Market Action

February 4, 2009

It seems that PrefBlog is persuading the world that Bad Bank = Bad Idea:

The Obama administration, aiming to overhaul the $700 billion financial-rescue program, is refocusing on an effort to guarantee illiquid assets against losses without taking them off banks’ balance sheets.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is skeptical of setting up a so-called bad bank to hold the toxic securities, an option that still may form part of the final package, people familiar with the matter said. Senator Charles Schumer yesterday said debt guarantees are becoming “a favorite choice” of options because a bad bank would be too costly.

Across the curve is skeptical:

The process of repairing the banking system (read the nursery rhyme Humpty Dumpty) is proving to be a challenge for the Obama Administration. News reports indicate that the bad bank idea is losing followers and that the Administration seems to be turning to idea of massive guarantees of the flotsam and jetsam in bank portfolios. As one commentator noted, that has not worked out so well for the stock price of Citibank and B of A.

PerpetualDiscounts were off slightly today on good volume and now yield 6.98% – the equivalent of 9.77% interest at the standard equivalency factor of 1.4x. Long Corporates remain fairly steady at 7.6%, so the Pre-Tax Interest-Equivalent Spread has widened slightly to +217bp.

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices
These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices

Values are provisional and are finalized monthly
Index Mean
Current
Yield
(at bid)
Median
YTW
Median
Average
Trading
Value
Median
Mod Dur
(YTW)
Issues Day’s Perf. Index Value
Ratchet 5.37 % 3.87 % 24,931 17.61 2 -0.3316 % 856.6
FixedFloater 7.26 % 6.93 % 66,917 13.93 7 0.5253 % 1,382.8
Floater 5.39 % 4.46 % 30,777 16.48 4 0.2058 % 974.2
OpRet 5.30 % 4.80 % 159,681 4.02 15 0.0110 % 2,026.2
SplitShare 6.22 % 8.85 % 72,465 4.09 15 -0.0016 % 1,791.3
Interest-Bearing 7.08 % 8.10 % 35,747 0.87 2 -0.1154 % 1,998.9
Perpetual-Premium 0.00 % 0.00 % 0 0.00 0 -0.0920 % 1,556.3
Perpetual-Discount 6.91 % 6.98 % 215,135 12.64 71 -0.0920 % 1,433.4
FixedReset 6.14 % 5.87 % 713,258 13.80 27 0.0074 % 1,792.5
Performance Highlights
Issue Index Change Notes
BNA.PR.B SplitShare -4.42 % Asset coverage of 1.8+:1 as of December 31 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2016-03-25
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 20.32
Bid-YTW : 8.74 %
BNS.PR.N Perpetual-Discount -2.36 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 19.43
Evaluated at bid price : 19.43
Bid-YTW : 6.82 %
PWF.PR.G Perpetual-Discount -2.19 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 21.03
Evaluated at bid price : 21.03
Bid-YTW : 7.08 %
PWF.PR.E Perpetual-Discount -2.01 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 19.51
Evaluated at bid price : 19.51
Bid-YTW : 7.12 %
BAM.PR.B Floater -1.81 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 7.61
Evaluated at bid price : 7.61
Bid-YTW : 7.01 %
TD.PR.S FixedReset -1.36 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 21.70
Evaluated at bid price : 21.75
Bid-YTW : 4.62 %
RY.PR.I FixedReset -1.35 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 21.81
Evaluated at bid price : 21.85
Bid-YTW : 4.91 %
GWO.PR.H Perpetual-Discount -1.30 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 16.64
Evaluated at bid price : 16.64
Bid-YTW : 7.41 %
POW.PR.C Perpetual-Discount -1.27 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 21.04
Evaluated at bid price : 21.04
Bid-YTW : 6.98 %
POW.PR.B Perpetual-Discount -1.23 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 19.21
Evaluated at bid price : 19.21
Bid-YTW : 7.06 %
NA.PR.L Perpetual-Discount -1.19 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 17.45
Evaluated at bid price : 17.45
Bid-YTW : 7.00 %
POW.PR.A Perpetual-Discount -1.18 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 20.85
Evaluated at bid price : 20.85
Bid-YTW : 6.80 %
WFS.PR.A SplitShare -1.15 % Asset coverage of 1.1+:1 as of January 31 according to Mulvihill.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2011-06-30
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 8.56
Bid-YTW : 12.74 %
CM.PR.K FixedReset -1.14 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 21.44
Evaluated at bid price : 21.75
Bid-YTW : 5.32 %
PWF.PR.A Floater 1.11 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 11.86
Evaluated at bid price : 11.86
Bid-YTW : 4.43 %
SLF.PR.C Perpetual-Discount 1.45 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 15.38
Evaluated at bid price : 15.38
Bid-YTW : 7.36 %
CU.PR.B Perpetual-Discount 1.65 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 22.56
Evaluated at bid price : 22.76
Bid-YTW : 6.60 %
CIU.PR.A Perpetual-Discount 1.74 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 16.50
Evaluated at bid price : 16.50
Bid-YTW : 6.99 %
DF.PR.A SplitShare 1.89 % Asset coverage of 1.4-:1 as of January 30 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2014-12-01
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 9.18
Bid-YTW : 7.06 %
BNA.PR.C SplitShare 1.90 % Asset coverage of 1.8+:1 as of December 31 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2019-01-10
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 11.82
Bid-YTW : 14.91 %
TD.PR.A FixedReset 2.06 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 22.21
Evaluated at bid price : 22.25
Bid-YTW : 4.86 %
IAG.PR.A Perpetual-Discount 2.40 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 16.66
Evaluated at bid price : 16.66
Bid-YTW : 7.02 %
NA.PR.N FixedReset 2.60 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 22.80
Evaluated at bid price : 22.86
Bid-YTW : 4.87 %
BAM.PR.O OpRet 2.77 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Option Certainty
Maturity Date : 2013-06-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 19.69
Bid-YTW : 11.50 %
BCE.PR.R FixedFloater 2.82 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 15.70
Bid-YTW : 6.82 %
Volume Highlights
Issue Index Shares
Traded
Notes
CM.PR.L FixedReset 432,749 New issue settled today.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-05-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.90
Bid-YTW : 6.65 %
TD.PR.G FixedReset 153,349 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 24.76
Evaluated at bid price : 24.81
Bid-YTW : 6.50 %
RY.PR.R FixedReset 151,650 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-03-26
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.90
Bid-YTW : 6.42 %
BNS.PR.X FixedReset 78,157 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-05-25
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.84
Bid-YTW : 6.48 %
RY.PR.H Perpetual-Discount 60,183 RBC crossed 52,300 at 21.25.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-04
Maturity Price : 21.02
Evaluated at bid price : 21.02
Bid-YTW : 6.75 %
GWO.PR.X OpRet 59,850 Nesbitt crossed 50,000 at 25.05.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Soft Maturity
Maturity Date : 2013-09-29
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 25.00
Bid-YTW : 4.94 %
There were 32 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.
Issue Comments

CM.PR.L Closes – A Little Wobbly but Fine

CIBC has announced:

that it completed the offering of 13 million non-cumulative Rate Reset Class A Preferred Shares Series 35 (the “Series 35 Shares”) priced at $25.00 per share to raise gross proceeds of $325 million.

The offering was made through a syndicate of underwriters led by CIBC World Markets Inc. Following the successful sale of the previously announced 10 million Series 35 Shares, the underwriters exercised an option to purchase an additional 3 million shares. The Series 35 Shares commence trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange today under the ticker symbol CM.PR.L.

The Fixed-Reset 6.50%+447 was announced last week with an original size of 8-million shares plus a 3-million greenshoe, quickly bumped up to 10+3.

Today it traded 432,749 shares in a range of 24.60-94 before settling at 24.90-93, 20×21. The issue has been added to the HIMIPref™ Fixed-Reset subindex.

MAPF

MAPF Portfolio Composition: January 2009

Trading was relatively heavy in January, with portfolio turnover of about 120%, as the late-December rally continued for the first half of the month and then settled in for a more traditional grind. The market was also affected by heavy issuance of Fixed-Resets, many of which had their issue sizes bumped upwards to meet investor demand. These Fixed-Reset issues seem to have found a new level for the initial fixed rate: 6.25% which is much more interesting than the 5.00% of last year. While still rather expensive as a class, the newer issues are at the point where they are becoming competitive with straight perpetuals.

Trades were, as ever, triggered by a desire to exploit transient mispricing in the preferred share market (which may the thought of as “selling liquidity”), rather than any particular view being taken on market direction, sectoral performance or credit anticipation.

MAPF Sectoral Analysis 2009-1-30
HIMI Indices Sector Weighting YTW ModDur
Ratchet 0% N/A N/A
FixFloat 9.9% (+0.7) 6.95% 13.87
Floater 0% N/A N/A
OpRet 0% N/A N/A
SplitShare 12.2% (-20.8) 14.89% 6.32
Interest Rearing 0% N/A N/A
PerpetualPremium 0.0% (0) N/A N/A
PerpetualDiscount 71.5% (+12.9) 7.28% 12.27
Fixed-Reset 7.2%% (+7.2) 6.34% 13.45
Cash -0.8% (0) 0.00% 0.00
Total 100% 8.17% 11.82
Totals and changes will not add precisely due to rounding. Bracketted figures represent change from December month-end. Cash is included in totals with duration and yield both equal to zero.

The “total” reflects the un-leveraged total portfolio (i.e., cash is included in the portfolio calculations and is deemed to have a duration and yield of 0.00.). MAPF will often have relatively large cash balances, both credit and debit, to facilitate trading. Figures presented in the table have been rounded to the indicated precision.

Positions held in the split-share corporations WFS.PR.A and FTN.PR.A were tendered for their monthly retraction in mid-December and retraction proceeds were received in mid-January. The retraction was highly profitable.

The fund’s closing position in the Fixed-Reset BNS.PR.X arrived by a circuitous route:

Post-Mortem on BNS.PR.X Purchase
Date BNS.PR.X TD.PR.E NA.PR.O BMO.PR.L BMO.PR.K
Dec. 31 N/A N/A N/A 19.62 18.51
Jan. 14     Bought
24.85
Sold
21.75
Sold
19.76
Jan. 21   Bought
25.07
Sold
25.00
   
Jan. 30 Bought
24.91
Sold
25.04
     
Closing Bid
Jan. 30
24.90 25.02 24.90 21.35 19.60
Dividend
Effects
None None None None None

Perhaps not the most profitable sequence of trades ever presented on this website, but they did a reasonable job of protecting the capital gains earned at mid-month! It should be noted that HIMIPref™ works by comparing like securities to like and is very cautious when swapping between classes … the impetus of initial trade was only partially direct analysis that NA.PR.O was more attractive than BMO.PR.K & BMO.PR.L; a major driving force of the trade was that the NA issue when taken relative to other fixed-resets was more attractive than the BMO issues relative to other PerpetualDiscounts.

Credit distribution is:

MAPF Credit Analysis 2009-1-30
DBRS Rating Weighting
Pfd-1 60.4% (+4.3)
Pfd-1(low) 6.1% (+3.0)
Pfd-2(high) 9.3% (+9.3)
Pfd-2
(held)
0.4 (-10.9)
Pfd-2(low)
(held)
24.6 (-5.8)
Cash -0.8% (0)
Totals will not add precisely due to rounding. Bracketted figures represent change from December month-end.

The fund does not set any targets for overall credit quality; trades are executed one by one. Variances in overall credit will be constant as opportunistic trades are executed. The overall credit quality of the portfolio is now superior to the credit quality of CPD at August month-end.

The lowest rated issues in the portfolio are BCE.PR.I and BNA.PR.C. The latter issue is an entirely reasonable credit; a split share secured by shares of BAM.A with asset coverage that continues to be about 1.8:1.

Liquidity Distribution is:

MAPF Liquidity Analysis 2009-1-30
Average Daily Trading Weighting
<$50,000 0.5% (-0.1)
$50,000 – $100,000 13.5% (+3.0)
$100,000 – $200,000
(held)
39.9% (-2.7)
$200,000 – $300,000 20.4% (+10.1)
>$300,000 26.5% (+9.6)
Cash -0.8% (0)
Totals will not add precisely due to rounding. Bracketted figures represent change from December month-end.

MAPF is, of course, Malachite Aggressive Preferred Fund, a “unit trust” managed by Hymas Investment Management Inc. Further information and links to performance, audited financials and subscription information are available the fund’s web page. A “unit trust” is like a regular mutual fund, but is sold by offering memorandum rather than prospectus. This is cheaper, but means subscription is restricted to “accredited investors” (as defined by the Ontario Securities Commission) and those who subscribe for $150,000+. Fund past performances are not a guarantee of future performance. You can lose money investing in MAPF or any other fund.

A similar portfolio composition analysis has been performed on The Claymore Preferred Share ETF (symbol CPD) as of August 29. When comparing CPD and MAPF:

  • MAPF credit quality is better
  • MAPF liquidity is higher
  • MAPF Yield is higher
  • Weightings in
    • PerpetualDiscounts is similar
    • MAPF is much less exposed to Operating Retractibles
    • MAPF is more exposed to SplitShares
    • FixFloat / Floater / Ratchet is similar
    • MAPF is slightly less exposed to Fixed-Resets
HIMI Preferred Indices

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices: January 2009

HIMI Index Values 2009-1-30
These values reflect the December 2008 Revision
Index Closing Value (Total Return) Issues Mean Credit Quality Median YTW Median DTW Median Daily Trading Mean Current Yield
Ratchet 851.6 2 2.00 3.93% 17.5 26M 5.43%
FixedFloater 1,384.7 7 2.00 6.96% 13.9 159M 7.25%
Floater 943.7 4 1.71 4.75% 16.0 33M 5.57%
OpRet 2,023.7 15 1.36 4.92% 4.0 164M 5.31%
SplitShare 1,789.8 15 2.00 9.05% 4.10 76M 6.23%
Interest-Bearing 2,004.7 2 2.00 8.21% 0.9 36M 7.06%
Perpetual-Premium 1,562.2 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Perpetual-Discount 1,438.7 71 1.24 6.85% 12.7 223M 6.87%
FixedReset 1,797.9 26 1.04 5.44% 14.3 761M 6.10%

For Index Revisions during January 2009, see the post HIMIPref™ Index Rebalancing: January 2009.

Publication of index details is embargoed for six months following index date.

Index Construction / Reporting

Index Performance: January 2009

Performance of the HIMIPref™ Indices for January, 2009, was:

Total Return
Index Performance
January 2009
Three Months
to
January 30, 209
Ratchet +7.03% -34.62%
FixFloat +10.59% -23.58%
Floater -4.35% -14.04%
OpRet +2.83% +2.63%
SplitShare +1.75% +0.46%
Interest +9.18% -3.88%
PerpetualPremium +6.45%* +1.18%*
PerpetualDiscount +6.45% +1.18%%
FixedReset +0.26% -7.32%
* The last member of the PerpetualPremium index was transferred to PerpetualDiscount at the October rebalancing; subsequent performance figures are set equal to the PerpetualDiscount index
Funds (see below for calculations)
CPD +3.26% -1.52%
DPS.UN +5.71% -2.78%
Index
BMO-CM 50 +3.98% -1.21%

That, by the way, is the best monthly return for the IndexBearing sub-index on record.

Claymore has published NAV and distribution data for its exchange traded fund (CPD) and I have derived the following table:

CPD Return, 1- & 3-month, to January 30, 2009
Date NAV Distribution Return for Sub-Period Monthly Return
October 31 15.04      
November 28, 2008 13.37 0.00   -11.10%
Dec 24 12.92 0.2135 -1.77% +7.28%
Dec 31, 2008 14.11   +9.21%
January 30, 2009 14.57 0.00   +3.26%
Quarterly Return -1.52%

The DPS.UN NAV for January 28 has been published so we may calculate the January returns (approximately!) for this closed end fund.

DPS.UN NAV Return, January-ish 2009
Date NAV Distribution Return for period
December 31, 2008 15.64    
January 28, 2009 16.51   +5.56%
Estimated January Ending Stub +0.14%
Estimated January Return +5.71%
* CPD had a NAV of $14.55 on January 28 and $14.57 on January 30. Return for this period for CPD was therefore +0.14%.
The January return for DPS.UN’s NAV is therefore the product of two period returns, +5.56% and +0.14%, to arrive at an estimate for the calendar month of +5.71%

Now, to see the DPS.UN quarterly NAV approximate return, we refer to the calculations for November and December

DPS.UN NAV Returns, three-month-ish to end-January-ish, 2009
November-ish -12.95%
December-ish +5.65%
January-ish +5.71%
Three-months-ish -2.78%
Market Action

February 3, 2009

The Fed has announced that the alphabet soup of liquidity support will be with us for some time yet:

The Board of Governors approved the extension through October 30 of the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility (AMLF), the Commercial Paper Funding Facility (CPFF), the Money Market Investor Funding Facility (MMIFF), the Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF), and the Term Securities Lending Facility (TSLF). The FOMC also took action to extend the TSLF, which is established under the joint authority of the Board and the FOMC.

These are tough times for Tier 1 Capital at the banks in the eye of the storm:

The market for securities with characteristics of both debt and equity that Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp. and other financial companies used to bolster their capital is in freefall on concern governments will stop banks that took public cash from paying interest. The hybrids, which typically count as regulatory capital to cushion against losses, fell 11 percent last month in the U.S., more than they did in all of 2008, according to Merrill Lynch & Co. index data. Citigroup and Bank of America bonds lost as much as 34 percent of their value.

Only $694 million of preferred securities were sold in the U.S. since September, when the government closed the market by seizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That compares with about $44 billion in the first three quarters of last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

$694-million preferreds [and in the States, remember, this figure will include what we call Innovative Tier 1 Capital] in 4Q08? Hell, up here in Canada we do that in a week!

It’s not often Canadians have the opportunity to lord it over the global titans, so let’s enjoy it while we can!

Econbrowser‘s Menzie Chinn writes a piece on multipliers that I can only hope Pussycat and What-Debt? will read:

For some people, the answer to every question is…a tax cut!

I think the “wrong” kind of interventions include a slavish devotion to tax cuts — especially when the [Marginal Propensity to Consume] [3] could be argued to be low in the aggregate (although I still believe it would be relative high for liquidity constrained households).

Accrued Interest likes the “Bad Bank” idea but I continue to believe:

  • All previous efforts to entice banks into selling “toxic assets” have failed
  • Caballero’s idea of ‘tail-insurance’ is the best way forward.

Donato Masciantdaro and Marc Quintyn write a piece on VoxEU introducing their formal paper on bank supervision:

Our CEPR Policy Insight No. 30, released today, summarises the answers provided so far. One of the interesting features of the current supervisory landscape is the emerging dichotomy between the role of the central bank in supervision and the trend toward supervisory unification. In a majority of countries that have opted for a unified supervisor, the central bank has been given no role in supervision. On the other side of the spectrum, in those countries that stayed close to the “silo” approach to supervision, the central bank is the main (or sole) bank supervisor in a majority of cases. This phenomenon – that the degree of supervision unification seems to be inversely correlated with central bank involvement – has been labelled the “central bank fragmentation effect”

Similarly, Patrick Bajari, Chenguan Sean Chu and Minjung Park introduce their NBER Paper An Empirical Model of Subprime Mortgage Default from 2000 to 2007 in a VoxEU piece Quantifying the triggers of subprime mortgage defaults:

A decomposition using our estimation results indicates that the nationwide decrease in home prices accounts for roughly half the increase in default propensity of loans originated in 2006 compared to 2004-vintage loans. With home prices down by more than 20% from their peaks in many US cities, borrowers whose outstanding mortgage liabilities now exceed their home values can in effect increase their wealth by walking away from their loans. Our estimates indicate that, for a borrower who purchased a home one year earlier with a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage and no down payment, a 20% decline in home price makes the borrower 15.4% more likely to default than an otherwise identical borrower whose home price remained stable.

However, we also find that household illiquidity is an equally important factor behind the increasing propensity of borrowers to default. Our parameter estimates indicate that roughly half the increase in default probability for 2006-vintage loans relative to 2004-vintage loans can be attributed to deterioration over time in observed characteristics of the borrower pool. In particular, later borrowers tend to have lower credit scores and a higher probability of having undocumented loans or additional liens on their properties—indicators of a greater risk of illiquidity due to insufficient income or lack of access to other forms of credit. We also see an increase over time in the proportion of adjustable-rate mortgages among new originations. Adjustable-rate mortgages are generally chosen by more liquidity-constrained borrowers, and often come with large, periodic increases to monthly payments, forcing liquidity-constrained borrowers to default.

Because we find empirical importance for both illiquidity and net equity as drivers of default, this suggests that effectively mitigating foreclosures would require either some combination of policies targeting each cause, or a single instrument that targets both. For example, loan modifications that merely increase payment affordability by extending loan lengths would not be very effective as a standalone measure, as they would leave borrowers’ equity positions unchanged. On the other hand, write-downs on loan principal amounts would address both causes simultaneously, with the reduction in loan size serving both to increase the borrower’s net equity as well as reduce monthly payments.

But today’s prize-winning essay – give that man a kewpie doll! – is from Thomas Philippon, who eschews slogan-shouting while asking the question Are bankers paid too much?:

Evidence from a new century-long dataset suggests that the key factors driving relative wages in the financial sector have been regulation and corporate finance activity, followed by financial innovation. Over the past decade, however, “rents” account for 30% to 50% of the sector’s wage differential. In this sense, financiers are overpaid.

Our investigation reveals a very tight link between deregulation and human capital in the financial sector. Highly skilled labour left the financial sector in the wake of Depression era regulations, and started flowing back precisely when these regulations were removed. This link holds both for finance as a whole, as well as for subsectors within finance. Along with our relative complexity indices, this suggests that regulation inhibits the ability to exploit the creativity and innovation of educated and skilled workers. Deregulation unleashes creativity and innovation and increases demand for skilled workers.

The second set of forces that appear to have a large influence on the demand for skills in finance are non-financial corporate activities: in particular, IPOs and credit risk. New firms are difficult to value because they are often associated with new technologies or new business models, and also for the obvious reason that they do not have a track record. Similarly, pricing and hedging risky debt is an order of magnitude harder than pricing and hedging government debt. Indeed, we find that increases in aggregate IPO activities and credit risk predict increases in human capital intensity in the financial industry. Computers and information technology also play a role, albeit a more limited one. Contrary to common wisdom, computers cannot account for the evolution of the financial industry. The financial industry of the 1920s appears remarkably similar to the financial industry of the 1990s despite the lack of computers in the early part of the sample.

Not a great day for prefs.

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices
These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices

Values are provisional and are finalized monthly
Index Mean
Current
Yield
(at bid)
Median
YTW
Median
Average
Trading
Value
Median
Mod Dur
(YTW)
Issues Day’s Perf. Index Value
Ratchet 5.36 % 3.86 % 25,795 17.62 2 0.9269 % 859.5
FixedFloater 7.30 % 7.04 % 64,798 13.86 7 -0.3582 % 1,375.5
Floater 5.40 % 4.48 % 31,194 16.45 4 0.1546 % 972.2
OpRet 5.30 % 4.69 % 161,658 4.02 15 0.1505 % 2,026.0
SplitShare 6.22 % 9.39 % 73,235 4.09 15 0.3496 % 1,791.3
Interest-Bearing 7.07 % 8.31 % 35,860 0.87 2 0.1155 % 2,001.3
Perpetual-Premium 0.00 % 0.00 % 0 0.00 0 -0.2587 % 1,557.8
Perpetual-Discount 6.89 % 6.93 % 217,265 12.63 71 -0.2587 % 1,434.7
FixedReset 6.12 % 5.62 % 724,727 14.13 26 -0.4391 % 1,792.3
Performance Highlights
Issue Index Change Notes
BCE.PR.F FixedFloater -3.16 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 15.01
Bid-YTW : 7.13 %
CIU.PR.A Perpetual-Discount -2.42 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 16.50
Evaluated at bid price : 16.50
Bid-YTW : 7.13 %
RY.PR.G Perpetual-Discount -2.42 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 17.32
Evaluated at bid price : 17.32
Bid-YTW : 6.53 %
GWO.PR.H Perpetual-Discount -2.26 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 16.86
Evaluated at bid price : 16.86
Bid-YTW : 7.31 %
BNS.PR.R FixedReset -2.23 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 21.51
Evaluated at bid price : 21.51
Bid-YTW : 4.97 %
ALB.PR.A SplitShare -2.01 % Asset coverage of 1.1+:1 as of January 29 according to Scotia.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2011-02-28
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 19.50
Bid-YTW : 18.00 %
PWF.PR.H Perpetual-Discount -1.92 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 20.40
Evaluated at bid price : 20.40
Bid-YTW : 7.12 %
SLF.PR.C Perpetual-Discount -1.88 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 15.16
Evaluated at bid price : 15.16
Bid-YTW : 7.47 %
PWF.PR.I Perpetual-Discount -1.76 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 21.76
Evaluated at bid price : 21.76
Bid-YTW : 6.96 %
NA.PR.K Perpetual-Discount -1.64 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 20.40
Evaluated at bid price : 20.40
Bid-YTW : 7.22 %
RY.PR.B Perpetual-Discount -1.50 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 17.74
Evaluated at bid price : 17.74
Bid-YTW : 6.65 %
BAM.PR.K Floater -1.44 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 7.54
Evaluated at bid price : 7.54
Bid-YTW : 7.07 %
SLF.PR.E Perpetual-Discount -1.40 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 15.48
Evaluated at bid price : 15.48
Bid-YTW : 7.39 %
BNS.PR.K Perpetual-Discount -1.40 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 18.35
Evaluated at bid price : 18.35
Bid-YTW : 6.60 %
CM.PR.K FixedReset -1.35 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 21.62
Evaluated at bid price : 22.00
Bid-YTW : 5.25 %
TD.PR.Q Perpetual-Discount -1.34 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 20.62
Evaluated at bid price : 20.62
Bid-YTW : 6.85 %
TD.PR.R Perpetual-Discount -1.34 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 20.62
Evaluated at bid price : 20.62
Bid-YTW : 6.85 %
MFC.PR.C Perpetual-Discount -1.34 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 16.94
Evaluated at bid price : 16.94
Bid-YTW : 6.76 %
IAG.PR.C FixedReset -1.30 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 22.02
Evaluated at bid price : 22.06
Bid-YTW : 6.60 %
FTN.PR.A SplitShare -1.16 % Asset coverage of 1.3+:1 as of January 15 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2015-12-01
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 7.68
Bid-YTW : 10.14 %
POW.PR.A Perpetual-Discount -1.12 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 21.10
Evaluated at bid price : 21.10
Bid-YTW : 6.72 %
NA.PR.L Perpetual-Discount -1.12 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 17.66
Evaluated at bid price : 17.66
Bid-YTW : 6.91 %
TD.PR.Y FixedReset -1.09 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 21.73
Evaluated at bid price : 21.77
Bid-YTW : 4.73 %
BMO.PR.M FixedReset -1.08 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 21.86
Evaluated at bid price : 21.91
Bid-YTW : 4.70 %
PWF.PR.A Floater -1.01 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 11.73
Evaluated at bid price : 11.73
Bid-YTW : 4.48 %
BAM.PR.H OpRet 1.04 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Soft Maturity
Maturity Date : 2012-03-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 22.33
Bid-YTW : 10.06 %
BNA.PR.A SplitShare 1.22 % Asset coverage of 1.8+:1 as of December 31 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2010-09-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.10
Bid-YTW : 9.39 %
BCE.PR.Y Ratchet 1.36 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 14.20
Bid-YTW : 7.49 %
HSB.PR.D Perpetual-Discount 1.50 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 17.56
Evaluated at bid price : 17.56
Bid-YTW : 7.24 %
ACO.PR.A OpRet 1.56 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2009-12-31
Maturity Price : 25.50
Evaluated at bid price : 26.00
Bid-YTW : 4.57 %
LFE.PR.A SplitShare 1.74 % Asset coverage of 1.5-:1 as of January 15 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2012-12-01
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 9.34
Bid-YTW : 7.31 %
ELF.PR.G Perpetual-Discount 1.75 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 14.50
Evaluated at bid price : 14.50
Bid-YTW : 8.31 %
WFS.PR.A SplitShare 1.88 % Asset coverage of 1.1+:1 as of January 22 according to Mulvihill.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2011-06-30
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 8.66
Bid-YTW : 12.18 %
PWF.PR.E Perpetual-Discount 2.10 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 19.91
Evaluated at bid price : 19.91
Bid-YTW : 6.97 %
GWO.PR.G Perpetual-Discount 2.31 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 18.15
Evaluated at bid price : 18.15
Bid-YTW : 7.28 %
BAM.PR.B Floater 2.51 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 7.75
Evaluated at bid price : 7.75
Bid-YTW : 6.88 %
BNA.PR.C SplitShare 3.20 % Asset coverage of 1.8+:1 as of December 31 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2019-01-10
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 11.60
Bid-YTW : 15.20 %
Volume Highlights
Issue Index Shares
Traded
Notes
BNS.PR.X FixedReset 125,407 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-05-25
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.90
Bid-YTW : 6.42 %
RY.PR.R FixedReset 95,476 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-03-26
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.95
Bid-YTW : 6.37 %
TD.PR.G FixedReset 77,994 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-05-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.85
Bid-YTW : 6.46 %
TD.PR.E FixedReset 73,337 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-05-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 25.05
Bid-YTW : 6.34 %
SLF.PR.E Perpetual-Discount 59,400 RBC crossed 47,500 at 15.45.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 15.48
Evaluated at bid price : 15.48
Bid-YTW : 7.39 %
SLF.PR.B Perpetual-Discount 45,051 Nesbitt crossed 37,100 at 16.88.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-03
Maturity Price : 16.78
Evaluated at bid price : 16.78
Bid-YTW : 7.27 %
There were 37 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.
Seminars

Seminar, February 26: PerpetualDiscounts

Update, 2009-8-25: To gain access to the on-line video of this seminar and the ancillary written material, please visit PrefLetter.com

I am pleased to announce that I will be hosting a seminar series on the theory and practice of preferred share investing.

These seminars will be aimed at active and potential preferred share investors who wish to review relative valuation techniques in preferred share analysis.

All seminars will be presented by James Hymas, who has written extensively on the subject of preferred share investment and has been referred to as a "top expert" on the subject.

Questions are encouraged throughout the seminars, as well as in informal discussion at the end of the session.

Each seminar is two hours in length; coffee and tea will be served. The cost of attendance is $100, but a discount of $50 will be given to participants who have an annual subscription to PrefLetter with at least one issue remaining at the time of the seminar.

PerpetualDiscounts: Theory & Practice

"PerpetualDiscounts" are currently the most common type of preferred share in Canada. They are characterized by:

  • No mechanism whereby the issue can be forced to redeem the shares
  • A fixed dividend rate
  • Call provisions in the issuer’s favour
  • a trading price below their call price

This seminar will review the theory of PerpetualDiscount evaluation, including:

  • Credit Quality
  • The embedded call
  • The importance of ex-Dividend dates
  • Importance of cumulative dividends
  • Investment characteristics relative to bonds

Examples of relative valuation in current markets will be supplied and discussed.

Attendence is limited; a reservation will avoid disappointment.

Location: Days Hotel & Conference Center, (at Carlton & College, downtown Toronto) Yorkville Room (see map).

Time: February 26, 2009, 6pm-8pm.

Reservations: Please send an eMail to jiHymas@himivest.com.

Update, 2009-4-24: The seminar and its ancillary material have been accredited for four hours of IDA Professional Development Continuing Education.

Update, 2009-8-24: ◦This program is eligible for four CE credit hours, as granted by CFA Institute. If you are a CFA Institute member, CE credit for your participation in this program will be automatically recorded in your CE Diary.

 
 

Market Action

February 2, 2009

Spend-Every-Penny is urging Canadian investors to ignore banks’ capital ratios:

“We have said that we’ll do what’s necessary to protect the Canadian banking system,” Mr. Flaherty reiterated on Saturday from Davos during a conference call with reporters.

It seems like only a few months back he was saying that his government would no more run a deficit than a man could have a baby.

With a hat-tip to Econbrowser, a graph from Calculated Risk puts the current crash in perspective:


Click for big

Volume was off today – month-end window dressing is done for another three weeks? – and PerpetualDiscounts eased off slightly. Recent increases in the Canada 5-year yield have triggered legitimate expectations (subject to volatility!) of five-year calls in the Fixed-Reset market.

HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices
These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices

Values are provisional and are finalized monthly
Index Mean
Current
Yield
(at bid)
Median
YTW
Median
Average
Trading
Value
Median
Mod Dur
(YTW)
Issues Day’s Perf. Index Value
Ratchet 5.42 % 3.91 % 25,470 17.54 2 0.0000 % 851.6
FixedFloater 7.27 % 7.01 % 65,980 13.88 7 -0.3021 % 1,380.5
Floater 5.41 % 4.51 % 32,457 16.37 4 2.8624 % 970.7
OpRet 5.31 % 4.78 % 164,009 4.02 15 -0.0334 % 2,023.0
SplitShare 6.24 % 10.18 % 73,501 4.09 15 -0.2611 % 1,785.1
Interest-Bearing 7.08 % 8.17 % 37,095 0.87 2 -0.2880 % 1,998.9
Perpetual-Premium 0.00 % 0.00 % 0 0.00 0 -0.0234 % 1,561.8
Perpetual-Discount 6.88 % 6.87 % 220,391 12.67 71 -0.0234 % 1,438.4
FixedReset 6.10 % 5.64 % 740,671 14.10 26 0.1287 % 1,800.2
Performance Highlights
Issue Index Change Notes
DFN.PR.A SplitShare -4.29 % Asset coverage of 1.7-:1 as of January 15, according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2014-12-01
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 8.71
Bid-YTW : 8.14 %
ENB.PR.A Perpetual-Discount -3.81 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 22.70
Evaluated at bid price : 22.99
Bid-YTW : 6.09 %
PWF.PR.E Perpetual-Discount -3.70 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 19.50
Evaluated at bid price : 19.50
Bid-YTW : 7.12 %
GWO.PR.G Perpetual-Discount -3.11 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 17.74
Evaluated at bid price : 17.74
Bid-YTW : 7.45 %
ELF.PR.G Perpetual-Discount -1.72 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 14.25
Evaluated at bid price : 14.25
Bid-YTW : 8.46 %
BNA.PR.A SplitShare -1.61 % Asset coverage of 1.8+:1 as of December 31, according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2010-09-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 23.81
Bid-YTW : 10.18 %
BCE.PR.R FixedFloater -1.55 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 15.27
Bid-YTW : 7.06 %
BCE.PR.G FixedFloater -1.38 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 15.00
Bid-YTW : 7.23 %
TD.PR.P Perpetual-Discount -1.25 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 19.75
Evaluated at bid price : 19.75
Bid-YTW : 6.71 %
TD.PR.A FixedReset -1.13 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 21.91
Evaluated at bid price : 21.95
Bid-YTW : 4.92 %
BAM.PR.N Perpetual-Discount 1.06 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 12.42
Evaluated at bid price : 12.42
Bid-YTW : 9.77 %
TD.PR.C FixedReset 1.08 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 23.26
Evaluated at bid price : 23.30
Bid-YTW : 5.44 %
BAM.PR.K Floater 1.19 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 7.65
Evaluated at bid price : 7.65
Bid-YTW : 6.97 %
MFC.PR.C Perpetual-Discount 1.24 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 17.17
Evaluated at bid price : 17.17
Bid-YTW : 6.67 %
W.PR.H Perpetual-Discount 1.24 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 19.53
Evaluated at bid price : 19.53
Bid-YTW : 7.13 %
BNS.PR.K Perpetual-Discount 1.36 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 18.61
Evaluated at bid price : 18.61
Bid-YTW : 6.51 %
POW.PR.A Perpetual-Discount 1.52 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 21.34
Evaluated at bid price : 21.34
Bid-YTW : 6.64 %
RY.PR.G Perpetual-Discount 1.66 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 17.75
Evaluated at bid price : 17.75
Bid-YTW : 6.37 %
HSB.PR.C Perpetual-Discount 1.74 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 17.55
Evaluated at bid price : 17.55
Bid-YTW : 7.39 %
BNS.PR.R FixedReset 1.80 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 21.96
Evaluated at bid price : 22.00
Bid-YTW : 4.85 %
PPL.PR.A SplitShare 1.92 % Asset coverage of 1.4+:1 as of January 15 according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2012-12-01
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 9.02
Bid-YTW : 8.01 %
DF.PR.A SplitShare 1.93 % Asset coverage of 1.4-:1 as of January 15, according to the company.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Hard Maturity
Maturity Date : 2014-12-01
Maturity Price : 10.00
Evaluated at bid price : 8.96
Bid-YTW : 7.55 %
NA.PR.L Perpetual-Discount 2.06 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 17.86
Evaluated at bid price : 17.86
Bid-YTW : 6.83 %
GWO.PR.H Perpetual-Discount 2.07 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 17.25
Evaluated at bid price : 17.25
Bid-YTW : 7.14 %
BAM.PR.B Floater 2.72 % YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 7.56
Evaluated at bid price : 7.56
Bid-YTW : 7.05 %
PWF.PR.A Floater 7.14 % Basically, reversing Friday’s nonsense.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Limit Maturity
Maturity Date : 2039-02-02
Maturity Price : 11.85
Evaluated at bid price : 11.85
Bid-YTW : 4.43 %
Volume Highlights
Issue Index Shares
Traded
Notes
BNS.PR.X FixedReset 127,375 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-05-25
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.91
Bid-YTW : 6.41 %
NA.PR.P FixedReset 78,398 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-03-17
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.90
Bid-YTW : 6.77 %
TD.PR.G FixedReset 63,070 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-05-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.86
Bid-YTW : 6.45 %
RY.PR.R FixedReset 59,340 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-03-26
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 24.92
Bid-YTW : 6.40 %
BAM.PR.H OpRet 53,151 Desjardins crossed 50,000 at 22.15.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Soft Maturity
Maturity Date : 2012-03-30
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 22.10
Bid-YTW : 10.43 %
RY.PR.P FixedReset 26,115 Recent new issue.
YTW SCENARIO
Maturity Type : Call
Maturity Date : 2014-03-26
Maturity Price : 25.00
Evaluated at bid price : 25.12
Bid-YTW : 6.26 %
There were 12 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.
Issue Comments

XCM.PR.A: Last Day to Vote on Reorganization

Commerce Split Corp has announced:

the deadline for voting on the proposed reorganization is February 3, 2009 at 10:00 a.m.

The purpose of the meeting, as previously disclosed, is to provide both Priority Equity and Class A shareholders with two choices. Effectively, there would be two investment options within the Company, each of which will be considered a separate investment fund.

The first Fund (Original Commerce Split) would function in much the same way as the Company now functions. There would continue to be two classes of shares related to this Fund: Priority Equity shares and Class A shares. The portfolio assets of the Fund would consist largely of cash and permitted repayment securities, and there would be limited exposure to the common shares of CIBC. There would continue to be a Priority Equity Portfolio Protection Plan in respect of this Fund.

The second Fund (New Commerce Split) would not have a Priority Equity Protection Plan associated with it, but rather would hold only shares of CIBC, to provide full exposure to a potential recovery in the value of CIBC common shares. The increased exposure to such common shares would create higher dividend income (assuming no changes to current dividends paid on the CIBC common shares) and the potential for much higher levels of income through the covered call writing program. In summary, under this option, Priority Equity Shares would receive the following securities for each Priority Equity share held: (i) one new $5 Class I Preferred share to yield 7.5% per annum; (ii) one Class II Preferred share with a notional value of $5 with distributions to yield 7.5% per annum on the $5 notional issue price to commence if and when the net asset value per unit of the New Commerce Split exceeds $12.50; and (iii) one half warrant. One full warrant can be exercised to purchase one Unit (consisting of one Class I Preferred share, one Class II Preferred share and one Capital share) for $10.00 at specified times for a period of two years after the closing date of the reorganization, if approved. Class A shares would receive one Capital share which would continue to participate in any net asset value growth over $10.00 per unit and dividends would only be reinstated if and when the net asset value per Unit exceeds $15.00.

Therefore, the special resolution, if passed, will effectively offer all shareholders a choice of the status quo through the Original Commerce Split or participating in a new fund through New Commerce Split that potentially could offer increased distribution and capital growth potential. The Company believes providing this choice is in the best interests of all shareholders in light of the unprecedented and severe decline in CIBC shares and the fact that there is still 6 years remaining until the maturity date of the Company.

We encourage all shareholders who have not yet voted, to vote by the February 3, 2009 deadline.

As discussed at the time of announcement, I recommend … VOTE NO!:

The preferred shareholders – currently holding a perfectly good fixed-income portfolio – are being asked to provide all the funding for the new company, taking all the downside risk of the portfolio holdings and giving away, free, gratis and for nothing an option on a big chunk of the upside. VOTE NO!

Issue Comments

XMF.PR.A: Last Day to Vote on Reorganization

M-Split Corporation has announced:

Last Day to Vote on Proposed Reorganization
TORONTO, ONTARIO – February 2, 2009 / Marketwire: M Split Corp (the “Company”) announces the deadline for voting on the proposed reorganization is February 3, 2009 at 10:00 a.m.

The purpose of the meeting, as previously disclosed, is to provide both Priority Equity and Class A shareholders with two choices. Effectively, there would be two investment options within the Company, each of which will be considered a separate investment fund.

The first Fund (Original M Split) would function in much the same way as the Company now functions. There would continue to be two classes of shares related to this Fund: Priority Equity shares and Class A shares. The portfolio assets of the Fund would consist largely of cash and permitted repayment securities, and there would be limited exposure to the common shares of Manulife. There would continue to be a Priority Equity Portfolio Protection Plan in respect of this Fund.

The second Fund (New M Split) would not have a Priority Equity Protection Plan associated with it, but rather would hold only shares of Manulife, to provide full exposure to a potential recovery in the value of Manulife common shares. The increased exposure to such common shares would create higher dividend income (assuming no changes to current dividends paid on the Manulife common shares) and the potential for much higher levels of income through the covered call writing program. In summary, under this option, Priority Equity Shares would receive the following securities for each Priority Equity share held: (i) one new $5 Class I Preferred share to yield 7.5% per annum; (ii) one Class II Preferred share with a notional value of $5 with distributions to yield 7.5% per annum on the $5 notional issue price to commence if and when the net asset value per unit of the New M Split exceeds $12.50; and (iii) one half warrant. One full warrant can be exercised to purchase one Unit (consisting of one Class I Preferred share, one Class II Preferred share and one Capital share) for $10.00 at specified times for a period of two years after the closing date of the reorganization, if approved. Class A shares would receive one Capital share which would continue to participate in any net asset value growth over $10.00 per unit and dividends would only be reinstated if and when the net asset value per Unit exceeds $15.00.

Therefore, the special resolution, if passed, will effectively offer all shareholders a choice of the status quo through the Original M Split or participating in a new fund through New M Split that potentially could offer increased distribution and capital growth potential. The Company believes providing this choice is in the best interests of all shareholders in light of the unprecedented and severe decline in Manulife shares and the fact that there is still 6 years remaining until the maturity date of the Company.

We encourage all shareholders who have not yet voted, to vote by the February 3, 2009 deadline.

For further information please contact Investor Relations at 416-304-4443, toll free at 1-877-4-Quadra (1-877-478-2372), or visit www.M-Split.com.

As previously discussed, I have recommended … VOTE NO!:

The preferred shareholders – currently holding a perfectly good fixed-income portfolio – are being asked to provide all the funding for the new company, taking all the downside risk of the portfolio holdings and giving away, free, gratis and for nothing an option on a big chunk of the upside. VOTE NO!