Why Are Cash-Flush Big Tech Firms Issuing Bonds?

Answer: Rates are low, and so are the firms’ debt ratios.



Despite enormous cash stashes, three Big Tech companies have just issued a load of debt. At first blush, one wonders: why bother? They can easily cover buybacks, acquisitions and other needs with the cash.

In a sign of the times, the answer is that Amazon, Apple and Facebook-parent Meta Platforms are taking advantage of still relatively low interest rates. Meta, for instance, in its first bond offering ever, has an array of maturities ranging from 5 to 40 years.

The Corporate Finance 101 reason for taking on more debt, especially when it still is relatively cheap, is that it enhances a company’s capital and long-term growth prospects. And of course, interest on corporate debt is tax-deductible. None of the three companies responded to requests for comment.

Debt “drives up equity returns,” says Robert Cantwell, founder and portfolio manager at investment firm Upholdings. “You want more debt than cash.” Plus, every company finance chief “knows that you raise money when you don’t need it; it’s how you get the best terms.”

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter.

The 5-year obligation from Meta carries an interest rate of 0.75 percentage point over Treasury bonds. With the 10-year T-note at 3.0%, that implies 3.75%. This compares favorably with the average investment-grade corporate’s rate for that maturity, 3.95%, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis’ count. The 10-year Meta bond is 1.75 points over that Treasury benchmark, at 4.75%.  That’s just a little above the corporate average for that term, 4.62%.

These three companies are far from heavily levered. Amazon, which floated its first bonds in 1998, has cash and equivalents of $37.4 billion, with a healthy debt-to-assets ratio of 37%, per Bloomberg data. Apple’s cash on hand is even bigger, $48.2 billion, for a 36% debt ratio.  The iPhone maker issued its first bonds in 2013. Meta, new to the bond market, sports $40.5 billion in cash, with a mere 6% debt ratio.

It helps that all three of these recent debt issuers have good credit ratings. Standard & Poor’s rating for Amazon is AA (three steps down from AAA, the top tier). Apple’s rating is AA+ and Meta’s is A-, likely due to its scant credit history. Moody’s Investors Service gives them comparable ratings.

Further, the interest rates they’re paying are much lower than inflation; the Consumer Price Index is now 8.5% annually. “And interest rates are going to rise,” observes Cantwell, due to the Federal Reserve’s campaign to choke off high inflation.

True, Meta has had some erosion of its Facebook user base and is spending a lot to expand into the multiverse. Yet it still generates ample revenue. The business performances of the debt-issuing trio are “pretty damn good,” says Cantwell.

Related Stories:

Why Have Stocks and Bonds Been Correlated Lately?

What Will Be the Best Future Tech Plays? Not the Big Five

Promise of Private Debt Burns Bright—With a Big If

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Hedge Fund Losses Accelerate During Second Quarter

The trend of net inflows ends after more than a year.



Hedge funds lost ground again during this year’s second quarter, according to Citco data, which show that the hedge funds the Citco group administers lost 6.81% for the three months ending June 30, after declining 3.23% in the first quarter.

 

In addition to the quarterly loss, the trend of net inflows into hedge funds ended, which a Citco report says had been the case each quarter of 2021 and in the first quarter of 2022. The data also show that 32.81% of funds delivered a positive return during the second quarter, down from 40.21% in the first quarter.

 

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter.

The “event driven” sector of the hedge fund industry, which was among the top performers last quarter, was the worst performer in the second quarter, losing 17.04%, followed by equities and multi strategy, which declined 7.98% and 7.52%, respectively, while fixed-income arbitrage was down 4.03%. Meanwhile, ccommodities and global macro were the only categories with positive gains, returning 4.58% and 0.79%, respectively.

 

As was the case in the first quarter, the report says, the largest funds suffered the biggest losses, as hedge funds with $3 billion or more lost 8.14%, followed by hedge funds with $200 million to $500 million, which dropped 6.36%. Citco’s report notes that this is in sharp contrast to last year, when the largest hedge funds were consistently the top performers.

 

There were a total of $7.8 billion of net redemptions to Citco-administered funds in the second quarter, with gross subscriptions of $40.1 billion and gross redemptions of $47.9 billion. However, the report notes one trend that has stayed consistent with 2021 and the first quarter of 2022: There were net inflows for the months intra-quarter, with the quarter-end trading cycle experiencing outflows.

 

“For example, subscriptions and redemptions cancelled each other out at $10.9 billion each in April, with $3 billion of net subscriptions in May and $10.9 billion of net redemptions in June,” says the report.

 

Despite the increase in losses, Citco’s report says some signs indicate things could turn around in the third quarter.

 

“Although the hedge fund sector continued to see pullback in terms of performance across most strategies in the second quarter,” Declan Quilligan, head of hedge fund services at Citco Fund Services, said in a statement, “our most recent data for July shows a post-Q2 swing back into positive territory for almost all strategies – with 69.9% of funds posting positive returns.”

 

Related Stories:

Hedge Funds Embark on a Short-Selling Spree in This Bear Market

Which Hedge Funds Will Do Best With Rates Rising?

SEC Proposes Reporting Changes for Private Equity, Hedge Fund Advisers

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

«