News & Views

Yes, a Recession Is Coming; No, It Won’t Be the End of the World for Equity Investing

We at Solyco Wealth anticipate the U.S. entering the most forecasted and discussed recession in economic history some time in 3Q23. One need do little more than scan Bloomberg, CNBC, or any other financial press headlines to discover the all-too-numerous drivers of this impending economic downturn. In short, recessionary drivers encompass various degrees of impacts from the U.S. Federal Reserve escalating the prevailing interest rate environment to counteract inflationary forces that resulted from aggressive acceleration of demand for goods and services, the satisfaction of which labor, logistics, and policy issues complicated, as the country and the world recovered from the worst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Oh yeah, and there was an energy price-spike brought on by Russia invading Ukraine right as that inflation component really started to take root and accelerate. Uhm, I’m forgetting something else, too, that consumers and, thus, economies dislike…bank failures! Thankfully, no one expects anything from the U.S. Congress for another couple months until the Debt Showdown: the fun just never stops!

If Jerome Powell and Team Fed could solve all of the above with interest rate policy, they should be the subjects of the next Marvel superhero movie!  Soft landing? I think we’ve already experienced more than a few bumps. Anyone failing to anticipate a few things going “thud” navigating out of lockdowns and re-starts should have exited this economy and returned to graduate school or run for public office.

Anyway, while recessionary impacts may be imminent, we do not necessarily think this translates to a repeat of 2022 for risk asset markets. The fact that returns stunk for pretty much everything but oil stocks last year defines the biggest driver of this opinion: most markets already priced in expectations for crummy 2023 performance last year! This leads us to another potential source of sunshine: asset markets remain forward-looking. Based on this simple forward-looking hypothesis we would not be surprised to see equity markets trade flat to 10% lower over the next six months as investors parse out the probable magnitude (small, we think) and duration (short, we expect) of this 2023 recession. To take advantage of this expectation Solyco Wealth commenced to generate cash in client accounts earlier this month so as to continue dollar-cost averaging into the securities we most desire to own. When appropriate, we also engaged in writing covered calls against core equity positions in response to upward volatility spikes.

At this point doomsayers may be shaking their heads and wondering where in the world an intelligent investor could possibly derive positive market views. “It’s a recession!” they exclaim. We calmly agree, but append that exclamation with the fact that many people anticipated this recession and, thus, adjusted for its likelihood some time ago. In support of this claim, we present a several graphs below from Doubleline and Bloomberg and Morningstar describing the magnitude of 4Q22 earnings surprises, 2023 earnings revisions, and some context for 4Q22’s earnings performances.

Certainly, we would not be surprised to see the magnitude of revisions in the graph above accelerate with 1Q23 reporting season. In fact, we would find it shocking if company managements chose not to take the opportunity to lower the bar again for 2023 earnings expectations given the negative economic environment and its well-stated and documented challenges. The other side of this “lowering the bar” process, however, easily could be a priming of the pump for more robust, recovery-like expectations for 2024. Again, markets always look forward.

While consumer spending and attitudes appear to remain comparatively resilient, a number of economic components indicate declining inflation. Compounding the impacts of higher interest rates, tighter credit conditions resulting from the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank will continue to slow economic activity as well. The following table also show that the costs of shelter, which compose 40% of the Consumer Price Index, fell earlier this year, a phenomenon that almost certainly will continue with tighter credit markets.

Goods inflations, as relayed in the chart below, started declining months ago. Recently, drops in Services costs joined this decline in Goods prices. The China restart could create a short-term bump higher in Goods prices, but we anticipate ongoing declines in Shelter and Services costs more than compensating for it. Bottom-lining it: at least a little good on the inflation front is starting to materialize in 2023 to offset much of what was so bad in 2022.

We conclude with the fact that declining earnings do not always foretell falling equity prices. As shown in the following scattergram pilfered from LPL, more than a few times over the past 70 years the S&P 500 rose despite declining earnings estimates. So you’re saying there’s a chance…

Rolling Options on Volatile Equities Offers Several Benefits

Covered call options and cash-secured put options represent key components of valuation and volatility management at Solyco Wealth. We remained very active in the options markets in response to the heightened volatility in equity markets that characterized the close of 2022 and the beginning of 2023. Substantial moves higher and lower for well-held stocks such as NVIDIA, Amazon, Netflix, Tesla, and Meta, among many others provide motivation for having a well thought out strategy to roll contracts prior to engaging in an initial options trade.

We engage in the options markers with an explicit strategy in place to “roll” covered calls on stocks that appreciated well beyond, and on short puts for stocks that moved significantly below, the strike price of expiring contracts. The term “roll” describes the process of repurchasing an options contract prior to expiration and subsequently selling a contract on the same underlying equity at a future expiration date.

Our roll strategy encompasses several key tenets, including:

1. Explicit valuation targets for the underlying equities
2. Ongoing knowledge of earnings and ex-dividend dates that may trigger early exercise
3. Sufficient account liquidity to fund repurchases of options contracts
4. Minimum premia equivalent to 1% per month as compared to expiration

Rarely do we roll contracts before the day of expiration. The threat of losing a position to a dividend-driven call or pricing anomalies caused by event-driven volatility changes represent two instances that could demand an early roll.

The recent price action of NVDA provides an excellent illustration of the value of rolling covered calls. Whereas NVDA shares commenced 2023 trading in the $143 range, they recently were +60%, or $230 each. With solid, 20%+ appreciation by mid-January an investor could have sold a $200 call expiring February 17^th for over $2 per share, or $200 per contract as each option contract represents 100 shares of stock. While this implied 1.2% monthly return may appear relatively innocuous, annualized on a monthly basis such actions represent a 15.4% return. As compared to 2022’s stock market returns +15.4% appears worth the trouble in our view.

However, many other investors concluded that NVDA shares represented a bargain early in 2023. By the time February 17^th rolled around, NVIDIA traded to $214 per share. While the $143-investor could just allow their shares to be called and walk away with $202 per share, they also might have upwardly revised their NVDA price target to $250 on the basis of the company’s gangbuster 4Q22 earnings report. Rather than allow the shares to be called away at $200, the investor could pay the $14.80 or so to close out the covered call contract and “roll” to a future expiration. Notably, on 2/17 the $210 call expiring a well later on 2/24 generated over $10 in premium. One complication, though: the investor needs to fund the $4 per share difference in order to roll the contract.

NVIDIA shares offer a special, near-term example for rolling options contracts as its share price continued to escalate, reaching a recent $232. This ongoing appreciation theoretically provides several benefits for continuing to roll options on NVDA:

• Volatility likely remains elevated, offering attractive premiums for future contracts
• Shares edge closer to the ultimate $250 valuation target
• Trading volume probably remains highly active

Should NVDA shares achieve the $250 valuation target, rolling covered calls on the position also offers an investor time to evaluate and choose another target for their investment capital. This period of time also could prove valuable for end-of-year tax planning should an investor desire to push a capital gain to another year or from short- to long-term status.

Embark on Tax Season with a Checklist to Save Time, Reduce Errors

The April 15, 2023, deadline for filing 2022 taxes or extensions fast approaches. Rather than commencing the filing of your taxes haphazardly, searching for statements and information on an as-needed basis, Solyco Wealth highly recommends that you spend some front-end time devising or downloading a Tax Preparation Checklist. Doing so likely will not only save time, but also reduce the probability of you or your preparer committing errors.

Time-saving information and details to have prior to starting your tax preparations might include:

• Social Security numbers for your spouse and dependents
• Copies of 2021 tax returns and supporting documentation
• Bank account information, including routing and account numbers (for payments OR refunds)

In addition to the usual income information that comes with your W-2, it likely will save time to also gather forms for other income like:

• 1099-INTs with interest income
• State and local tax refunds from 2021 (maybe from last year’s return that you already pulled from your files)
• Rental, partnership, or farm income
• Taxable Health Savings Account distributions

Deductions and credits information that might slip your mind while in the midst of preparing your taxes but that could still save a buck or two could come from:

• Mortgage interest
• Property taxes
• Child or dependent care costs
• Education costs
• Expenses related to:
  • Side businesses
  • Home office expansion
  • Energy efficient home improvements
• Charitable donations
• Estimated tax payments made earlier in 2022

Tax preparation frequently represents one of the more aggravating and frustrating exercises of the year. We highly recommend starting the process early and segmenting it into phases like:

1. Gathering and accumulating information and data
2. Preparing forms
3. Reviewing the forms for accuracy and completeness
4. Filing the forms with required payment or refund information

In our experience approaching tax season in this manner vastly reduces its annoyance and increases accuracy.

When Reinvesting Dividends Can Do You Wrong

Reinvesting dividends paid on shares of common stock frequently represents an outstanding way in which to benefit from the long-term compounding effect of common stock ownership. Investing website The Motley Fool calculated that the value of $10,000 invested in the S&P 500 in 1960 – with dividends reinvested through 2021– would have compounded to a cool $4.95 million. The value of the reinvested dividends accounted for $4.16 million, or 84%, of the gain, while simple share price appreciation made up only $795,800 of the increase.

Depending on reinvested dividends from single stocks, though, may present unforeseen risks for investors. Consider a hypothetical example in which an investor initially pays $10 per share for 2,500 shares of common stock in a company that pays an attractive 8% yield. The investor chooses to reinvest their dividend proceeds back into more common shares of stock in the company. In the first year these dividend reinvestments result in an additional $23, or 0.1% of dividend yield, as compared to not reinvesting the dividends.

All initially appears well with respect to dividend income and rate in Year 1 of our hypothetical example. However, negative dynamics in asset markets begin to erode the underlying value of the $25,000 initial investment made in our example. Possibly interest rates increased, reducing the relative attraction of an 8% dividend yield as compared to other investments. Or, maybe the company lost a key management member, incurred a lawsuit, or experienced cost overruns on a large project. Potentially, management adopted too aggressive of a dividend policy and, as a result, its cost of capital in the higher interest rate environment negatively altered its investment proposition as it needed more capital from outside sources to fund its operations. 

Whatever: the company in our example sees its shares decline 5% annually over a five-year period. Management, however, continued to believe that a relatively high dividend policy attracted shareholders despite ongoing share-price declines for the company; they ratcheted up the original $0.80 per share, 8% dividend rate by 2% annually. As shown in the table below, the combination of declining share price and escalating dividend rate actually enhanced the dividend rate for the company to ~8.5% over the five-year period. Also, the quarterly dividend payment to the investor grew considerably – $133, or 26.6%,  – over the five-year period. In year 5 of our example the investor receives an estimated $2,497 in dividends versus $2,023 of estimated Year 1 dividend payments. Finally, the overall value of the investment grew to $29,503 from our initial $25,000 stake, an increase of 17.1%. 

All of that may appear not horrible at first glance: growing dividend payments and a positive total return, sign me up! The catch, though, is that the investor paid an additional $11,251 in reinvested dividends in order to achieve that $29,503 Year 5 value. In effect, they lost $6,747 as the share price in our hypothetical example moved from $10 per share to $7.78. This share price decline may appear relatively benign as compared to the moves for many stocks in 2022, but the actual compounded annual rate of return for our investor calculates to a measly 3.37%. Even with the S&P 500’s abysmal 2022 total return, this rate pales in comparison to that index’s 9.5% five-year compounded average annual growth rate from 2018 to 2022.

Also, this 3.37% annual rate of return is a far cry from the anticipated 8% rate implied by the dividend and only slightly better than one-half the 6.5% rate of inflation posted in 2022. In purchasing power, the investor would find themself noticeably worse off. The rate of annual dividend growth would need to leap to 17.5%, implying a Year 5 dividend yield of 14.3%, for the value of this investment to keep pace with 2022’s rate of inflation. Similarly, our investor would keep pace with a 6.5% rate of inflation were the shares in our example to only decline 2% annually, all other factors remaining equal. 

2023 Investing Views from Solyco Wealth

The investment climate in 2023 likely will reflect a tale of two halves. Through the first two quarters of the year, we anticipate ongoing discussions of inflation, Fed interest rate policy, and stalling economies to dominate the investing landscape, much as they did throughout last year. The second half of 2023, however, we envision that abating inflationary pressures will lead to fading concerns for higher interest rates and more constructive thoughts of economic recovery and growth.

We possess little certainty about the magnitude for any of the above conditions, however, but expect directionality will rule the day rather than absolute movements. As a result, we expect investing successes in 2023 will hinge heavily on securities selection. The retail sector already offers an excellent example of the probable difficulties posed to investors this year and the prospective benefits of holding the right assets. Whereas American Eagle (AEI) and Urban Outfitters (URBN) reported record 2022 holiday sales with better-than-anticipated margins that recently bolstered their share prices, Macy’s (M) and Lululemon (LULU) experienced fine rates of sales growth but apparently of discounted items that negatively impacted margins and, thus, their share prices. We are fairly certain that specificity likely will matter more for investing success in 2023 than in prior years.

Earnings season for 4Q22 kicks off later this week with Delta (DAL), which Solyco Wealth includes in its model portfolios and client accounts, joining several of the large money-center banks like JPMorgan (JPM) and Bank of America (BAC). We should get very quick reads of the strength of the US consumer via credit card and consumer lending data from the banks as well as travel-and-leisure booking trends from DAL. We expect banks’ views on consumer strength to remain modestly positive but with a decidedly stronger optimistic bias for their travel-and-leisure budgets. Overall through 4Q22 earnings season, however, we would not be surprised to hear a healthy degree of “sandbagging” from company management teams with respect to their earnings and cash flow expectations for 2023.

Driving our cherry-picked example just a little further, this investor also could have benefited from repurchasing the same 1,000 SLB shares four months later at $33. To maintain the symmetry to our example, they also recently reestablished their 133-share MSFT position at $244. So, our investor now not only retains the same 1,000 shares of SLB and 133 shares of MSFT, For one thing, as the above graph from Morningstar relays, expectations for 1Q23 economic growth remain anemic. With a backdrop of such low expectations for the economy and “margin pressure” like that experienced by Macy’s and Lululemon all but omnipresent, it probably will prove too attractive for all but the most bullish (or bad) of public company management teams to not take the opportunity to lower the bar of investor expectations. Some companies will need to do this as their businesses actually are flagging. Others, however, will do it just because they can (aka “sandbagging”). Environments like the current one that likely lead to wide-spread sandbagging of expectations all too often see companies segmented into three types of opportunities: 

1. Strong buys for companies with excellent and/or opportunistic leaderships that proactively managed inventories to maintain margins with solid views on the direction of their operations in ’23 that, therefore, do not need to sandbag. We think Delta falls into this category for 4Q22/2023.
2. Speculative buys or holds for companies that post solid 4Q22 results but that fail to exhibit much knowledge regarding the directionality of their businesses in 2023.
3. Strong avoids for companies that blame exogenous factors for underwhelming 4Q22 results coupled with little insight as to what 2023 may hold for them, their company, or their employees.

As analysts aggressively reduced their 4Q22 earnings estimates (see graph below) we expect a healthy “beat rate” for the quarter. According to FactSet analysts overall cut their S&P 500 earnings projections by 6.5% since 3Q22, a rate 1.5x that of the average decrease over the past 20 years. 

Earnings expectations for 2023 – the crux of our “sandbagging” claim – call for 4.8% growth for the S&P 500 versus 2022 earnings. By comparison S&P 500 earnings in 2022 exceeded those of 2021 by 4.7%. The likes of Macy’s and Lululemon will need to see some extensive inventory turnover early in ’23 to realize margin recoveries sufficient for this year’s earnings growth to exceed that of last year; we expect more than a few companies will be in similar positions with even more posting declining margins due to wage pressures. Also, the Energy sector appears highly unlikely to generate earnings growth this year comparable to what it did last year without crude oil prices staging a significant rebound from their recent $75 per barrel level. Due to recession and economic growth concerns and their estimated impact on crude oil demand, barring another unforeseen shock to crude oil supply we do not see this price appreciation occurring until 2H23. The necessary downward revisions to 2023 earnings estimates probably materialize (the lowering of the bar) with analysts’s 4Q22 reports, creating the proverbial “low bar” for much of 2023. Given very low expectations for equities late in 2022 and very high levels of ongoing uncertainty for 2023 operating conditions, little motivation existed for analysts to make these reductions prior to 4Q22 reporting season.

Despite our expectations for muted 1H23 earnings growth, we remain constructive on equities this year. Stock prices trade in response to future expectations and 2H23 offers immense opportunities for equities to clear the low bar of expectations set early in 2023. As shown in the following graph, the challenging investing environment in 2022 developed not in response to poor earnings, which likely grew 4.8%, but rather to investors substantially discounting those growing earnings. As a result, the price-to-earnings ratio for the S&P 500 fell to 18.6x at year-end 2022 a level 24.4% lower than 2021’s year-end P/E of 24.6x in spite of the aforementioned earnings growth. 

Rapidly escalating interest rates – a key component of companies’ cost of capital, or discount rates – at the hands of the Fed in response to even more rapidly escalating inflation explained this significant discounting of S&P 500 earnings. As shown in the table below, which reflects a stream of cash flows discounted in perpetuity at the stated rate, a 24.2% decline in P/E implies a 31.8% relative increase in a company’s discount rate: 10% to 13.2%, for instance. In other words, $20 of cash flow in 2021 is only worth $15.17 in 2022, irrespective of whether or not the company needed more or less capital to generate that cash flow. While we anticipate higher costs of capital persisting through 2023 and into 2024, the above graph of P/Es – albeit through environment with much lower and less volatile interest rates – exhibits the more or less whimsical nature of the relationship between prices and earnings. In our view it probably will not take much evidence of moderating interest rate increases for investors to begin propelling P/Es higher in response to prospectively lower estimated costs of capital. We point to the number and strength of 2022’s “bear market rallies” in support of this conclusion as well as to the magnitude of cash sitting on the sidelines (discussed below).

Source: Solyco Wealth

The three graphs below, which convey the percentage of high-yield, or junk, debt coming due over the next three years, the recent default rate of high-yield issuers, and the recent rate of interest coverage for these issuers, exhibit the cumulative capital situation for the subset of companies most sensitive to changes in the cost of capital. Overall, despite the very negative environment in 2022 and the significant economic uncertainty entering 2023, it appears that the companies most susceptible to a rising cost of capital environment remain in a relatively strong position. Sentiment, which we judge whimsical by nature, appears to be the primary driver of this increase in cost of capital and not fundamental demand for additional capital.

Substantial cash on the sidelines waiting for the “all clear” signal to deploy fulfills the final cog underpinning a constructive backdrop for risk assets in 2023, in our view. FactSet data, as presented in the following graph, calculated approximately $4.5 trillion in money market accounts exiting 2022. These money market balances represent about 13.8% of the total $32.5 trillion market capitalization of the S&P 500. Deployment of this magnitude of available capital and the positive momentum created would, in our view, signal the “all clear” and mark a persistent reversal of investor sentiment.

Solyco Wealth allocates assets to equity, fixed income and cash across four risk gradients ranging from Conservative to Aggressive using a model portfolio concept. While equity allocations to these four model portfolios range from 25% for the Conservative portfolio to 90% for the Aggressive portfolio, Fixed Income allocations span 5% for Aggressive to 65% for Conservative. The Cash allocation amounts to 10% for the three most conservative portfolios while the Aggressive portfolio maintains a 5% cash position. 

While we anticipate that the pace and magnitude of increases in the Fed Funds Rate will slow significantly in the coming months, we expect to maintain our Fixed Income allocations through at least 1Q23. For the most conservative portfolios we likely will pull cash allocations down to 5% in favor of heavier weightings to Fixed Income rather than change the portfolios’ equity allocations. Notably, we achieve all of Solyco Wealth’s Fixed Income exposures by investing in Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) and not in individual bonds.

Within the Fixed Income allocations, we continue to favor shorter duration securities. The outsized volatility at the long-end of the interest rate curve remains a concern to us vis-à-vis the relatively short period and magnitude of declines in the inflation numbers. We favor, as a result, greater equity exposure over long-duration fixed income assets. We also employ a decided preference for Credit and Municipals exposures over Treasuries. 

As for equity exposure for our four model portfolios, Solyco Wealth invests in shares of individual companies. We continue to favor the Industrials and Materials sectors, as we have since mid-October 2022, while underweighting Information Technology and avoiding Utilities altogether, as shown in the following table. 

Providing that economic growth rekindles and increases in interest rates cease as we expect by 2H23, we anticipate opportunities to upgrade the pro-cyclical sectors Consumer Discretionary and Information Technology to Overweights. In order to fund these moves we likely would move Consumer Staples to an Underweight rating and Industrials and Materials back to Equalweights. Energy represents a significant “wildcard” for 2023, in our view, as it hinges heavily on crude oil demand which we anticipate will swing wildly in response to Ukraine-Russia and geopolitical developments as well as to global economic growth (or the lack thereof).

Asset class allocation and sector weightings offer valuable buffers against portfolio underperformance. However, in our view, picking equities that offer compelling risk-reward ratios represents the best protection from lagging performance. We spend an inordinate amount of time pouring over equity research, company news flows and financials, and relevant sector, industry, and geopolitical commentaries, from a wide variety of sources. In our view these efforts in combination with a significant amount of successful investing experience across a broad array of market conditions give Solyco Wealth “the edge” many firms lack. Below we offer the stocks, grouped by sector, that compose the current equity holdings of our four model portfolios:

Solyco Wealth Model Portfolios Substantially Outperform Benchmarks, S&P 500 in 4Q22 and 2022

The four model portfolios managed by Solyco Wealth generated relatively very strong performances for 4Q22, full-year 2022, and since their September 8, 2021, inception, as shown in the charts below. Except the performance of the Conservative Model Portfolio in 4Q22 vs. the S&P 500, each of the portfolios’ performances exceeded that of its benchmark as well as that of the S&P 500 and Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index. Since inception the Conservative, Moderate, Moderately Aggressive and Aggressive Model Portfolios averaged 9.72% of out-performance versus their respective benchmarks and 8.45% out-performance versus the S&P 500.

Stock-picking remained the key strength underpinning the success of Solyco Wealth as across all portfolios equity out-performance averaged exceeding that of the S&P 500 by 11.34%, or 1,134 basis points (bps). Meanwhile, out-performance of the fixed income exchange traded funds (ETFs) held in the model portfolios only averaged 0.84%, or 84 bps. As a matter of investment policy, Solyco Wealth populates its model portfolios with individual equities while allocating capital to bond ETFs to achieve the desired fixed income weighting. The four portfolios hold between 25 and 30 stocks of individual companies and two to seven bond ETFs. The three more conservative portfolios also utilize the common stocks of private debt providers Ares Capital (ARCC) and Hercules Technology (HTGC) to achieve diversified fixed income exposures.

Conservative Model Portfolio

As shown in the following table, the Conservative model portfolio posted a positive 6.62% result for 4Q22 but dropped 8.48% in 2022 and 6.78% since inception. These results outpaced Conservative’s benchmark by 260 bps in 4Q22, 484 bps in 2022, and 591 bps SI. Solyco Wealth runs the Conservative Model Portfolio with a 65% allocation to fixed income securities, a 22.8% domestic equity securities allocation, a 2.2% international equity securities allocation, and a 10% cash position. The Conservative portfolio benefited from out-performance from both its equity and fixed income allocations as performances to each of these asset class allocations outdistanced those of the S&P 500 and the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index. By design the Conservative Model Portfolio under-weighted international equities throughout 2022 in anticipation of greater worldwide volatility relative to that of the US. Although this positioning served the portfolios well last year, we anticipate it reversing and will commence to adding more international exposure with subsequent portfolio changes.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee for 2022 as well as 0.25% for 4Q22 and 1.33% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Conservative benchmark = total returns for 10.0% Russell 3000 Index, 65.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, and 10.0% MSCI World ex-US Index and 15.0% cash allocations.

Energy and Defense propelled Conservative’s results, led by SLB’s +84.1% return since inception as well as TotalEnergies (TTE) 50.8% move higher and Lockheed Martin’s (LMT) 44.1% rate of appreciation for the same time period. From the fixed income side Ares Capital (ARCC), in which the portfolio carries a 5% weighting, generated a +5.3%, over 1,800 bps better than the fixed income benchmark. 

On the downside Conservative suffered significantly from a 25.1% move lower for the Vanguard Emerging Markets Government Bond ETF (VWOB) prior to removing it from the portfolio in 3Q22. In fact, fixed income ETFs defined six of the seven worst performing assets held in the portfolio. Amazon (AMZN), falling 52.1% SI, provided the stiffest headwind for Conservative’s performance, followed by Alphabet’s (GOOGL) 38.9% drop and the 38.9% decline in Comcast’s stock price since portfolio inception.

Moderate Model Portfolio

With a returns profile of +8.53% for 4Q22, -8.25% for 2022, and -4.81% SI, Solyco Wealth’s Moderate Model Portfolio exceeded benchmark performances respectively by 237 bps, 757 bps, and 992 bps. The Moderate portfolio carried a 52% weighting to equities along with a 38% bond allocation and a 10% cash position. As Moderate’s fixed income holdings only outperformed the -14.73% performance of the benchmark by 35 bps, equity holdings that outpaced the S&P 500 by 13.09% SI drove portfolio outperformance.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee for 2022 as well as 0.25% for 4Q22 and 1.33% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Moderate benchmark = total returns for 22.5% Russell 3000 Index, 45.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, and 22.5% MSCI World ex-US Index, and 10.0% cash allocations.

As with the Conservative Model Portfolio, Moderate’s Energy holdings paced performance. SLB moved 84.1% while held in the portfolio while Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD), which remains a 1.73% weighting, appreciated 75.2% SI. Health care companies Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VRTX) and AbbVie (ABBV) were sold out of the portfolio at respective gains of 63.5% and 49.7%.

The 25.1% move lower for the Vanguard Emerging Markets Government Bond ETF (VWOB), Amazon’s (AMZN) 52.1% decline, and entertainment company Paramount’s (PARA) 53.5% move lower disproportionately detracted from Moderate’s performance. Twelve positions were sold out of Moderate since inception, including four at a loss. Centene (CNC) was sold and subsequently repurchased in exchange for VRTX.

Moderately Aggressive Model Portfolio

Solyco Wealth’s Moderately Aggressive Model Portfolio remained the firm’s top-performing portfolio as it gained 8.98% for 4Q22, reducing its 2022 loss to 6.46% and its fall since inception to only 1.22%. These results exceeded those of the S&P 500 by 142 bps for 4Q22, 1,165 bps for full-year 2022, and 1,206 bps since its 9/8/21 inception. Moderately Aggressive deploys 65% of its capital to equities with 25% allocated to debt ETFs, and 10% reserved in cash. As compared to the blended benchmark, which equally splits its equity allocation with 32.5% allocated to domestic and to international stocks, we underweighted international equities throughout 2022. As shown in the following table, equity performance accounted for the vast majority of the portfolio’s out-performance.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee for 2022 as well as 0.25% for 4Q22 and 1.33% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Moderately Aggressive benchmark = total returns for 32.5% Russell 3000 Index, 25.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, and 32.5% MSCI World ex-US Index, and 10.0% cash allocations.

Out-performing Energy stocks SLB and Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) were joined by Chilean lithium and minerals miner Sociedad de Quimica y Minera (SQM) in aiding Moderately Aggressive’s since-inception performance as SQM shares appreciated 64.0% over that period of time. As with the more conservatively managed portfolios, Health Care entities VRTX, ABBV, and CNC (which we sold and repurchased) joined Energy and SQM to benefit the portfolio. Unfortunately, significant downside moves from AMZN, PARA, CMCSA,and cloud computing concern ServiceNow (NOW), among others more than offset positive contributions and led to the portfolio’s 122 bps loss since inception. Interestingly, Moderately Aggressive, despite the prevailingly negative investing environment, saw almost as many positive (21) contributions as negative headwinds (24) from the 45 positions held by the portfolio since its inception.

Aggressive Model Portfolio

Despite posting the strongest finish to 2022 of Solyco Wealth’s four model portfolios, up 12.56% for 4Q22, the firm’s Aggressive Model Portfolio defined its worst offering for 2022 (-9.96%) and since inception (-6.52%). The increased small-cap exposure of Aggressive explains much of this relative under-performance as 2022 proved to be a horrid year for small-cap stocks, especially small-cap growth equities. Aggressive, as its name implies, hinges substantially on equity performance as that asset class composes 90% of the portfolio’s holdings. Debt ETFs make up 5% of the portfolio with the 5% balance allocated to cash. While the worst-performing of Solyco Wealth’s model portfolios, Aggressive still handily out-performed both its blended benchmark as well as the S&P 500 across 4Q22, 2022, and since-inception, time periods, as shown in the following table.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee for 2022 as well as 0.25% for 4Q22 and 1.33% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Aggregate benchmark = total returns for 45% Russell 3000 Index, 5.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, 45% MSCI World ex-US Index, and 5.0% cash allocations.

Small-cap oil and gas producer Earthstone Energy (ESTE) joined SLB and SQM among Aggressive’s best-performing positions, joined by CNC and VRTX from the Health Care sector and Deere & Co. (DE) and Performance Food Group (PFGC) from the respective universes of Industrial and Consumer Staples companies. The out-sized positive contributions from DE and PFGC prove doubly notable as they represented 2H22 additions that generated significantly positive impacts (+32.6% and +28.3%, respectively) in relatively very short periods of time.

Shopify (SHOP), an e-commerce services provider that dropped over 70% in 2022, and consumer products company YETI, which experienced a 57.5% decline in its stock price since portfolio inception, defined Aggressive two worst-performing holdings. Joining them were PARA, CMCSA, and NOW, which we also hold in other portfolios. Chart Industries (GTLS), which engineers and manufactures equipment for Energy and Industrial concerns, presented Aggressive with a significant conundrum late in 2022 as its very positive absolute performance for the first nine months of the year gave way to a 40% share price drop by year-end due to a very, very poorly received acquisition management announced in 4Q22. We retain GTLS in the portfolio, however, as we view the concerns surrounding the transaction of less long-term impact than the potential cash flow accretion of the combination. Similarly, we continue to hold SHOP shares due to their long-term prospects.

Using Cash-Secured Puts to Manage Stock Price Volatility

With significant price swings highly characteristic of equity markets in 2022, Solyco Wealth used cash-secured puts from the options markets to manage client portfolio volatility. We anticipate many opportunities to do so in 2023 likely will arise as well as volatility appears set to persist for the foreseeable future.

Cash-secured puts offer investors two benefits:

1. In the event that the target stock remains above the strike price of the put contract, the investor retains the premium for which their originally sold the contract; and
2. Should the stock price of the target company break below the strike price of the put contract, the investor may purchase the stock for the equivalent of the strike price minus the premium received for selling the original put contract.

The primary risk in writing or selling put options stems from the possibility that the share price of the target company may fall significantly below the strike price of the options contract. In the event of this occurrence, the investor has a significant choice to make in that they may buy-out their put option for the difference between the lower share price and the strike price of the option or they may buy the stock at a higher price than the recent market price (again, the option’s strike price minus the already-received premium). Hence, we arrive at Rule #1 for selling cash-secured put option contracts:

Do not sell cash-secured put option contracts on stocks one does not desire to own for the long-run.

Rule #1 also carries with it a corollary:

Do not use cash-secured put options unless sufficient cash exists in the account to buy shares of stock.

Engaging in the options market to participate in a specific stock may allow patient and disciplined investors to better manage price volatility by better defining the entry point for a specific equity. For instance, envision an investor that researched a particular stock and determined a target price of $165 for its shares. As those shares recently transacted at $137.50 each, representing 20% prospective upside, the investor decides to purchase 100 shares the following day. However, the company of interest announced the following morning before the market opened a positive development with a prospective new client: shares move much higher to the $145 level in pre-market trading. The investor, unwilling to chase this move higher as they incorporated the possibility of this new development in their $165 target price, maintains price discipline. Instead of waiting to purchase the shares on a pullback, the investor checks the put options market and discovers that a put expiring in one month with a $140 strike price offers a $2.50 premium. Thus, the investor may be able to replicate their original $137.50 purchase price.

Notably, this hypothetical participation in the put option market is not exactly the same as direct participation in the stock. In the event that the company’s shares continue to move higher, gains for the investor are capped at the $2.50 premium received for the put option they sold. The investor also does not participate in any dividends that the target company might pay out, unlike they would if they owned shares of the company outright.

Reorienting Model Portfolios after Active Week, Earnings Season

After equity markets made major moves last week and in response to the results of 3Q22 earnings season, Solyco Wealth made several key changes to its four model portfolios. Notably, we:

• Brought our 9% Energy over-weight down to an equal-weight 5.3%,
• Increased the Consumer Staples weighting to 6.1% from 3.5%, bringing it from under-weight to equal-weight,
• Added 1.1% to Technology, which resulted in a move to 21.1% from 20.0%, but left it effectively in a modest under-weight position.

As always, we remain agile and look to adjust our asset allocations to capture the best investing opportunities for our clients on a risk-adjusted basis.

In order to enact these asset allocation changes within our model portfolios, Solyco Wealth over the past few weeks removed Energy companies Schlumberger (SLB) and Marathon Petroleum (MPC) from model portfolios. We retain producers Total (TTE), Pioneer (PXD), and Earthstone (ESTE), in our portfolios with an obvious preference for the time being for producers versus oilfield services companies and/or refiners.

We added Anheuser-Busch (BUD) and Boston Beer (SAM) to gain the aforementioned increased exposure to the Consumer Staples sector. While transitions in consumer tastes from seltzer to hard liquor and/or beer, increased input costs, and vastly higher transportation expenses severely hampered brewers’ performances over the past year, we see these headwinds moderating in the near future. We also hold Wal-Mart and Performance Food Group from the Staples space in our model portfolios.

Additional recent changes made to our model portfolios include booking gains from Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VRTX) and Deere & Co. (DE). In the equal-weight Health Care sector we chose to replace VRTX with shares of vaccine-oriented biotech company BioNTech (BNTX). Replacing DE in the Industrials space, we chose to jump onboard with the increase in air travel and to add shares of airliner Delta (DAL). In the Financials space we rolled out of BlackRock (BLK), replacing it with investment banker Goldman Sachs (GS).

Solyco Wealth runs four risk-aware model portfolios – Conservative, Moderate, Moderately Aggressive, and Aggressive – for the benefit of its client. Upon request, we remain happy to share the composition of these portfolios; please email ctrimble@solycowealth.com for a copy of the model portfolios’ holdings and percentage allocations.

Outperformance Persists for Solyco Wealth Model Portfolios through 3Q22

Outperformance largely continued for the four model portfolios managed by Solyco Wealth in 3Q22, year-to-date in 2022 (YTD), and since inception (SI), as shown in the two graphs below. Unfortunately, with the head-fake of a recovery in risk-asset prices of July-August 2022 firmly in the rear-view mirror and the resumption of 1H22’s downward trajectory for assets prices, this outperformance translated to the four portfolios posting less negative total returns than their benchmarks and the major indices.

Across the portfolios prescient moves at end-2Q22 to add Deere & Co. [DE (+11.4% in 3Q22)] and Marathon Petroleum [MPC (+18.3% in 3Q22)] led performance for the quarter. Adding these positions produced a dual benefit as they replaced Technology positions that continued their declines over the course of the quarter. The DE and MPC moves higher, however, failed to offset the declines among Communication Services stocks Comcast [CMCSA (-24.9% in 3Q22)] and Paramount [PARA (-23.3% in 3Q22)], which were the worst performing securities across the portfolios last quarter.

As has been the case since the September 8, 2021, inception of Solyco Wealth’s model portfolios, stock-picking drove outperformance across all time frames. Unlike in 1H22, though, price dispersion across fixed income-related assets materialized in 3Q22. For instance, the SPDR Bloomberg High-Yield Bond ETF (SJNK) posted a +0.2% total return for the quarter. Thus, asset allocation, or the proportion of bonds versus stocks in the portfolios along with the choice of bond ETFs within the portfolios, contributed to outperformance for almost 80% of the 12 time-period observations across the four model portfolios.

Conservative Model Portfolio

The Conservative model portfolio, which offers a 65% allocation to fixed income securities, a 22.8% domestic equity securities allocation, a 2.2% international equity securities allocation, and a 10% cash position, after fees lost 4.2% for 3Q22, 14.5% year-to-date, and 12.9% since inception. The Conservative portfolio underweighted international equities since inception in order to overweight domestic equities. While the 3Q22 and since-inception performances outpaced the Conservative Model Portfolio’s benchmark after fees, YTD Conservative’s return lagged by a basis point.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee, or 0.25% for 3Q22, 0.75% year-to-date through 9/30/2022, and 1.075% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Conservative benchmark = total returns for 10.0% Russell 3000 Index, 65.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, and 10.0% MSCI World ex-US Index and 15.0% cash allocations.

Not counting its allocation to cash, five of Conservative’s 35 holdings in 3Q22 generated a positive performance contribution: the aforementioned DE, MPC, and SJNK, as well as Amazon [AMZN (+3.7%)] and CVS Health [CVS (+2.8%)]. For the YTD and Since Inception periods Energy companies Schlumberger (SLB) and Total (TTE), health insurer Cigna (CI), and defense and aerospace concern Lockheed Martin (LMT) also contributed positively to portfolio returns. Semiconductor equipment manufacturer Applied Materials [AMAT (-39.5% SI) along with Nike [NKE (-48.4% SI)] joined Communication Services companies CMCSA and PARA in presenting the stiffest headwinds for portfolio performance.  

Moderate Model Portfolio

The Moderate Model Portfolio performance exceeded benchmark and S&P 500 performance for 3Q22, YTD, and SI, time periods, returning -4.5% for 3Q22, -15.8% YTD, and -12.1% SI. The Moderate portfolio allocates 45% of assets to fixed income, 3.5% to international equities, 41.5% to domestic equities, and 10% to cash. These allocations place Moderate at a significant overweight position to domestic equities vis-à-vis the benchmark’s 22.5% allocation, reflective of the view (correct thus far since inception) that U.S. equities will outperform international stocks.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee, or 0.25% for 3Q22, 0.75% year-to-date through 9/30/2022, and 1.075% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Moderate benchmark = total returns for 22.5% Russell 3000 Index, 45.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, and 22.5% MSCI World ex-US Index, and 10.0% cash allocations.

In addition to previously mentioned positive contributions from DE, MPC, and SLB, the Moderate Model Portfolio also benefited since inception from the upside performances of:

• Oil and gas firm Pioneer Natural Resources [PXD (+62.2% since inception)],
• Vertex Pharmaceuticals [VRTX (+50.6% since inception)],
• Health insurer Centene [CNC (+28.3% since inception and sold 12/10/21)],
• Medical technology company AbbVie [ABBV (+49.7% since inception and sold 3/18/22)] and,
• Broadcom [AVGO (+28.1% since inception and sold 12/14/21)].

Eastman Chemical [EMN (-34.1% SI)] and Advanced Micro Devices [AMD (-42.0% SI)] join CMCSA, PARA, and NKE, in presenting significant challenges to higher Moderate portfolio returns.

Moderately Aggressive Model Portfolio

As it has since inception, the Moderately Aggressive Model Portfolio defined Solyco Wealth’s top-performing portfolio for 3Q22 with a 3.8% loss. Through the first nine months of 2022 Moderately Aggressive lost 13.8%, which exceeded benchmark and S&P 500 performances for the same nine-month period by 6.5% and 10.1%, respectively. Moderately Aggressive performed modestly better since inception as its 8.9% loss exceeded by 10.9% the benchmark’s 19.8% loss and by 10.5% the S&P 500’s 19.4% loss.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee, or 0.25% for 3Q22, 0.75% year-to-date through 9/30/2022, and 1.075% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Moderately Aggressive benchmark = total returns for 32.5% Russell 3000 Index, 25.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, and 32.5% MSCI World ex-US Index, and 10.0% cash allocations.

With a 65% equity weighting, substantially skewed to better-performing US equities, stock-picking drove the Moderately Aggressive Model Portfolio’s relative out-performance. Stock performance in the portfolio exceeded that of the S&P 500 by 11.7% since inception. The fixed income exchange traded funds (ETFs) in Moderately Aggressive also contributed to its comparative upside as their performance exceeded that of the benchmark Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index by 228 basis points.

International holding Sociedad de Quimica y Minera (SQM), one of the world’s largest lithium producers, paced Moderately Aggressive performance as it moved 7.7% higher for the quarter, +83.2% for all of 2022, and up 78.2% since inception. Joining SQM in supporting the portfolio’s performance were PXD, SLB, VRTX, MPC and DE. In addition to the significant declines experienced with CMCSA and PARA, Moderately Aggressive also suffered downside from cloud tech firm Service Now [NOW (-42.9% SI)], search leader Alphabet [GOOGL (-33.7% SI)], and Vanguard Emerging Markets Government Bond ETF [VWOB (-24.5% SI)].

Aggressive Model Portfolio

Distinctly risk-off attitudes in 2022 decidedly hampered Aggressive Model Portfolio returns as it posted losses of 5.6% for 3Q22, 19.5% YTD, and 15.9% SI. These performances outpaced those of the benchmark by 1.8%, 4.3%, and 7.1%, respectively, and those of the S&P 500 by 0.2%, 4.3%, and 3.4%. Indicative of transitions in fixed income markets in 3Q22, which saw a more positive reception for credit exposure, the model’s fixed income positions outperformed the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index by 2.3% in that period. For the YTD and SI periods equities remained responsible for Aggressive’s outperformance.

The above table reflects a 1% annual management fee, or 0.25% for 3Q22, 0.75% year-to-date through 9/30/2022, and 1.075% since exception.
Actual client investment performance likely will differ from respective model portfolio performance due to several factors including: 1) Timing of securities purchases and sales, 2) Dividend reinvestment choices, 3) Securities held outside the model portfolio, 4) Weighting differentials for certain securities relating to whole versus partial share accounting, 5) Timing and pricing of rebalancing actions, and other minor factors.
Aggregate benchmark = total returns for 45% Russell 3000 Index, 5.0% Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, 45% MSCI World ex-US Index, and 5.0% cash allocations.

Earthstone Energy [ESTE (+49.0% SI)] marked the only out-performing equity not held in the other portfolios and previously mentioned. Shopify [SHOP (-80.4% SI)] and Yeti [YETI (-70.6%)], despite continuing to post impressive absolute and relative growth amidst economic turmoil, posted substantial negative returns for the portfolio. Notably, active management, including dollar-cost averaging and covered-call writing, significantly reduced the actual magnitude of losses from these securities within the client portfolios that hold them and that follow the Aggressive Model Portfolio.

Tax-Loss Harvesting: Why and How

For taxable accounts tax-loss harvesting may be the most valuable portfolio management activity in which one can engage before year-end 2022. Depending on individual situations, the depth and breadth of asset market downturns this year probably offer numerous value-adding opportunities that tax consequences prohibited in prior years such as:

• Reducing legacy and/or concentrated stock positions,
• Rebalancing Tech-heavy portfolios for better diversification,
• Eliminating undesired positions in favor of more favorable holdings,
• Repositioning a growth-heavy portfolio to incorporate more value positions (or vice versa), and
• Adapting exposures to generate more income.

Another “trick” that may accentuate the value of tax-loss harvesting, providing one starts early, is dollar-cost averaging. While many associate dollar-cost averaging with selling securities, the process also may add value exiting positions. Rarely is it better to take a larger loss and, as such, selling out of positions over multiple trading sessions could enable one to take advantage of short-term volatility. Similarly, redeploying generated funds into new positions over time, opportunistically taking advantage of downside volatility, could complement well dollar-cost averaging out of positions.

Consider the following cherry-picked example to illustrate the potential value of tax-loss selling for a portfolio with just a passing flavor of favorable timing. Assume an investor correctly read the Energy environment six months ago and decided to buy 1,000 shares of oilfield services company Schlumberger (green line in price chart below) in early April 2022 at $42 per share for $42,000. Concurrently, the same investor unfortunately decided to purchase at the same time 133 shares of Microsoft (red line) at $300 per share for $39,990. In mid-June 2022 our lucky investor analyzed the SLB move to $50 per share to be too much too soon and sold their entire 1,000 shares and booked an $8,000 gain. On their MSFT position our investor proved to be not so lucky as the stock moved to $244 per share just a few days after they sold their SLB; the investor chose to sell MSFT and created a $7,448 loss. However, from a tax standpoint this MSFT loss prospectively adds $1,788 of value to the portfolio as the loss almost entirely offsets the impact of the investor’s $8,000 SLB gain, providing our investor resides in the 24% tax bracket.   

Driving our cherry-picked example just a little further, this investor also could have benefited from repurchasing the same 1,000 SLB shares four months later at $33. To maintain the symmetry to our example, they also recently reestablished their 133-share MSFT position at $244. So, our investor now not only retains the same 1,000 shares of SLB and 133 shares of MSFT, but they also have $16,868 in cash with an estimated tax liability of only $132 (24% * the $552 in gains not offset by the MSFT share sale). Additionally, the 1,000 SLB position recently reflected ~$5 per share of appreciation, offering another $5,000 in paper gains, but…with no offsetting tax-loss. Overall, our investor hypothetically finds themself an estimated $5,420 better off with the same 1,000 SLB shares and 133 MSFT shares, but with $16,868 in cash, net of the $132 in estimated taxes payable.