sainsbury and Asda for branded goods was significantly higher than their share of the overall grocery market because Aldi, Lidl and Marks and Spencer sell mostly own-label products. It estimated that, were the deal to proceed, Tesco and Sainsbury-Asda would control 70 per cent of the procurement market.

It added that suppliers were already under heavy price pressure because of changes in grocery market structure — resulting in “cost cutting, rationalisation and factory closures” — and that further margin pressure would “by necessity” lead to more reductions in investment.

When the takeover was announced in April, Sainsbury’s and Asda committed to reduce the price of some everyday items by 10 per cent as they aligned group buying prices. They argued the margins of the large multinational companies that dominate their supply base by value could easily absorb such reductions.

The BBG, which does not disclose its membership publicly but which is dominated by small and mid-sized suppliers, said the two companies buy in different ways which would make harmonising buying prices difficult. It also said any manufacturer delisted by Sainsbury-Asda could potentially become unhealthily reliant on Tesco, the other major player in what could become an effective duopoly. The Groceries Code Adjudicator’s current remit affords it little scope to police the impact of the combination.

The CMA is expected to present its preliminary findings in January and a final report in March. Although its formal remit covers only the impact on consumers, it has come under political pressure to consider the effects on suppliers as well.

>>> OHL divests, regulatory headwinds seen obstacles to sale – advisers

OHL divests, regulatory headwinds seen obstacles to sale – advisers
MergerMarket.com
  • Previously divested Concessiones segment seen most attractive segment
  • Company has been for sale for a while, but “nothing seems to happen” - lawyer
  • Chinese buyers would face significant regulatory hurdles due to OHL’s US business - advisers

Obrascon Huarte Lain’s (OHL) [BME:OHL] past divestiture and potential regulatory risk could make its current sale process an uphill battle to find a buyer, said two sector bankers, two sector lawyers and an infrastructure investor.
The Spanish construction company continues to work with Lazard on its strategic options, including a sale, the local press reported last month. However, it was also reported that the mandate is to pursue divestitures and restructuring.
The Madrid-based company has been tacitly for sale for a long time, said the first sector lawyer, both sector bankers and the infrastructure investor. “Nothing seems to happen,” said the first sector lawyer.
Rumours of a sale date back at least to 2015, when OHL was said to have received an approach from HNA Group while the builder was preparing an EUR 1bn rights issue. In September 2017, the local press ran rumours of talks with China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSEC) [SHA:601668].
OHL’s decision to sell its infrastructure arm and concentrate on construction makes a sale much harder to execute, said the first sector lawyer and both sector bankers. The company announced plans to sell OHL Concesiones to IFM Investors of Australia for EUR 2.775bn in October 2017 and the deal completed in April.
On completion of the deal, OHL announced a new business plan, focusing on construction and concession development in the US, Latin America and Europe. It has slashed its overhead costs and its debt, leaving it with a net cash position of EUR 787m at the end of March.
The business that is left is the most difficult part of the former group to sell, said the first lawyer. Although there is little debt, there is also little profit, said the first sector banker, adding that the cashflow is unstable.
In the first half of the year, OHL had a negative EBITDA of EUR 113.2m following an unfavourable decision by an arbitrator on delays to the Xacbal Delta Hydropower Plant. Other factors included “practically nil EBITDA” in construction, delays in seeing the benefits of cost savings and a redundancy package.
The situation is “very complicated,” said the first banker, adding that OHL’s heavy construction business has low margins, which can at times be negative. The group used to use the income from concessions to offset construction risk, the banker added.
In the first six months of the year, construction accounted for 82% of OHL’s sales of EUR 1.59bn. Its industrial business accounted for 8.1%, while services accounted for 6.8%.
The big question is who, if anyone, wants to buy the business, said the first sector banker. It has been offered to Chinese bidders in the past, but no deal emerged, this banker said.
There have been lots of rumours about interest from China, said the second sector banker, adding that it isn’t clear that a deal can be done due to the company's new focus on construction. If OHL isn’t sold, one option would be to sell the small services division, this banker said.
At least one Chinese company is closing a deal to buy a family-controlled builder in Spain, said a source familiar with the situation. However, the target is unlisted and smaller than OHL, this source said.
OHL’s large business in the US could be a significant hurdle to a deal, said a third and fourth sector bankers and a third sector lawyer. At the end of June, the US business accounted for 38.5% of OHL’s short-term order book of EUR 5.58bn (EUR 2.15bn).
President Donald Trump signed in the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA) in August. The new law provides the first update to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) review process in a decade.
In the current climate, Chinese buyers should ask CFIUS to review all deals which have US operations, said the third sector lawyer. If GVM wants to sell OHL to a Chinese buyer, it should consider selling off the US business first, this lawyer said.
Any OHL projects in the US related to local infrastructure or government agencies would be sufficient for CFIUS to block a deal, the third lawyer said. OHL’s projects in the US include the I-405 upgrade in Orange County and a tunnel rehabilitation in New York.
CSCEC is actively seeking builders in North Africa and Europe, said the third sector banker. It has run into political difficulties before and needs to buy local firms, this banker said, adding that its status as a state-run company can cause problems in the US.
As state-backed firms, CSCEC and China Communications Construction Company [CCCC; HKG: 1800] would have the firepower to buy OHL, said the fourth sector banker, adding that both would face significant regulatory risks in the US. OHL is capitalized at just EUR 305m, with its shares trading at EUR 1.05, close to its 52-week low of EUR 0.95.
As well as the regulatory risks, Chinese buyers have found it difficult to buy builders, due to conflicts over intellectual property, industry standards and labour issues, said a source familiar with the situation. This hasn’t stopped local players from looking for deals, this source added.
HNA is probably less likely to buy OHL than its peers, said the fourth sector banker.
A sale by GVM was flagged as a viable option by this news service in June. Other options were said to include a dilutive merger with another player and simplifying the group structure by making GVM the listed entity instead of its affiliate. GVM subsequently reduced its stake in OHL to 41% from 53%.
CSCEC, CCCC and HNA declined to comment. OHL and Lazard also declined to comment.

WSJ : Oil Falls on Rising U.S. Inventories, Worries of Oversuppl

Oil Falls on Rising U.S. Inventories, Worries of Oversupply
U.S. oil benchmark falls 0.8% to $61.10 to enter bear market


*U.S. oil benchmark falls 0.8% to $61.10 to enter bear market

*20% drop from recent high ends WTI’s longest bull market since 2008

*Oil prices fall on rising U.S. inventories, worries of oversupply

(This article will be updated)

Oil prices rose Thursday morning in a small rebound after data showing expanding inventories in America sent prices lower in the previous session. Record monthly imports of crude into China helped support prices, analysts said.
Brent crude, the global oil benchmark, was trading up 0.2% at $72.20 a barrel midmorning on London’s Intercontinental Exchange. However, it was still down almost 17% from its four-year high of $86.74 a barrel hit in October, putting it close to a bear market, which is generally defined as a decline of 20% from the recent peak.
West Texas Intermediate futures, the U.S. oil standard, were trading up 0.02%, at $61.68 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

>>> ECB's Draghi: we are now at the point where we anticipate that we will end n

>>> ECB's Draghi: we are now at the point where we anticipate that we will end net asset purchases at the end of the year
- The financial stability environment in the euro area overall remains favourable, but it has become somewhat more challenging in recent months.
- While we are now at the point where we anticipate
– subject to incoming data confirming our medium-term inflation outlook
– that we will end net asset purchases at the end of the year, significant monetary stimulus will still be needed to ensure the continued sustained convergence of inflation to levels that are below, but close to, 2% over the medium term
- The latest incoming information overall suggests that the broad-based expansion in the euro area, and in Ireland, is set to continue.
- Inflation to continue to converge towards goal
- Significant monetary stimulus will still be needed

FT : Security flaws discovered at world’s largest drone maker DJI

Security flaws discovered at world’s largest drone maker DJI
Personal data at risk of being accessed by intruders, warn cyber experts

Cyber security experts found security flaws in the software of DJI, the world’s largest commercial drone maker, which put data collected by drones and usage patterns of individual drones at risk of being accessed by intruders.

Check Point, the California-based security company, and DJI said the bug had been fixed, but the announcement may re-ignite discussions in the US over potential risks of using drones from the China-based manufacturer.

In a pattern similar to the US government’s warnings about Chinese telecoms gear makers Huawei and ZTE, the US Army in August last year ordered an immediate end to using any DJI drones, citing classified internal research on technology threats and user vulnerabilities of DJI products.

DJI, headquartered in Shenzhen, is best known for photography and video drones used by professionals and consumers, but has also started branching out into corporate solutions. 

Check Point said a probe of DJI’s infrastructure found this year that the drone maker’s user authentication systems allowed potential attackers to pose as a user and look at and steal users’ personal information, photos and video taken by their drones and information such as flight paths and GPS data.

According to the analysts, potential intruders would have been able to gain the tokens that allow users to access different applications on one platform — a software feature that has proven a security risk with other companies too.

“We are seeing over the past two years that malicious actors are exploiting tokens, for example in a Facebook incident last month involving the theft of tokens,” said Oded Vanunu, head of products vulnerability research at Check Point. 

Mr Vanunu said the analysts had undertaken their investigation on their own initiative following last year’s statement from the US Army citing vulnerabilities in DJI systems. 

Late last year, DJI initiated a bug bounty programme, an incentive some technology companies use to encourage benevolent hackers to help them find security loopholes.

Check Point said it had informed DJI of the problem in late March, but not taken any reward or signed any non-disclosure agreement with the Chinese company. 

According to the two companies, DJI had fixed the bug by late September, six months after being notified — a period Mr Vanunu said was double the time companies needed on average to patch such problems.

In February, Denver-based security firm Kivu Consulting, hired by the Chinese drone maker, gave DJI a clean bill of health with regard to the question whether its systems might extract user data and transfer them elsewhere without authorisation.

But Kivu also mentioned at the time that it had identified certain vulnerabilities in one DJI application and on one of its outsourced servers, and notified the company.

In a joint statement with Check Point, DJI applauded the cyber security firm for demonstrating the weakness. “All technology companies understand that bolstering cyber security is a continual process that never ends. Protecting the integrity of our users’ information is a top priority for DJI,” it quoted Mario Rebello, vice-president and country manager, North America, at DJI, as saying. 

DJI did not respond to a request for additional comment.