You are viewing the chat in desktop mode. Click here to switch to mobile view.
X
Return toCapitalist Times
April 2025 Capitalist Times Live Chat
powered byJotCast
AvatarRoger Conrad
1:51
Hello everyone and welcome to the April Capitalist Times live webchat. We thank you for joining us today and look forward to a lively and informative session!
 
Per usual, there is no audio. Just type in your questions and we’ll get to them as soon as we can concisely and comprehensively. As always, we’ll keep this going so long as there are questions left in the queue to answer, as well as from emails we received prior to the chat.
We will send you a link to a transcript of the complete Q&A tomorrow morning. And it will also be posted on the Energy and Income Advisor and Conrad’s Utility Investor websites as well.
 
Now let’s get started with the questions we received prior to the chat.
 
 
Q. Roger has written he thinks "reduced regulation could further speed up midstream sector mergers and acquisitions" and that "it's only a matter of time" until some of the majors (Energy Transfer, Plains, Oneok and Enterprise were cited) try to benefit from scale in this sector. I am a bit confused on when a reorganization creates a taxable event and when it does not?
I have read that conversions and mergers can be structured as tax-free transactions but the corporate sponsor reaps tax benefits if structured as a taxable sale for unitholders (thus, it's the most common choice).
 
Do you agree with this generalization? If so, what has been (or might be) your recommendation for unitholders. Finally, do you have a sense of which midstreams would be more likely to create a taxable events and which might not? I understand you’re not CPAs and that each investors' circumstance vary, but thanks for your thoughts.--Susan P.
 
A. Hi Susan
The general rules of thumb are:
1. Mergers are not taxable events for shareholders of acquiring companies.
 
2. Mergers where the price paid is shares of stock are not taxable events for shareholders of the acquired company. The exception is an MLP acquired by a C-Corp. C-Corps by C-Corps, MLPs by MLPs and C-Corps by MLPs are not taxable events—provided the deal is in shares of stock.
1:52
3. Cash acquisitions are taxable events for acquired companies, though again not for the acquirer.
 
As an example, an all-stock merger between Enterprise Products Partners and Energy Transfer LP would not be a taxable event, regardless of who the acquirer is. If ET bought ONEOK or Williams with stock, it would also not be taxable. But if Kinder Morgan (a C-Corp) acquired Enterprise, it would be taxable whether paid in stock or cash.
 
The primary criteria for what midstream companies decide to merge are going to be related to industrial logic primarily. But they will take taxes into consideration if they’re substantial—often with a cash component.
 
I will also say mergers figure to be far more profitable now in midstream than in the previous decade—as targets are in an energy up cycle, rather than a bear market as was the case then. 
 
 
Q. What are the considerations on keeping or selling XIFR?—James R.
 
A. The basic investment case for XPLR Infrastructure (NYSE: XIFR) is that the company executes its
debt reduction plan the next few years and is able to eventually restore dividend payments later in the decade. By eliminating the dividend earlier this year, the company has freed up considerable free cash flow that it's now utilizing for that purpose. It is also repowering certain contracted wind energy facilities to boost output and cash flow, which it's also financing with internally generated cash flow.
 
We should get a pretty good progress report on the recovery plan when XPLR announces Q1 results and updates guidance, which should happen in early May. I was encouraged by management's ability to upsize a debt offering from $1.4 bil to $1.75 bil about a month ago, before interest rates spiked up earlier this month. And from results posted by parent NextEra Energy (NYSE: NEE), it appears assets performed well during the quarter. Wind resource fleet wide, for example, was 102% of normal, a meaningful increase from 96% in the year earlier period.
 
XPLR has a ways to go with its recovery. And as I said, no
one should expect a resumption of dividends before 2028 at least. But at this price, the stock is trading at just 20% of the book value of strategically located assets contracted for 10 years plus. This is for very patient investors only. But if they can with the help of parent NextEra Energy execute the recovery plan the next few years, I think the stock could easily be 3X its current level in 24 months.
 
Q. Is Noble Corp covered in any portfolio on EIA? I didn't see it.—Cliff W.
 
A. Hi Cliff
 
We don't currently track Noble Corp (NYSE: NE). But it's definitely one we could pick up in our "Exploration & Production and Services coverage list.
1:53
Thanks for the suggestion.
 
I would say we are in general cautious on the drilling sector at this stage of the energy super cycle--with the exception of the highest quality companies being Baker Hughes and SLB. The challenge right now is the capital discipline of producers. It's less offshore where Noble primarily operates. But the best companies now are focused on costs and profitability, rather than growing output. That will change later in the cycle and the driller names like Noble will shine. But at this point, we're more focused on quality producers (especially natural gas) and the highest quality midstream names.
 
 
Q. Do you think that the power producers-NRG, LEU, CEG and Vistra-will recover some lost ground? They looked way overvalued to me last summer but have since dropped like rocks. I can't tell whether they are fairly valued now or not, because I don't know if their drivers like data centers and AI are still plausible in uncertain tariff/economic times.—James G.
 
A. Hi James
 
I think the
underlying case for growth at Vistra, Constellation and NRG is basically intact--as it is for other electric utilities and power generation companies in general. We only have a handful of sector Q1 results and guidance updates to go on at this point. But what we do have strongly indicates the sector is still seeing robust demand growth in real time, despite the recent concerns about the US economy and turmoil in investment markets.
 
NRG is expected to report May 5, Constellation May 6 and Vistra has confirmed for May 7. I would expect to see pretty much the same robust results we did in Q4 for all three. 
 
Like you, I saw all three of these stocks as hugely overvalued last summer. And on multiple occasions, I advised Conrad's Utility Investor readers to take advantage of what I saw as momentum-led buying to sell at least a portion of their holdings. I don't see any of these stocks as being sells at this time, though they're still a little expensive to rate buys. I may change my mind depending on what they
report, however. Power supplies are increasingly tight and all three are well positioned to capitalize on elevated wholesale electricity prices.
 
I don't consider Centrus in the category of these three companies, however. They're not really a power producer but a uranium company. And while they actually do make money, this is still a business pumped up with a great deal of hype about nuclear power's potential--and hugely dependent on government subsidy. 
 
Until there's a new plant model--large scale or SMR--that a utility or other developer can give a credible and construction time projection to investors and regulators, the only "new" nuclear generation we're going to see in the US is from re-opening shut facilities.
And if Inflation Reduction Act subsidy goes away, I think you're going to see another dozen US nuclear reactors shut because they can't operate profitably.
 
 
 
Q. Hi Roger,

Hope you’re well presently. I continue to follow you closely on CUI and EIA. I have attached a pair of articles regarding power in the NY/NJ areas. The first is a NY Post editorial discussing the Empire Wind One offshore turbine project. Although Pres Trump has stopped construction for the time being the article goes on to indicate ratepayers will be charged 2.5 times market rates if the project goes forward which I find astounding. The piece blames current Gov Kathy Hochul's green energy lunacy. However, I also give the former Gov and want to be mayor Cuomo for his efforts to create this mess that in New York state. Remember that Cuomo saw to it the Indian Point nuclear plant was shut down some years back.
1:54
Also, a few decades back LILCO sold their Shoreham nuclear facility to the Long Island Power Authority. Not a single watt of power was ever generated. While all this is going on as mentioned in a recent Barron's article the New York Dems are fighting construction of the Constellation gas pipeline from Pennsylvania to Albany which is intended to alleviate the natural gas shortages in New York and New England. Had the voters selected Lee Zelden for governor the power outlook in New York would have been much less bleak. But once again the voters are reaping the rewards of their decisions. The second article is about NJ officials trying to delay the impending 20% statewide electricity rate increases slated for June 1st. It seems Gov Murphy is blaming PJM and wanting to delay the rate hikes until at least after the governor's primary later in June. Once again, the voters are
going to reap the rewards of their decisions. Perhaps the politicians
should ask JCP&L to consider recommissioning the Oyster Creek nuclear
facility that was shut down many years ago like the Palisades plant in
Michigan and the Three Mile plant in Pennsylvania.

While I do not own any NY electric utilities, I do own a very significant
position in PEG and worry that my investment may be constrained or
negatively affected by the political shenanigans.

Anyway, I thought to send these articles across mostly for your
entertainment as I think the articles speak for themselves for the most part
but hint of the coming affordability crisis that may come in the next few
months. Kind regards—Jim C.
 
 
A. Hi Jim
 
Thanks for sending these articles. I think the big takeaway from this is: The more government gets involved making decisions that are essentially engineering/physics/finance based--and overruling industry in the process--the more political and less economically sound the outcomes.
1:55
That means higher prices for electricity. And both major political parties are guilty.
 
The situation right now with offshore wind projects in the Northeast is a pretty good example. These multi-billion dollar, multi-year projects were put to the front of the line by several states like New York. And believing they could trust the government would honor permits, the developers invested billions of dollars to build them. Now the federal government comes along after billions have been spent--and ratepayers are on the hook for the money--and pulls the permits.
 
Maybe this is this gamesmanship to pressure New York and New England to build a gas pipeline. And I agree there's a need for a pipeline to bring cheap Appalachian gas to the region. There has been for years. And these states are instead right now importing far more expensive LNG to keep the heat on in winter.
But by pulling previously granted permits for offshore wind projects so far ahead in development, the Trump Administration is setting a very dangerous precedent in my opinion. Mainly, can any investor trust the US government not to pull permits for any energy project at any time--no matter how far along the project.
 
This administration has made no bones about being hostile to wind and solar. And yes, they have their shortcomings like every energy source. But remember that the one before it was historically restrictive on fossil fuels including natural gas. They never followed through shutting down Line 5, Dakota Access and other big pipelines. But with this administration upping the ante, it’s probable the next administration will have far fewer qualms about doing so. 
 
This doesn't mean nothing will be built the few years, including the New York/New England gas pipeline now proposed. But there’s going to be a cost. Mainly, any developer is now going to require a higher return and a lot of guarantees--to
compensate for the risk a new federal administration will cancel its project and force billions of dollars of writeoffs. The utility ratepayer will be on the hook for all of that too, even as halting the offshore wind projects will keep electricity in short supply and higher priced in New York.
 
As an investor, there are obviously huge opportunities here. And while you're concerned with Public Service Enterprise Group (NYSE: PEG), these policies are going to enable its nuclear power fleet in New Jersey to sell its output at premium prices for some time to come. New Jersey regulators may ask them to slow investment on the transmission and distribution utility system. But any government action--state or federal--that discourages investment in new electricity generation from whatever source is going to keep prices high. And that's very positive for PEG.
 
 
Q. Hi Roger:

I hope you and the rest of the team at Capitalist Times are doing well. I bought some Rayonier Inc (NYSE: RYN) based on your recent comments
1:56
comments in the REIT sheet: about the high dividends.  You mentioned they often have special payouts in addition to the regular $0.28 per quarter including a "special payment" of $1.80 per share in January 2025. I went to their website to check previous years and didn't see any record of payouts beyond the regular quarterlies. The regular quarterlies amount to about 4.4% per year. 
You have an indicated yield of 11.78% in the table in the REIT sheet.  
Are they "hiding" the special payouts for some reason?--Kerry T.
 
A. Hi Kerry
 
Thanks for writing. Rayonier has "Historical Dividends" information available under the "Investors" tab on their website. The listing for 2024 will show you four payments of the "regular cash" dividend of 28.5 cents, plus a "special cash/stock" dividend of $1.80 per share. In 2023, the special was 20 cents, along with the regular of 28.5 cents.
These "specials" are related to the fact that all timberlands companies are essentially real estate companies as well. And Rayonier periodically buys and sells land, with the REIT structure requiring proceeds to be paid out as dividends. Payments vary. But they are regular since land sales are basically a part of the ongoing operation of the business--as is the case for example with Farmland Properties (NYSE: FPI). 
 
On March 10 of this year, Rayonier announced the sale of their New Zealand joint venture for $710 mil, and guided to a "special dividend for 2025 of $1 to $1.40 per share--details of which will be announced later this year."
 
 
 Q. Roger: A question for next week's chat. I received from Kiplinger this
morning information I had not previously heard. I will quote their
article "...there is a five year waiting period for withdrawing
converted ROTH IRA funds to avoid a 10% penalty. However, that rule
doesn't apply to the principal sum converted--only gains. And it also
doesn't apply once you turn
591/2. At that point, you're entitled to
penalty-free withdrawals from any tax-advantaged retirement account you
have."

My question-if this is true-is how can someone who qualifies take the
best advantage of this to reduce taxes (after the initial hit for doing
the conversion)? Thanks for all you do!--Jimmy C.
 
A. This is the kind of question I generally turn to my accountant to answer. 
 
As I understand it, the main advantage of the Roth is you're not compelled to take withdrawals after hitting a certain age--as you are with ordinary IRAs and SEPs. And taking fewer distributions will obviously reduce taxes owed. Also, Roths are a lot easier to manage in general with far fewer other restrictions, both for you and your heirs.
1:57
Other than that, I'm still pretty much in a learning stage here. I can say that--now having dealt with IRAs belonging to deceased family members--I am considering whether it makes sense to shift a SEP to a Roth, if for no other reason than to simplify. 
 
At this point, I'm not qualified to advise you on this question. I would be interested in what you decide though.
 
 
 
Q. On your next live chat can you let me know what you think about OVV? I believe one of you liked it before, I just wanted to see what your thoughts were these days on it, the PE is very low, thanks for all your work
Eric F
 
A. Hi Eric
 
Ovintiv is one of the better values in the natural gas producer sector in our view. We would in fact consider the stock a buy all the way up into the 50s. The stock has weakened along with other natural gas producers as the commodity has dropped this month and is now actually somewhat below our Dream Buy price of 45.
Earnings will be released May 6. Gas prices were generally strong in Q1, which should have helped at both the top and bottom line. But the real appeal of this stock is long-term with a low cost production profile in multiple key reserve basins--including western Canada proximate to the country's nascent LNG export industry. Look for more on the company along with rest of the EIA portfolio holdings in next month's issue.
 
 
Q.  Can you add this to the next chat? Seeking Alpha has a very high quant rating on the stock, I wanted to see what real humans thought of it. Is it something you guys cover?  SBS Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo – SABESP—Eric F.
 
A. Hi Eric
 
SBS appears to be getting a lift from the rally in emerging markets, as well as a stronger Brazilian Real this year so far. Earnings are due out May 12. We would expect to see a continuation of the same positive trends from Q4--increased water and sewage customer connections, regulatory support and cost efficiencies. EBITDA
was up 18.8% on these trends in 2024 and the dividend was well covered.
 
This is a stock I will consider picking up in Conrad's Utility Investor going forward. For now, I'd rate it hold after the recent surge in the stock. The greatest risk to the company is a negative shift in regulation. That appears diminished now. Also, the US dollar is weakening on rising concerns of a US recession--which we actually put around 50-50 this year now. But a reversal would affect SBS shares negatively.
 
Q. Fluence (NSDQ: FLNC) is sinking fast. What’s your opinion now.
Thanks--John M
 
A. Hi John

My view is there’s a lot concern about what orders are going to be in Q1, given the unpredictability of tariffs on batteries for businesses. The company has said in the past that they have a heavy US supply chain, which should minimize the impact. But as we saw in Q4, this company’s ability to generate positive gross margins and thereby earnings is closely linked to order flow. And when 3 Australian projects were delayed, it had a
huge negative impact at the top and bottom lines.

This company does have real sales and orders. So I don’t see it vanishing. And the selling we’re seeing right now looks overdone. But I wouldn’t own this stock if going to zero is going to make a real difference to your portfolio.

There’s still a lot of promise here. Demand for battery storage is rising—and with the breakthrough in China, it’s likely to accelerate. But FLNC is still a relatively small player in this space. And despite a lack of debt, another dip in order flow would be a great strain.
 
 
Q. EQT was mentioned in last month’s chat as being a very good play on natural gas (along with EXE). I can’t seem to find the Buy Under or the Dream Price for EQT in your newsletters or the Utility Report card. Is it still a very good choice? Thank you—Larry W.
 
A. Hi Larry
 
I don't cover EQT Corp in Conrad's Utility Investor, as it's primarily a natural gas producer. There are a handful of utility-like midstream
1:58
companies and super oil majors, which also have utility like investment characteristics. But the place we cover energy is in Energy and Income Advisor. EQT is in our E&P and Services coverage universe--as well as the Model Portfolio. And we do like it a lot as a low cost natural gas producer with considerable upside.
 
Q. Roger and Elliott

I’m sure you’re receiving many questions in regards to the tariffs. Do believe this is now presenting a good buying opportunity in your portfolio recommendations or do you believe there is too much uncertainty to take positions at this time. I’m reading that oil may get down to 40.00 a barrel. Thanks for your insight.--Ron K
 
A. Hey Ron
 
Our view is this is a great time to take positions in top quality energy stocks
. Strong financial positions and pricing power—the ability to pass through rising costs to customers (including tariffs) without losing meaningful sales—are essential to limiting losses and being made whole in the recovery. And we’re comfortable with our stocks’ strengths. We need to be prepared for stocks to drop further in the near term, no matter how strong the companies are. But shale discipline is strong as ever. Underlying supply is tight and set to remain so as companies cut costs in the face of weak pricing this year. And these stocks are well positioned to ride the energy super cycle higher.
 
 
Q. Good morning, Roger, how are you? Well, I hope. Capitalist Times is my main source of information for new ideas and is a big part of decision making. The reason I am writing is to ask your opinion about Reits and in particular Alexandria. With the new federal administration proclaiming bring back jobs to our country. These companies coming to the US are going to need Reits for space to lease. You have
thought demand and supply are essential. Can you give me your thoughts?—Robert P.
 
A. Hey Bob
 
REITs have had a really rough first third of the year. Concerns about a potential recession are growing and the Fed is keeping interest rates higher for longer. So REITs are really pulling in their horns as you can see in the Q1 results and guidance updates so far. I was a little disappointed in Alexandria REIT reducing guidance slightly for 2025. But I still believe they're well positioned for whatever happens--and as the strongest player in the space they certainly have the wherewithal to take advantage of weaker companies and REITs. 
 
I do think the prices we're seeing are a great opportunity to build positions in the highest quality REITs across property sectors. And the fact the investment has dried up this year after declining sharply since early 2022 is setting the economy up for shortages, which means higher occupancy, rents and cash flows. But I think we're going to have to be patient with our REITs in
1:59
this environment--unlike the utilities, which have really done well under the radar.
 
 
Q. Hi Roger,
 
I missed last week's chat - bad planning on my part thinking I'd make the live to ask my questions - and had had a couple of questions if you have time. 
 
ARE: I read an article recently that 'kinda' made sense, but it is very contrarian to the general sentiment concerning ARE. The author's position was given all the grant money that the Trump admin was pulling from Universities, the funding NIH/CDC/HHS was pulling/no renewing for vaccines and other research, that there would be a negative impact on Life Sciences - i.e. a lot less money, so fewer startups or research projects. He further opined that the 15% indirect expense cap would be a drag on leasing in the life science field. His conclusion was even though ARE is best in class, has solid investment credit ratings, low debt metrics with well laddered maturities, ARE was dead money at best, and likely to see further pull back from concurrent levels.
1.   

Do you have any opinions on this and if it would affect your thesis of investing in ARE? (A piggyback to that would be that BXP is also in trouble because they've been moving into Life Sciences harder lately to offset the general office property weakness, but that is my opinion not the author's) 
2.   You don't cover Rexford (REXR) in your coverage universe, do you have any opinions of it? It is clearly under pressure, but it too seems to have strong fundamentals. But with the new tariffs likely to depress imports, that would likely pressure demand for their properties. 
3.   CAPL has risen strongly, but I didn't see any change in fundamentals which would explain why it suddenly moved well above the range it had been in for the last 2-3 years. Other than yield seekers bidding it up, are there any other reasons you're aware of for the move higher?
4.   Last, is there any reason you don't cover BDCs? Just curious because as an asset class they, along with CEF, yield materially higher than most anything
2:00
1.   else now that MLPs are trading at levels more in line with historical averages. 
 
Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide. Best--Andy Z. 
 
 
A. Hi Andy
 
Certainly this past month's trading has not been kind to REITs overall, and Alexandria REIT in particular.
 
Alexandria just now reported its Q1 results and updated guidance. The highlights include a slight dip in FFO per share from a year ago ($2.30 down -2.1%). Megacampus revenue was 75% and occupancy of all properties came in at 91.7% with adjusted EBITDA operating margin of 71%. And the collection rate was 99.9%, or essentially all tenants. Leasing volume was again over 1 mil square feet in Q1, the fifth consecutive quarter at that amount or greater. And rental increases were robust at 7.5% for renewals on a cash basis.
 
Asset sales remained on track for $1.95 bil in 2025 (mid-point of guidance). But the company cut guidance for adjusted FFO for 2025 to a range of $9.16 to $9.36 per share, from a previous $9.23 to $9.43 per share. The
primary reasons were "slower than anticipated re-leasing of expired spaces and lease-up of vacancy" that is now expected to reduce occupancy by 70 basis points, along with $20 mil higher expected debt interest costs.
 
Nonetheless, the dividend payout ratio remains very low at 57%, setting the stage for another semi-annual boost later this year and solid protection for the yield that's now almost 7%. 
 
These results show there are undoubtedly headwinds in the biotech space that have worsened under current federal government policies. On the other hand, as the best in class, Alexandria REIT is arguably the best suited in the space to weather them and by extension take advantage of weaker players. I would say BXP is considerably less exposed to life science--they report Q1 Wednesday, probably during the live chat.
 
I will put Rexford on the list to cover. As you know, I prefer Prologis in the industrial space. But this is a high quality name and Q1 was solid.
I think you have it right on CAPL--they report Q1 on May 7. But I think most of the strength recently in the share price is people buying the yield in expectation interest rates come lower. I do like the business plan and I don't see a lot of risk to the dividend in this environment. But I'm not willing to chase it at this price either--given the fact that dividends are not likely to increase.
 
Hannon Armstrong (HASI) is essentially a business development corporation--now organized as a C-Corp rather than a REIT as used to be the case. I like it because it has a leading position in a very focused niche that continues to grow rapidly (energy efficiency). Most BDCs I look at are more scattershot--diversified over multiple businesses. And that makes it hard to really ascertain whether their investments are consistently generating more income than it takes to finance them.
2:01
OK that appears to be it for the questions received previous to that chat--quite a bit there, including on Alexandria REIT and its Q1 earnings and guidance cut and our views on the company going forward.
Now let's get to some live ones.
James
2:13
In Smart Bonds, the portfolio tables do not show the number of shares held or the purchase price.  I need to do my own math to come up with an estimated purchase price and number of shares.  Any reason why it's done so differently than the other newsletters?
AvatarElliott Gue
2:13
There are a number of differences between bond, credit and preferred ETFs and normal stocks. One is that looking at the purchase price is misleading because it's not adjusted to account for distributions received, which for bonds is a large portion of overall returns.  Also, while for stocks I like to include a "buy under" target price, this isn't as important for bond ETFs, which  are far less prone to short-term spikes up or down driven by newsflow. So, in Smart Bonds I prefer to focus on the percentage allocation to each individual ETF, a number that readers can apply to whatever dollar allocation they choose to commit to the strategy. Of course, sometimes the percentage allocations won't translate exactly to a specific number of ETF units; however, it's more important to approximate relative allocations than to get the percentages exact -- the percentage allocations reflect the risk of the underlying ETF and my current outlook.
David O.
2:15
Gentlemen,

No doubt you have gotten numerous questions on this. While I loathe politics as it relates to investing, it is a reality we need to deal with, especially in the energy space. As I understand it, the recent Canadian election has been won by those who are the antithesis of reason as it relates to the “existential threat of climate change.” Investment capital has been avoiding Canada for years now…any reason to think things will change?

For us little guys, while I am much attracted to their long term reserves, is Canada really investable with a regime that hates energy?
AvatarRoger Conrad
2:15
Hi David. I think the Canadian oil and gas sector would probably have preferred a Conservative Party victory in this week's election. But (1) the Tories actually did pick up seats, (2) the previous Liberal government was by no means all bad for Canadian energy--supporting LNG and LPG export infrastructure in BC and actually funding completion of the Trans Mountain expansion and (3) the new Liberal government is considerably more centrist from all indications, and has a powerful incentive to support Canadian energy companies by expanding export markets outside the US.

Don't be put off by political rhetoric. Canada is very investable right now. The biggest hurdle is 15% with holding tax on dividends, which you can recover as a tax credit when you file your US taxes. Also some brokers won't buy the five-letter symbols.
Mr. G
2:20
What's your current recommendation on AES It sells for a low P/E and decent dividend- is this a good opportunity? Is there growth in their future - buy, hold, sell?
AvatarRoger Conrad
2:20
I'm very interested in what AES will report for Q1 and what its updated guidance will be--that's still expected May 2 though the company itself hasn't set a date so it may be later.

At a (still growing) yield of 7% plus and selling for 4.2X expected next 12 months earnings, expectations are obviously very low. And the stock is in my view pricing in a fairly steep reduction in earnings growth guidance and investment--which is far from a given at this time.

This company is strongly leveraged to growth of demand from AI-enabled data centers. And my current advice is buy for more aggressive investors with a long time horizon. I will be watching the Q1 report closely, however.
Mary E.
2:30
Hi guys.
Just wondering your thoughts on moving money out of US stocks into Canada, Australia, Europe?

It seems like the fed has been ahead of the controlling inflation curve and now it's other countries turn?

If so what is looking good to your trained eyes?

Thanks for all you do.
AvatarRoger Conrad
2:30
Hi Mary. If you look at the model portfolios across our advisories, we're long time believers in global diversification. With the US dollar so strong in recent years, that's been a potential drag on returns. But so far this year, the benefits of holding non-US stocks--or at least multinationals--have been pretty stark, with the US dollar sliding against other major currencies. And the February issue of Conrad's Utility Investor featuring non-US utilities looks quite timely in retrospect. I will say Canadian and Australian energy producer stocks are taking on a little water at this time in the face of oil prices moving under $60/bbl, just as US producers are. But the midstream companies like TRP are doing very well.

I'm not one who will fault the Fed for keeping interest rates higher for longer, given uncertainty on growth and inflation. They're in a tough place now, however, and I think some global exposure is a pretty good antidote for US investors. We will continue to bring names we like to your attention.
Load More Messages
Connecting…