Showing posts with label Risk Arbitrage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Risk Arbitrage. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

A Response to Arbitrage Pricing Theory - MBA Mondays with Darwin

Initially,  I meant this response as a comment to a recent blog post, Arbitrage Pricing Theory - MBA Mondays with Darwin, however as I began to write, it has taken on a life of it’s own.

I commend Darwin in his endeavor to educate the general public, however to quote Darwin himself from a previous post :

“Not only do I disagree with his opinion, but I’m concerned that his advice is actually dangerous and gullible readers will lose money as a result.”

I realize that merger or risk arbitrage is presently alluring due to the raft of deals! coming to the fore.  In Risk Arbitrage back on?, I gave the reasons why many arbitrageurs are gearing up for what could be a banner year. I would caution, however that the subject is somewhat daunting, the scope of which cannot be covered in a single blog post.

That being said, I believe a little more color would dissuade any notion that putting on a risk arb trade is as easy and profitable as Darwin suggests. Hopefully I will enable readers to have a better understanding of the process of trading a merger deal .  Risk arb hedge funds have done rather poorly for the past few years, due to amongst other things the length of time a deal takes to go through which really screws with your return.

Merger Arbitrage - Whilst I agree with the basic outline of Darwin's merger arb paragraph, I think he is doing his readers a disservice by the rather simplistic overview of Risk Arbitrage given.  The announcement of a merger deal is merely the first scene of the first act of a production that could give Wagner’s Ring Cycle a run for it’s money.

Due to the scope of the subject matter, I will merely address the points Darwin has raised. He mentions that the price never reaches the theoretical price of the offer, this is technically not true as sometimes the price exceeds the offer price. Depending on whether the acquirer is paying a large enough premium, or if the offer undervalues the target, the target stock price will react accordingly.

Perhaps there is an alternative bidder as in the deal cited - AVIS(CAR) /Dollar Thrifty(DTG).  Initially the deal was between Hertz(HTZ) and Dollar Thrifty(DTG), The terms consisted of an exchange ratio of 0.6366 HTZ + $25.92/share in cash, and a $6.88/share special cash dividend to be paid by DTG immediately prior to the transaction's closing.

But the biggest reason the prices do not converge is it is not a “done deal”. There are many hoops to jump through beyond the initial announcement.  Typical timing for a non hostile, non regulated deal is 90-120 days.  That gives it enough time to clear the HSR antitrust act hurdle, and get SEC, DOJ , FTC and respective shareholders approvals.  Should it be in a regulated industry such as utilities, as in the recent Duke/Progress merger, timing increases to 1 year on average, to clear the additional regulatory bodies.

Now we get to the sexy, exciting, risky part of risk arb. The calculations have to work for you to even consider the trade.  How is the offer structured? all cash? cash and stock? In the deal cited, AVIS(CAR) initially offered $39.25 cash and 0.6543 CAR for every DTG in July 2010. That spread blew up(DTG stock price traded at a premium to the offering price) as the market thought the offer was not reflecting the inherent value of DTG.

Lets take Darwin’s hypothetical:

"So, let’s say you went out and bought shares on Monday and within a month, the FTC ruled that the deal could go through.  That would be a gain of ~$3 per share (6%) in a month, which is well over 70% annualized."

AVIS(CAR) upped the offer to $45.79 cash and the same ratio 0.6543 in September 2010, for a theoretical offer price tonight of $53.24 vs  RTG ask price of $49.9 for a $1.69 spread or a spread premium of 3.27%.  To get the spread you have to lock it in  - so for every 1 DTG you buy , you have to sell .6543 CAR.

As a retail investor you would get shitty borrow rates - if your broker can get the borrow that is - right there your 3.27% return is more like 2%. The retail investor can bump returns up with leverage(like hedge funds) - which you also have to pay for - so that cuts further into your return. Depending on the broker, there will be a short interest credit(interest on the short sale of CAR - but again as a retail customer, its bupkiss)...

As an alternative to buying the target and shorting the acquirer,  you can utilize a buy-write(selling calls against a long stock position) or put purchase strategy to alter the risk reward profile.  In this example, Buy 100 DTG and sell a DTG Call or Buy 100 DTG, sell 65 CAR and buy 1 DTG put.  A word of caution, the put purchase strategy would cut sharply into your return, but your risk would be greatly reduced also.

I will end here as I guess 80% of you are no longer interested. For those of you that are interested, shoot me an email. I  would agree with Darwin that the deal is looking dicey but only in terms of what the eventual company would look like.  I think there will likely have to be some divestitures which might play havoc with the accretive numbers Avis is pumping out..

To wit, I am all for education, however there is no short cut or easy way. There are no cliff notes either. The work and risk involved should be made crystal clear, it is NOT easy.  Look at the mutual funds that thought they could replicate a risk arbitrage strategy. It is by no means impossible, but it takes a lot more work than the normal investor is willing to put in.

Happy Trading!

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Merger Arbitrage Candidates: Interesting Reads

Following up on Risk Arbitrage Back On?, today Morningstar (MORN) and its unit Footnoted published their respective 2011 M&A outlooks, along with a list of top takeover candidates:
CHICAGO, Jan. 20, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (Nasdaq: MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, today published its Merger & Acquisition Outlook for 2011, a comprehensive research report that outlines merger and acquisition trends by sector, identifies the 100 most likely takeover candidates across Morningstar's equity coverage universe, highlights the likely acquirers, and examines the implications of merger and acquisition activity for bondholders.
"While global merger and acquisition activity has been on the decline over the last few years, we observed the inklings of a revival in 2010 and expect both the number and size of deals to substantially increase in 2011," said RJ Hottovy, director of equity research for consumer stocks and editor of the report. "We expect some of the key M&A themes to include interest in emerging markets, companies that have mastered a unique niche in their respective industries, and the ability to generate free cash flow."  


Interesting reads:


Morning Star M&A Report








FootnotedPro2011

Friday, January 14, 2011

Risk Arbitrage back on?

A NYtimes DealBook article, Return of the Risk Arbs, declared betting on mergers is back from the dead in November 2010:

We're seeing people dip their toe back in the water and participate, said Keith M. Moore, a managing director at MKM Partners in Stamford, Conn.

Many investment banks echo'd that sentiment in their 2011 outlooks, proclaiming mergers will return with a vengeance in 2011, with the rationales being:

  • Healthy corporate balance sheets with access to accommodative financing and reasonable or some might say cheap valuations.
  • The need to buy growth.
  • Product and or geographic extension.
  • Cost rationalization.
I would, however be remiss in not including the improving swagger of CEOs with an appetite for destruction, deal making.

With mergers being back in fashion, we might see the re-emergence of risk arbitrage or merger arbitrage, one of the most popular hedge fund strategies. So time to brush up on the strategy, review any new FTC guidelines and crank up "ye olde arb spreadsheet".

So, what is risk arbitrage? I can tell you it is not buying stock in a company because uncle Vito said “something’s gonna happen, so get stuck in”. Although, it would probably be highly profitable, it is not arbitrage and can be illegal. Along the same lines is rumortrage – it means just what you think it does -, those in the market know what I mean – particularly the denizens of Foreign Exchange trading. Sometimes rumortrage works but more often than not that “strategy” results in loss or break even at best minus costs, of course.

Risk arbitrage is the systematic arbitrage of corporate events, wherein the terms of the event specify exactly what investors will receive in exchange for their holdings when the operation effectively closes. These corporate events include mergers, tender offers, exchange offers, liquidations, spin-offs, and corporate reorganizations. For a more detailed discussion of risk arbitrage click here.

One such corporate event was announced on Monday January 10th. Duke Energy (DUK) and Progress Energy (PGN) announced that their board of directors have agreed to merge the two companies, with DUK offering 2.6125 shares of Duke for every one of PGN, in a deal valued at $38 billion (inclusive of $12 billion in debt).

Highlights

  • The pricing represents a 7% premium for PGN Shareholders to the stock price on January 5th and a 4% premium to the January 7th close.
  • It would also represent a 3% dividend increase for PGN Shareholders, based on DUK’s current dividend.
  • Both companies expect the deal to be accretive in its first full year and expect the deal to close by year-end 2011.

Approvals & Timing

  • Completion of the merger is conditioned upon, among other things, the approval of the shareholders of both companies, as well as expiration or termination of any applicable waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976.
  • Other necessary regulatory filings include: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) and South Carolina Public Service Commission (SCPSC).
  • DUK’s current northern states (IN, KY, OH ) as well as PGN’s FL jurisdiction only require notice and will not have to approve the deal.

On the conference call discussing the merger, Progress CEO Bill Johnson shed some light on the merger rationale, that of reducing costs and improving the company’s credit rating to meet new environmental regulations.

With the current spread at $2.07 with a retrurn 4.6% (Duke has a dividend due on 2/9/11 of $0.245, which puts the current spread at $1.43 and the return at 3.23%).

As with the Cinergy merger in 2005, the timing for deal closure will be between 12 and 18 months. Which should keep thr annualized return in the 3.25% - 3.30% ball park based on current spread of $2.07($1.43 - DUK dividend).

Not super sexy, yet nothing to sneeze at considering 5 year treasury is yielding 1.96%.

I will update the blog, once the offer document is released and I have had time to go over it.

Happy Trading

(Full disclosure, I have a position on at $2.05 spread.)



Duke Energy and Progress Energy Service Territories.







Advisors
J.P. Morgan served as lead financial advisor and provided a fairness opinion to Duke Energy, and BofA Merrill Lynch also provided a fairness opinion to Duke Energy. Lazard Frères served as lead financial advisor and provided a fairness opinion to Progress Energy, and Barclays Capital also served as a financial advisor and provided a fairness opinion to Progress Energy. Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz served as legal counsel for Duke Energy. Hunton & Williams LLP served as legal counsel for Progress Energy.

SW489XJZV6RF