Third Point letter to investors for the first quarter ended March 31, 2016.

Third Point – Review and Outlook

Volatility across asset classes and a reversal of certain trends that started last summer caught many investors flat-footed in Q1 2016. The market’s sell-off began with the Chinese government’s decision to devalue the Renminbi on August 11, 2015 and ended with the RMB’s bottom on February 15, 2016, as shown in the chart below:

Third Point

By early this year, the consensus view that China was on the brink and investors should “brace for impact” was set in stone. In February, many market participants believed China faced a “Trilemma” which left the government with no choice but to devalue the currency if it wished to maintain economic growth and take necessary writedowns on some $25 trillion of SOE (State Owned Enterprise) debt. Based largely on this view, investors (including Third Point) crowded into short trades in the RMB, materials, and companies that were economically sensitive or exposed to Chinese growth.

Making matters worse, many hedge funds remained long “FANG” stocks (Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, and Google), which had been some of 2015’s best performing securities. Further exacerbating the carnage was a huge asset rotation into market neutral strategies in late Q4. Unfortunately, many managers lost sight of the fact that low net does not mean low risk and so, when positioning reversed, market neutral became a hedge fund killing field. Finally, the Valeant debacle in mid-March decimated some hedge fund portfolios and the termination of the Pfizer-Allergan deal in early April dealt a further blow to many other investors. The result of all of this was one of the most catastrophic periods of hedge fund performance that we can remember since the inception of this fund

When markets bottom, they don’t ring a bell but they sometimes blow a dog whistle. In mid-February, we started to believe that the Chinese government was unwilling to devalue the RMB and was instead signaling that additional fiscal stimulus was on deck (an option that the bears had ruled out). Nearly simultaneously, the dollar peaked and our analysis also led us to believe that oil had reached a bottom. We preserved capital by quickly moving to cover our trades that were linked to Chinese weakness/USD dominance in areas like commodities, cyclicals, and industrials. We flipped our corporate credit book from net short to net long by covering shorts and aggressively adding to our energy credit positions. However, we failed to get long fast enough in cyclical equities and, while we avoided losses from shorts, we largely missed the rally on the upside. Unfortunately, our concentration in long health care equities and weakness in the structured credit portfolio caused our modest losses in Q1.

[drizzle]So where do we go from here? As most investors have been caught offsides at some or multiple points over the past eight months, the impulse to do little is understandable. We are of a contrary view that volatility is bringing excellent opportunities, some of which we discuss below. We believe that the past few months of increasing complexity are here to stay and now is a more important time than ever to employ active portfolio management to take advantage of this volatility. There is no doubt that we are in the first innings of a washout in hedge funds and certain strategies. We believe we are well-positioned to seize the opportunities borne out of this chaos and are pleased to have preserved capital through a period of vicious swings in treacherous markets.

Third Point – Quarterly Results

Set forth below are our results through March 31, 2016:

Third-point-1

Third Point – Portfolio Positioning

Equity Investments: Risk Arbitrage and Pro Forma Situations

“Event-driven” and activist strategies performed poorly in 2015 and in Q1 2016. We believe that the resulting redemptions and liquidations from these strategies have helped to create today’s environment, which is one of the more interesting we have seen in many years for classic event situations like risk-arbitrage and transformative mergers. Many investors are ignoring companies in the midst of deals because catalysts are longer-dated (well into 2017) which is allowing us to buy outstanding enterprises at bargain valuations on 2017/18 earnings. Many of these combined businesses should compound in value thanks to the benefit of synergies, modest financial leverage, and strong or improved management teams that have a history of successful capital allocation. Some of the most interesting situations are described below:

Dow/DuPont

We are encouraged by the latest developments in our investment in Dow which announced a merger with DuPont in December. In February, the company revealed that long-time CEO Andrew Liveris will be stepping aside not long after the merger’s completion. DuPont’s CEO, Ed Breen, is a proven operator and capital allocator. Breen made his mark by streamlining Tyco, a long-time industrial conglomerate, splitting the company into focused units and thus created enormous shareholder value. He brings an unbiased perspective and is not afraid to challenge the status quo, two qualities that will be essential in leading Dow/DuPont given the histories of both of these conglomerates.

We continue to believe there is potential for operational improvement at Dow that would be incremental to the $3 billion announced synergy target; in aggregate, approximately $5 billion of earnings improvement could be unlocked. The merger structure preserves both companies’ strong balance sheets which, combined with fading Sadara and Gulf Coast CapEx, should allow for meaningful capital return while maintaining a strong investment grade balance sheet. Taking all of these factors into account, we believe the pro forma entity is capable of generating $5.50 – 6.00 of EPS in 2018. Given that these earnings will consist of contributions from several focused spinoffs, we also believe that multiple expansion is likely.

Conglomerate structures often breed unintended consequences like misaligned incentives and suboptimal capital allocation. Going forward, segments in both companies will no longer have to compete for capital with disparate businesses. They will become liberated and empowered to create their own targets with their own incentive plans. More work needs to be done to ensure that the split results in focused, pure-play businesses, in particular because the current structure still has basic petrochemicals and specialty businesses housed together. Re-jiggering the split structure may in itself unlock incremental synergies as more specialty product businesses would benefit from being managed together.

A major step forward has been achieved with the appointment of a new merge-co CEO and a strategy to split the business. Now the focus shifts toward creating the optimal split structure and ensuring the proper leadership and governance in each split entity is put into place. With the right management, structure, and a synergy target that looks conservative in light of the prospect for more sweeping change, we believe we have a compelling long term investment in Dow/DuPont.

BUD/SAB/TAP

The long awaited acquisition of SAB Miller (SAB) by Anheuser Busch InBev (BUD) announced late last year created two interesting pro forma situations. The deal, expected to close in the second half of 2016, will combine the two largest global brewers and create an unrivaled player with strong pricing power in an increasingly consolidated global industry. It will also transform Molson Coors

1, 2  - View Full Page