LIN - MXI: Materials Dashboard For May

2023-05-23 17:34:15 ET

Summary

• Construction materials have attractive value and quality scores.
• Other subsectors are close to 11-year averages in valuation.
• Packaging has a good quality score.
• iShares Global Materials ETF is a global alternative to Materials Select Sector SPDR® Fund ETF, we analyze and compare them.

This monthly article series shows a dashboard with aggregate industry metrics in materials. It is also a review of sector exchange-traded funds ("ETFs") like Materials Select Sector SPDR® Fund ETF ( XLB ), iShares U.S. Basic Materials ETF ( IYM ), and other funds whose largest holdings are used to calculate these metrics.

Shortcut

The next two paragraphs in italics describe the dashboard methodology. They are necessary for new readers to understand the metrics. If you are used to this series or if you are short of time, you can skip them and go to the charts.

Base Metrics

I calculate the median value of five fundamental ratios for each industry: Earnings Yield ("EY"), Sales Yield ("SY"), Free Cash Flow Yield ("FY"), Return on Equity ("ROE"), Gross Margin ("GM"). The reference universe includes large companies in the U.S. stock market. The five base metrics are calculated on trailing 12 months. For all of them, higher is better. EY, SY, and FY are medians of the inverse of Price/Earnings, Price/Sales, and Price/Free Cash Flow. They are better for statistical studies than price-to-something ratios, which are unusable or non-available when the "something" is close to zero or negative (for example, companies with negative earnings). I also look at two momentum metrics for each group: the median monthly return (RetM) and the median annual return (RetY).

I prefer medians to averages because a median splits a set in a good half and a bad half. A capital-weighted average is skewed by extreme values and the largest companies. My metrics are designed for stock-picking rather than index investing.

Value and Quality Scores

I calculate historical baselines for all metrics. They are noted respectively EYh, SYh, FYh, ROEh, GMh, and they are calculated as the averages on a look-back period of 11 years. For example, the value of EYh for packaging in the table below is the 11-year average of the median Earnings Yield in packaging companies.

The Value Score ("VS") is defined as the average difference in % between the three valuation ratios (EY, SY, FY) and their baselines (EYh, SYh, FYh). The same way, the Quality Score ("QS") is the average difference between the two quality ratios (ROE, GM) and their baselines (ROEh, GMh).

The scores are in percentage points. VS may be interpreted as the percentage of undervaluation or overvaluation relative to the baseline (positive is good, negative is bad). This interpretation must be taken with caution: the baseline is an arbitrary reference, not a supposed fair value. The formula assumes that the three valuation metrics are of equal importance.

Current Data

The next table shows the metrics and scores as of last week's closing. Columns stand for all the data named and defined above.

Value and Quality Chart

The next chart plots the Value and Quality Scores by industry (higher is better).

Evolution Since Last Month

Both scores have significantly deteriorated in mining/metals.

Momentum

The next chart plots median returns by subsector.

Interpretation

The most attractive subsector regarding both value and quality scores is construction materials. Chemicals and packaging are very close to 11-year averages in valuation. The latter is above the historical baseline in quality. Mining/metals is moderately overvalued.

Fast Facts on MXI

The iShares Global Materials ETF has been tracking the S&P Global 1200 Materials Index since 9/12/2006. It has 103 holdings and a 12-month trailing yield of 4.57%. The total expense ratio is 0.40%, whereas XLB charges only 0.10%.

The portfolio is quite concentrated: the top 10 holdings weigh 35.2% of asset value and the top 2 names are over 6%. However, MXI is more diversified than XLB, which has about 65% in the top 10 holdings and 20% in the largest one. The next table shows MXI's top 10 constituents with fundamental ratios.

* U.S. ticker for convenience. The fund usually holds shares in primary exchanges. Ratios from Portfolio123.

MXI has underperformed XLB since inception by almost 4 percentage points in annualized return (see next table). It also shows a higher risk measured in maximum drawdown and volatility (standard deviation of monthly returns).

Data calculated with Portfolio123

However, both funds are almost tie in the last 12 months:

In summary, MXI is a fund for investors seeking diversified and global exposure in basic materials. It currently holds 103 global stocks, including large and mid-caps, whereas XLB invests in 32 large U.S. companies. Nonetheless, past performance is underwhelming. Investors who are concerned by risks related to the concentration of capital-weighted ETFs may prefer the Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight Materials ETF ( RTM ).

Dashboard List

I use the first table to calculate value and quality scores. It may also be used in a stock-picking process to check how companies stand among their peers. For example, the EY column tells us that a chemical company with an Earnings Yield above 0.0603 (or price/earnings below 16.58) is in the better half of the industry regarding this metric. A Dashboard List is sent every month to Quantitative Risk & Value subscribers, with the most profitable companies standing in the better half among their peers regarding the three valuation metrics at the same time.

For further details see: