Saturday, March 26, 2016

Everbank, stock quote $EVER on Nasdaq, is using floating interest notes in the amount of $90 000 000 million dollars with a 6% interest rate, in other words this loan is a credit on their balance sheet, and so beyond a reasonable doubt, this bank is insolvent, however, these floating interest notes can go un reported according to the sec mandate issued in 1933, so Everbank is off shooting balance sheets, with Bankcorp, another crooked bank, as an underwriter for this \debt agreement that undoubtedly unplayable debt. $EVER, Everbank Financial Corp. is committing fraud, this company I recommend buying options, or even better short this baby , my price target for $EVER on NASDAQ, which is trading at $14.00 dollars now, in the next year, my target is obviously a bearish call target price $6 dollars a share is the one year target. Ride this sucker as it tanks lmfao!!

# Scrapes CRAN archives to determine the number of packages per release # Create a list of pages to scrape, including both archive and current extract_url <- active="https://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/contrib/" archive="https://cran-archive.r-project.org/bin/windows/contrib/" d.="" d="" function="" get_urls="" grep="" gsub="" idx="" list="" readlines="" txt="" url="" versions="">(\\d.\\d+(/)).*", "\\1", txt[idx]) versions paste0(url, versions) } z <- a="" and="" cran="" date="" extract="" extract_date="" extract_pkg_info="" fun="max){" function="" get_urls="" given="" grep="" gz="" lapply="" number="" of="" packages="" pkgs="" ptn="" the="" txt="" unlist="" unname="" url="" z="" zip="">(\\d{2}-...-\\d{4}).*" idx <- -2="" aes="" and="" angle="90," as.date="" colour="red" count="" cran="" cran_urls="" data.frame="" data="major_releases," date="extract_date(txt)," div="" do.call="" ersion="" extract="" extract_pkg_info="" extract_url="" format="%d-%b-%Y" fun="" geom_point="" geom_rug="" geom_smooth="" geom_text="" geom_vline="" get="" ggplot2="" ggplot="" ggtitle="" grep="" grepl="" gsub="" head="" hjust="1," idx="" information="" label="paste(" lapply="" length="" library="" list="" major="" major_releases="" match.fun="" message="" of="" p="" package="" packages="" per="" pkgs="" print="" ptn="" r-devel="" r-future="" r="" rbind="" readlines="" release="" remove="" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;" sum="" tail="" the="" theme_minimal="" txt="" umber="" url="" urls="" version="" vjust="-1)" x="date," xintercept="as.numeric(date))," xlab="" y="8000)," ylab="" zip=""> Me and Goldman Sachs are way too smart, issues a sell , short position on #EVER as well, very nice.
Ryan NashGoldman SachsSell  Jan 13, '15  17.67 17.50 Jan 13, '16 17.43% 
Item 1.01. Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.On March 9, 2016, EverBank Financial Corp, a Delaware corporation (the "Company") completed the public offering and sale of $90.0 million aggregate principal amount of its 6.00% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Subordinated Notes due 2026 (the "Notes"). The Notes were sold pursuant to an underwriting agreement, dated March 9, 2016 (the "Underwriting Agreement"), by and among the Company, Incapital LLC and U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc., as representatives of the underwriters named therein. The Underwriting Agreement contains customary representations, warranties and agreements of the Company, and customary conditions to closing, obligations of the parties and termination provisions. The foregoing description is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Underwriting Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.1 and incorporate a herein by reference.
The Notes have been registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Company's Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-205243) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, which was filed and automatically became effective on June 26, 2015.
The Notes were issued pursuant to the Indenture, dated as of June 30, 2015 (the "Indenture"), between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee"), and the Second Supplemental Indenture, dated as of March 14, 2016 (the "Second Supplemental Indenture"), entered into between the Company and the Trustee. The Indenture, as amended and supplemented by the Second Supplemental Indenture, governs the terms of the Notes and provides that the Notes are unsecured, subordinated debt obligations of the Company and will mature on March 15, 2026. From and including the date of issuance, but excluding March 15, 2021, the Notes will bear interest at an initial rate of 6% per annum. From and including March 15, 2021 and thereafter, the Notes will bear interest at a floating rate equal to 3-month LIBOR as calculated on each applicable date of determination, plus a spread of 470.4 basis points. The foregoing descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the Indenture, the Second Supplemental Indenture and the Global Note. A copy of the Indenture is attached as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company's Form 8-K, filed on June 30, 2015, and incorporated herein by reference. Copies of the Second Supplemental Indenture and Global Note are attached hereto as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, respectively, and are incorporated herein by reference.

Item 2.03. Creation of a Direct Financial Obligation or an Obligation under an Off-Balance Sheet Arrangement of a Registrant.The information set forth in Item 1.01 above with respect to the Indenture, the Second Supplemental Indenture and the Notes is hereby incorporated by reference into this Item 2.03 insofar as it relates to the creation of a direct financial obligation of the Company.


Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits. 
(d) Exhibits

Exhibit No.     Description.

1.1            Underwriting Agreement, dated March 9, 2016, by and among the
               Company, Incapital LLC and U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc., as
               representatives of the underwriters named therein.
4.1            Second Supplemental Indenture, dated as of March 14, 2016, by and
               between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association,
               as Trustee.
4.2            Global Note, dated as of March 14, 2016, representing $90,000,000
               6.00% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Subordinated Notes due 2026.
5.1            Opinion of Alston & Bird LLP regarding the legality of the Notes.
23.1           Consent of Alston & Bird LLP (included in Exhibit 5.1 filed
               herewith).
# Scrapes CRAN archives to determine the number of packages per release
   Add EVER to Portfolio      Set Alert          Email to a Friend  
Get SEC Filings for Another Symbol:   Symbol Lookup
Quotes & Info for EVER All Recent SEC Filings
Copyright © 2016 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy - Terms of Service

Friday, March 25, 2016

Cannabis Science and the War on Drugs. The real problem is that cannabis is a drug with far too many medical applications. We know there's strong evidence for cannabis working for the following conditions: Depression Insomnia Nausea Severe Epilepsy Pain Inflammation That's a big chunk of the pharmaceutical industry's bread and butter... Not to mention, many of the pharmaceutical treatments for these conditions have nasty side effects. Take severe epilepsy. A cannabinoid extracted from marijuana, called CBD, treats it very well. The prescription answer to this condition is often heavy sedatives, like Xanax. And they give that stuff to kids, who eventually become addicted to it. (If you're interested in learning more about CBD, watch this seven-minute CNN documentary.) CBD works so well that shares of a pharmaceutical company called GW Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: GWPH) spiked almost 100% this month after announcing positive clinical results on a CBD drug. And it's not a small company - it has a market cap of $1.72 billion.

Cannabis Science and the War on Drugs

By Charles T. Graham on March 25, 2016

Dear Early Investor,

Since Richard Nixon kicked off the war on drugs in 1971, more than $1 trillion has been spent on the effort. 

An estimated 45 million arrests have been made in the U.S.

And the result? Drugs are still widely available, and profits for the cartels have never been higher.

A primary consequence of the war on drugs is that America has the highest incarceration rate in the world. With only 5% of the Earth's population, the U.S. holds 25% of all prisoners.

It's all a stunning misuse of taxpayer dollars. It blocks important research that needs to happen. And the human cost is incalculable.

It's simply no longer a justifiable battle. Especially once you recognize the political agendas that drive policy. 


The Drug War's Disturbing Roots

Back in 1994, writer Dan Baum interviewed Nixon's domestic policy adviser, John Ehrlichman, about the war on drugs.

Ehrlichman was instrumental in launching the war. (He also spent time in jail for Watergate crimes.) And what he had to say is shocking. Here's an excerpt from Baum's recent article in Harper's (emphasis mine). 

    "You want to know what this was really all about?" he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the anti-war left and black people. You understand what I'm saying?"

    "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."
I can't imagine a much more damning indictment of the war on drugs. From the start, the whole "movement" was a political attack on certain segments of the population.

Thankfully, things are slowly turning around. States around the U.S. are legalizing marijuana at an increasing pace. And there's a growing worldwide movement that favors treating drug users for addiction over locking them up.

The Washington Post's recent headline about the policy debate reads, "Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs and maybe go even further."

When society appears to be on the cusp of a change such as this, paying attention can pay dividends down the road. If the war on marijuana and other drugs truly is crumbling, the impacts will be more far-reaching than most expect.

For example, medical cannabis is already beginning to disrupt the pharmaceutical space. As I'll explain, it has the potential to take significant market share. 

Change = Opportunity

Because marijuana has been illegal for so long, it's been very difficult for scientists to study. 

The DEA classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug. In its world, it's a drug with "no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse." It says it's worse than heroin, crack and meth, which are all considered Schedule 2 drugs (with some legitimate medical applications).

Being a Schedule 1 drug makes it nearly impossible to get government funding to study the medical uses of cannabis in the U.S. But researchers are finding a way. Mostly overseas, or with rare special permission in the U.S., the science is ongoing and extremely promising.

The real problem is that cannabis is a drug with far too many medical applications. 

We know there's strong evidence for cannabis working for the following conditions:

  • Depression
  • Insomnia
  • Nausea
  • Severe Epilepsy
  • Pain
  • Inflammation
That's a big chunk of the pharmaceutical industry's bread and butter...

Not to mention, many of the pharmaceutical treatments for these conditions have nasty side effects.

Take severe epilepsy. A cannabinoid extracted from marijuana, called CBD, treats it very well. 

The prescription answer to this condition is often heavy sedatives, like Xanax. And they give that stuff to kids, who eventually become addicted to it. (If you're interested in learning more about CBD, watch this seven-minute CNN documentary.) 

CBD works so well that shares of a pharmaceutical company called GW Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: GWPH) spiked almost 100% this month after announcing positive clinical results on a CBD drug. And it's not a small company - it has a market cap of $1.72 billion.

Regular readers know I'm extremely bullish on the legal marijuana business. Obviously, the medical sector is especially interesting to me.

But to be honest, I haven't figured out the best way to invest in the medical side. I've looked into a few stocks (like GW Pharmaceuticals). But I don't know enough about how strong their patent protection is. Need to do more research. 

I've also found few startups doing breeding, which is important for medical applications due to the use of specialized strains to produce specific compounds for various conditions.

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Well, do not cast the PowerShares DB U.S. Dollar Index Bullish Fund (NYSEArca:UUP) aside just yet if you are a firm believe that Goldman Sachs is accurate in its bullish calls on the greenback.

Well, do not cast the PowerShares DB U.S. Dollar Index Bullish Fund (NYSEArca:UUP) aside just yet if you are a firm believe that Goldman Sachs is accurate in its bullish calls on the greenback.
UUP, which tracks the price movement of the U.S. dollar against a basket of currencies, including the euro, Japanese yen, British pound, Canadian dollar, Swedish krona and Swiss franc, is off nearly 4% this month and obviously got no help from the Federal Reserve when the central bank declined to raise interest rates last week. Making life harder on the dollar and UUP is the fact that many traders are now betting that the Fed will only raise interest rates twice this year, down from expectations of four rate hikes coming into 2016.
Macquarie Bank Ltd. and Morgan Stanley, two of the world’s top 10 currency forecasters, are also warning of potential further risks in the U.S. dollar ahead. Goldman feels differently.
“Goldman Sachs Group Inc., one of the world’s top 10 foreign-exchange traders, is holding fast to its bullish-dollar stance, unmoved by the currency’s recent slide. Gains in the greenback against its higher-yielding peers on Monday showed at least some investors agree,” according to Bloomberg.
Bloomberg notes Goldman is of the mind that the Fed will raise rates three times this year.
The U.S. dollar has previously rallied on expectations for a tighter U.S. monetary policy, which would diminish the amount of dollars sloshing around the economy and prop up the greenback against foreign currencies. However, with Fed backtracking on its interest rate outlook, the dollar is losing some of its previous momentum.
Numerous factors could play roles in the dollar’s performance this year, including commodities prices, the Federal Reserve’s plans for additional interest rate hikes and the presidential election. The dollar’s current bull market still is not five years old and knowing that dollar bull markets can last for eight or nine years means UUP could have another year or two of upside ahead of it. In fact, the dollar could rally for another two years.
More international investors have piled in to the relatively attractive yields in U.S. government debt as foreign central bank policies have pushed international government yields to near zero or negative in some cases like Japan. [Treasury Bond ETFs Continue to Impress]
PowerShares DB U.S. Dollar Index Bullish Fund
uup
The opinions and forecasts expressed herein are solely those of Tom Lydon, and may not actually come to pass. Information on this site should not be used or construed as an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a recommendation for any product.

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Harvard researchers have created the first stem cells programmed to kill brain cancer Americans at Harvard University have created genetically modified stem cells in the laboratory that can kill cancerous brain tumors. Radiation is one of the causes of cancer in the brain. In human development, stem cells (stem cells) are undifferentiated cells that have the ability mitotic division to reânoiasc? (and keep unmodified original properties of these cells), but have the ability to differentiate and generate highly specialized cells . “STEM” or the “Company”), a biomedicine firm engaged in the development of effective treatments for degenerative and cancerous diseases.

Harvard researchers have created the first stem cells programmed to kill brain cancer
Americans at Harvard University have created genetically modified stem cells in the laboratory that can kill cancerous brain tumors.
Scientists at Harvard Medical School, quoted by BBC, explains that these cells produce toxins that kill cancer cells but that at the same time are able to withstand the effects of the poison they produce and thus do not affect other healthy cells.
This discovery is considered by experts worldwide as the future technique in treating cancer.
Treatment has already been tested on laboratory mice, and after the stem cells were surrounded in gel and placed at brain tumor, cancer cells were destroyed by toxins.
The toxins that kill malignant tumors have been successfully used in a variety of cancers of the blood, but they do not work as well in solid tumors because not all cancers are equally accessible and toxins have a short period of activity.
But now the situation is changing through genetic modification of stem cells they produce, and Agerpres reports.SZacks Investment Research upgraded shares ofStemCells Inc (NASDAQ:STEM) from a hold rating to a buy rating in a report released on Friday morning,MarketBeat.com reports. They currently have $0.25 price target on the stock.
According to Zacks, “Stemcells, Inc. is engaged in research aimed at the development of therapies that would use stem and progenitor cells derived from fetal or adult sources to treat, and possibly cure, human diseases and injuries such as Parkinson’s disease, hepatitis, diabetes, and spinal cord injuries. “
In related news, General Counsel Kenneth Blair Stratton sold 104,549 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Tuesday, December 29th. The shares were sold at an average price of $0.45, for a total transaction of $47,047.05. Following the transaction, the general counsel now owns 556,525 shares in the company, valued at approximately $250,436.25. The sale was disclosed in a filing with the SEC, which can be accessed through this link.
Several other equities research analysts have also weighed in on the stock. Maxim Group reaffirmed a buy rating and issued a $3.00 target price on shares of StemCells in a report on Wednesday, December 23rd. Chardan Capital reaffirmed a buy rating and issued a $1.00 target price (down previously from $1.55) on shares of StemCells in a report on Thursday, December 24th. Finally, HC Wainwright reaffirmed a buy rating and issued a $2.10 target price on shares of StemCells in a report on Tuesday, November 24th. Seven research analysts have rated the stock with a buy rating, The stock presently has an average rating of Buy and a consensus price target of $1.54.
Shares of StemCells (NASDAQ:STEM) traded down 1.4063% during trading on Friday, hitting $0.2524. 2,162,600 shares of the stock traded hands. StemCells has a 1-year low of $0.21 and a 1-year high of $1.10. The company’s market cap is $27.46 million. The company has a 50 day moving average of $0.34 and a 200-day moving average of $0.42.
StemCells (NASDAQ:STEM) last announced its quarterly earnings results on Tuesday, March 15th. The company reported ($0.08) earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating the Thomson Reuters’ consensus estimate of ($0.09) by $0.01. On average, equities analysts anticipate that StemCells will post ($0.39) EPS for the current fiscal year.
StemCells, Inc is engaged in the research, development, and commercialization of stem cell therapeutics. The Company is focused on developing and commercializing stem and progenitor cells as the basis for therapeutics and therapies. The Company’s lead product development program is its CNS Program, in which it is developing applications for HuCNS-SC cells, its human neural platform technology.
12 Month Chart for NASDAQ:STEM
For more information about research offerings from Zacks Investment Research, visit Zacks.com
Receive News & Ratings for StemCells Inc Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for StemCells Inc and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.
One of the authors of the study published in the journal Stem Cells, Dr. Khalid Shah said that soon will initiate laboratory tests on mice with glioblastoma, the most common type of brain tumor in humans.
After completion of testing, this type of therapy would be tested on humans within 5 years.esearch carried out in the past five years have demonstrated that like any tissue of the body and starts all cancerous tissue from some stem cells.
Why is attacked brain. The most common malignant brain tumors are the result of migration of cancer cells in the body from other bodies, a phenomenon called metastasis. More rarely, cancer cells are formed directly in the brain and form the so-called primary brain tumors. They can spread along the central nervous system and spinal cord can reach. Although the exact causes are unknown, it is assumed that the genetic factor plays an essential role in brain cancer.
Diagnostic- brain tumors can be detected by computed tomography.
Noutate- discovery that tumors all come from one category of stem cells explains why, once removed surgically, cancer still persists in the body. These cells can not be detected by any normal means of diagnosis because they “hide” in the most inaccessible and yet most favorable for their development. So far scientists have discovered cancer stem cells for four forms of malignant brain tumors, myeloma (bone marrow localized), and breast cancer.
How to form cancerul- brain cancer is one of the most problematic forms of oncological diseases, it is very difficult to treat. And this explanation is quite simple: until recently not discovered the exact mechanisms of this type of tumor formation. Researchers believed that all cells forming a malignant brain tumor are identical. But little time scientists have revealed that within a group of brain tumors are cancer stem cells. In fact, these cells are those that confer malignancy tumor, molecular biologists concluded from Children’s Hospital “St. Jude “in Tennese USA.
Specifically tumors formed by the accumulation of cancer stem cells located in a kind of “niche” created by tiny blood vessels in the brain. As these cells are “fed” the blood vessels that coexist, they grow and form tumors.
Radiation is one of the causes of cancer in the brain.
In human development, stem cells (stem cells) are undifferentiated cells that have the ability mitotic division to reânoiasc? (and keep unmodified original properties of these cells), but have the ability to differentiate and generate highly specialized cells . By analogy, recent research has hypothesized that the origin of malignant cancerous tumors could stand some mutant cells with properties to divide and maintain germinal nucleus, but also to multiply and generate localized tumor masses or remotely. These cells are indicted cancer recurrences in patients treated for various cancers. Moreover, surgery is designed to extract solid masses of cancer cells and chemotherapy and radiotherapy intended to destroy these outstanding potential cancer stem cells in the body.
How stem cells survive. The specialists at Children’s Hospital “St. Jude “is now trying to find the weak point of cancer stem cells by comparing them with noncancerous neural stem cells. The latter are concentrated in brain areas rich in blood vessels, which are lined with endothelial cells. These, in turn, secrete a number of chemicals that help stem cells to survive. In this way are kept alive and cancer stem cells that are nestled near the capillaries. When the researchers injected laboratory mice stem cells from a human malignant tumor with endothelial cells, the animals developed tumors than mice that were injected only cancer stem cells.
It will create a new treatment. Once discovered the weakness of cancer stem cells, researchers can create a treatment that specifically target these cells. Therefore, experts are working on a method to be destroyed parts of the capillaries that feed the cells. It is possible that anti-angiogenic treatments (of stumbling to the formation of new blood vessels) that are to be effective.

Friday, March 18, 2016

The Paris-based agency, which advises the world’s biggest economies on energy policy, said the oil market was “massively oversupplied”. Global oil supply surged by 550,000 barrels a day in June to 96.6m b/d, up 3.1m b/d from the same month a year ago, the IEA said in a widely followed monthly report “The market’s ability to absorb that oversupply is unlikely to last. Onshore storage space is limited. So is the tanker fleet. New refineries do not get built every day,” the IEA said. “Something has to give.”10 per barrel rally in crude oil has now brought the market more than 35% off its low made just one month ago. The recent rally could find increasing its gains difficult as it heads into seasonal and technical resistance as you’ll see on the enclosed chart.

10 per barrel rally in crude oil has now brought the market more than 35% off its low made just one month ago. The recent rally could find increasing its gains difficult as it heads into seasonal and technical resistance as you’ll see on the enclosed chart. 


According to the International Energy Agency (“IEA”) the oil supply glut is set to continue until well into 2016.
Inevitably there will be some people who will say that the IEA is deliberately talking down the market so as to encourage a low oil price, which is presumed to be beneficial for Western economies.
What the IEA is predicting however follows the classic pattern of an over-supply glut.
The initial response of producers to a supply glut is to increase rather than cut back production as a way of keeping market share and maintaining cash flow through higher sales.  Heavily indebted marginal producers like the shale producers in the US tend to do this to an even greater degree than more established producers, since they have to maintain cash flow to pay their debts.
The result is that as production grows the supply glut increases driving prices down even more.
This is the process the IEA is describing and given the state of the market and the debt financing needs of US shale producers - the weakest link in the industry - it makes complete sense.
Oil is by no means unique in following this pattern.  One of the reasons for the “dust bowls” in the US in the 1930s was the removal of top soils by US farmers driven to overproduce in the 1920s by low prices caused by the conditions of over supply created by the  preceding period of high prices before and during the First World War.
Falling prices during the supply glut caused by rising production however eventually undermine the position of marginal producers, especially if as US farmers were in the 1920s and as some US shale producers are today, they are heavily indebted. 
In the 1930s in the US farm industry there was actually a foreclosure crisis.  It is not completely impossible that something similar may eventually happen amongst weaker producers in the US shale industry.
Once the process has finally run its course prices will recover - probably by more than some assume.
The last few months have shown that Russia is capable of weathering the oil price fall.  Indeed a period of lower oil prices is arguably beneficial to an economy with low debt that wants to expand its agricultural and manufacturing base.  Used properly a period of low oil prices should encourage higher investment in agriculture and manufacturing as opposed to energy, which has had a disproportionate share of investment up to now.
For this period of lower oil prices to be used properly, so that long-term investment in manufacturing and industry become truly profitable, inflation and interest rates need to fall below what have been their historic levels in Russia, which is why the government is so single-mindedly focused on lowering inflation.
———————————————
From the Financial Times
The rebalancing of the oil market that started last year has yet to run its course and a bottom in prices “may still be ahead”, according to the world’s leading energy forecaster.
In a bearish assessment of market conditions the International Energy Agency said the adjustment process would “extend well into 2016” as production — led by Opec nations — continued to swell and demand growth softened.
The Paris-based agency, which advises the world’s biggest economies on energy policy, said the oil market was “massively oversupplied”.

Global oil supply surged by 550,000 barrels a day in June to 96.6m b/d, up 3.1m b/d from the same month a year ago, the IEA said in a widely followed monthly report
“The market’s ability to absorb that oversupply is unlikely to last. Onshore storage space is limited. So is the tanker fleet. New refineries do not get built every day,” the IEA said. “Something has to give.”
That something could be US shale oil, the agency said. Relentless supply growth from North America has been one of the factors contributing to the glut in crude oil.
While some weakness in US shale oil output was beginning to show “it may also take another price drop for the full supply response to unfold”, the IEA warned.
Oil prices on both sides of the Atlantic fell sharply this week, with Brent crude — the international benchmark — entering bear market territory. Brent hit $55 a barrel on Monday, rattled by the financial turmoil in Greece and the stock market rout in China. On Friday Brent had risen back to $59 a barrel — a level that is still almost 50 per cent lower than last year’s $115 a barrel June peak.
Cost savings, efficiency gains and hedging have helped shale producers “defy expectations”until now, but supply growth ground to a halt in May and is forecast to stay at these levels through mid-2016, the IEA noted. After growing at 1.7m b/d in 2014, US shale onshore production is forecast to slow to 900,000 b/d this year and 300,000 b/d in 2016.
As a whole, the IEA expects non-Opec supply growth will slow to 1m b/d in 2015 and stay flat in 2016 as lower oil prices and spending cuts take hold.
Although the IEA increased its global demand growth forecast for 2016 to 1.2m b/d — taking total demand to 95.2m b/d — it is still less than 1.4m b/d it predicts for this year.

“World oil demand growth appears to have peaked in the first quarter of 2015 at 1.8m barrels a day and will continue to ease throughout the rest of this year and into next,” said the IEA.
A possible Greek exit from the eurozone could suppress demand across the continent if economic activity was to weaken, the IEA said.
The agency said that would not translate into a “tighter market” for oil in 2016 as long as members of Opec, the oil producing cartel, continued to pump at near record levels.
“The group is not slowing down. On the contrary, its core Middle East producers are pumping at record rates and the outlook for Iraqi capacity growth — accounting for most projected Opec expansions — keeps improving,” it said.
Opec crude supply reached a three-year high in June to 31.7m b/d, up 340,000 b/d from the prior month, led by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
The IEA estimates that the demand for the cartel’s crude will stand at 30.3m b/d next year, up 1m b/d from 2015. But this is still a “whopping” 1.4m b/d less than its current production.
An Iranian nuclear deal with world powers could also unleash more barrels on to the market.


The year 2015 may have been dull and quite for the broader market, breaking a prolonged bull run, but a few segments kept the market noisy. Crude oil takes the first spot in this league followed by other forms of energy like natural gas while overall commodities, metals and some country investments round out the top five positions.

Definitely, these noises emanated from panic; not from cheers. The persistent slump in oil prices, a broad-based acute slump in commodities, a super slowdown in metals instigated mainly by the China-led worries (China is the main consumer of global metals) and upheaval in some countries like Brazil kept the global stock returns at check in 2015.

However, as they say –– someone's pain is someone’s gain. The rule applies in the ETF world as well. There are plenty of investment opportunities in the ETF world to make quick and hefty bucks from any investment’s downturn via an inverse leveraged approach.

However, these funds run high risk of losses compared with traditional funds due to the short-term nature of investments of the former. Further, their performances could vary significantly from the actual performance of their underlying index over a longer period when compared to a shorter period. These investments are not meant to be held for long and vary big-time even with slight changes in investment dynamics.

Whatever the case, below we highlight eight inverse leveraged ETFs that have offered at least 70% returns so far this year (as of December 29, 2015) against the S&P-based broader market ETFSPY’s 0.9% gains. Notably, Zacks does not rank inverse and leveraged ETFs in view of their short-term performance objectives.

DB Crude Oil Double Short ETN (DTO) – Up 100.88%

Oil is presently the worst investment possible due to an acute supply gut and low demand issues. Talks about no production cut from OPEC nations added further woes to this liquid commodity investment. As a result, ETFs shorting oil-related index made huge gains (read: 5 ETF Losers of 2015 Hoping for a Rebound in 2016).

This ETN provides twice the inverse exposure to the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Light Crude, which tracks the performance of a basket of WTI oil futures contracts. It has amassed $64.4 million in its asset base and trades in a moderate daily volume of roughly 90,000 shares. The product charges 75 bps in fees per year from investors (read: Still Believe in Goldman's $20 Oil? Go Short With These ETFs).

ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil (SCO) offering twice the negative impact of the daily performance of the Bloomberg WTI Crude Oil Subindex has added 79.33% so far this year (as of December 29, 2015). VelocityShares 3x Inverse Crude Oil ETN (DWTI) is yet another inverse leveraged crude fund that has gained 76.42% during this timeframe.
Given the situation, investors might want to consider shorting oil
  • North Sea Brent crude oil prices averaged $32/barrel (b) in February, a $1/b increase from January.
  • Brent crude oil prices are forecast to average $34/b in 2016 and $40/b in 2017, $3/b and $10/b lower than forecast in last month's STEO, respectively. The lower forecast prices reflect oil production that has been more resilient than expected in a low-price environment and lower expectations for forecast oil demand growth.
  • Forecast West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil prices are expected to average the same as Brent in 2016 and 2017. However, the current values of futures and options contracts suggest high uncertainty in the price outlook. For example, EIA's forecast for the average WTI price in June 2016 of $35/b should be considered in the context of recent Nymex contract values for June 2016 delivery (Market Prices and Uncertainty Report) suggesting that the market expects WTI prices to range from $24/b to $58/b (at the 95% confidence interval).
  • U.S. crude oil production averaged an estimated 9.4 million barrels per day (b/d) in 2015, and it is forecast to average 8.7 million b/d in 2016 and 8.2 million b/d in 2017. EIA estimates that crude oil production in February averaged 9.1 million b/d, which was 80,000 b/d below the January level.
  • Natural gas working inventories were 2,536 billion cubic feet (Bcf) on February 26, 46% higher than during the same week last year and 36% higher than the previous five-year average (2011-15) for that week. EIA forecasts that inventories will end the winter heating season (March 31) at 2,288 Bcf, which would be 54% above the level at the same time last year. Henry Hub spot prices are forecast to average $2.25/million British thermal units (MMBtu) in 2016 and $3.02/MMBtu in 2017, compared with an average of $2.63/MMBtu in 2015.
  • Natural gas is expected to fuel the largest share of electricity generation in 2016 at 33%, compared with 32% for coal. This would be the first time that natural gas provides more electricity generation than coal on an annual average basis. In 2017, natural gas and coal are both forecast to fuel 32% of electricity generation. For renewables, the forecast share of total electricity generation supplied by hydropower rises from 6% in 2016 to 7% in 2017, and the forecast share for other renewables increases from 8% in 2016 to 9% in 2017.

 . Though futures or short-stock are some of the possible ways for doing so, there are a host of short oil ETF options which may make more sense for many investors.

So, for investors seeking to make an inverse bet on oil, we have highlighted below four ETFs, any of which can be used to make a short play on oil.

However, investors should keep in mind that a short play in the futures market requires a strong appetite for risks.

ProShares UltraShort DJ-UBS Crude Oil ETF (SCO)

SCO is the most popular option in the short oil ETF space having an asset base of $169.1 million. The fund tracks the Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index to provide twice the inverse performance, on a daily basis of WTI crude oil. 

Volumes are also great as roughly 1.3 million shares change hand daily. However, expenses are a bit steep at roughly 95 basis points annually.

PowerShares DB Crude Oil Double Short ETN (DTO)

Investors seeking to use the ETN approach to inverse crude investing can consider DTO for exposure. The fund follows a benchmark of crude oil futures contracts to provide -2x exposure.

While the fund manages a small AUM of $66.9 million, volumes are pretty good at about 110,000 shares a day. Also, the fund is relatively cheaper with 75 basis points as annual fees (see all Inverse Commodity ETFs here).

PowerShares DB Crude Oil Short ETN (SZO)

SZO is the least risky bet in the space providing -1x short exposure to WTI crude. The ETN tracks the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Oil for this purpose, while it also adds in the yield from short-term T-bills.

However, the product is quite unpopular with an asset base of just $7.8 million and trades with low volumes of under 3,000 shares, which might result in additional costs in the form of wide bid-ask spreads. Expenses come in at 75 basis points annually.

VelocityShares 3x Inverse Crude ETN (DWTI)

DWTI is one of the riskier ways to play the short oil market, utilizing -3x exposure with daily rebalancing.  The fund tracks the S&P GSCI Crude Oil Index to provide exposure to crude oil.

However, the product is quite unpopular with a low asset base of trading volume. Moreover, it is quite pricey charging 1.35% as annual fees. $
There are a couple of large factors at work in the current crude oil environment. First of all, crude oil pricing has clearly shifted its traditional trading boundaries. Crude oil has made every attempt to install systemically higher prices since 2000 when US consumption ramped up on imported oil and drove prices above $140 per barrel thus, auguring in the fracking era. The rush to exploit North American reserves at very profitable margins in the name of, “energy independence” has now created a supply glut and driven prices back to the original $25-$40 per barrel of the early 2000’s. The supply glut is expected to take at least a year to work through at current economic activity levels. However, it is quite possible that forward global GDP will be revised downward as major economies enact negative interest rate policies. Thus, prolonging the supply overhang. Classic economics leads us to believe that prices will equalize, “at the margin” where the most efficient producers can capture market share at lower total prices. We think the 2016 equalization level will be less than $40 per barrel.
This brings us to the current situation as the recent rally begins to test resistance at $40 per barrel while heading into a classic seasonal peak. We think crude oil’s new upper boundary will be defined by the resistance at $42.50 which had acted as support this past fall. This will also time out well with last of the refiners’ buying as they prepare for Memorial Day’s kickoff of the summer blends and the seasonal peak occurring near the end of April. You can see on the enclosed chart this year’s pattern is taking on a pretty similar appearance to last year’s.
Crude oil is currently overbought on a short-term basis and overvalued based on the commercial traders’ collective actions. When we combine this with overhead technical resistance and the expectation of a seasonal peak, it puts us on the lookout for sellable rallies or momentum reversals lower. Many of these factors have been included in our fullymechanical Commitment of Traders programs. We’ll update this scenario accordingly and announce the sell signal once it’s officially triggered.
031416_TP_cl.jpg

y for informational purposes, not for trading purposes or advice, and is end-of-day. To see all exchange delays and terms of use please see disclaimer. NYSE, AMEX and Nasdaq data are end-of-day.