2010 | 2011 | ||||||
Price: | 8.15 | EPS | $2.26 | $1.56 | |||
Shares Out. (in M): | 132 | P/E | 5.9x | 4.1x | |||
Market Cap (in $M): | 1,061 | P/FCF | 9.8x | 6.4x | |||
Net Debt (in $M): | 2,999 | EBIT | 457 | 461 | |||
TEV (in $M): | 4,060 | TEV/EBIT | 8.9x | 8.8x |
Sign up for free guest access to view investment idea with a 45 days delay.
Special Situation: Cash Rich Restructuring
Recommendation
Thesis
Company Background
The Company in its current form developed over three principal stages:
Company Overview
Phoenix Group is the largest UK closed-life fund consolidator consisting of 8 closed-end life funds, two asset managers (Axial & Ignis), two management service companies, and one reinsurance business handling certain reinsurance contracts on the group’s annuity liabilities. In total, the Company has over 7.6 million policies in force, £66.9bn of AUM, and total life liabilities of £53.9bn. The Company’s life operations consist entirely of closed end funds, so no new origination takes place – it is effectively a cash flow wind down story.
As a closed-end fund operator, the Company seeks to generate captial through the release of embedded capital in excess of its policy liabilities as those policies roll off. The simpliest way to look at the cash flow power of the group is to look at its value-in-force (“VIF”) portfolio over time – if the Company manages its portfolio effectively, each policy that rolls off will effectively return the capital gain embedded in that portfolio back to the group. The Company forecasts ~ £2bn (65%) of its highly predictable VIF to run off in the next 10 years, nearly all of which drops to cash.
In addition to VIF policy rolloff, the Company extracts cash flow from existing policy portfolios through consolidation of policies within the group (effectively regulatory capital arbitrage), taxation savings on consolidated portfolios, as well as internal synergies created via backoffice consolidation. In total, the Company anticipates it can generate an additional 3%-6% unlevered IRR on portfolio consolidations. The Company estimates approximately £500m of savings are imbedded in its existing portfolio (assuming portfolio consolidations within Phoenix and Pearl on an individual basis, ie no inclusion of consolidation between the fund groups - potential for an incremental £500m of synergies). To illustrate, a step-by-step example is as follows:
For all closed end life operators, the most critical issues are (i) maintaining sufficient regulatory capital and (ii) maintaining stable investment performance. To this end, Phoenix maintains a relatively safe 132% capital surplus (£1.2bn, above 125% min target) and a low beta portfolio of investable securities comprised primarily of cash, government, and other liquid fixed income securities rated BBB or better (at 88% of total portfolio in bonds w/ 80% rated A or better, 2% equities, 1% properties, and 9% hedging and other instruments)
12/31/09 (£m) |
Pearl Assurance |
London Life |
NP1 |
Phoenix Life |
Phoenix and London Assurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Resources |
1,820 |
288 |
111 |
3,930 |
885 |
Capital Resources Requirement |
969 |
79 |
58 |
3,186 |
388 |
Excess |
851 |
209 |
53 |
744 |
497 |
Source: FY2009 annual report
Lastly, additional cost synergies are anticipated to be generated through the consolidation of its two asset management business, coupled with inflows of third party capital that have yet to be realized (let alone the potential to sell the asset managers all together). Managing a total of £66.9bn AUM, incremental third party funds (from a low base of £4.1bn) and cost synergies, opportunities to extract incremental value appears attainable. Latest performance snapshot below:
Aum 12/31/09 (€bn) |
2009 |
2008 |
Life Funds |
60.1 |
61.0 |
Group Pension Schemes |
2.7 |
2.5 |
Institutional (1)(2) |
1.6 |
2.5 |
International |
0.5 |
0.4 |
Retail |
2.0 |
1.7 |
Total AuM |
66.9 |
68.2 |
Source: FY2009 annual report
Shareholder Base
Under terms of the Liberty/Phoenix merger and restructuring, the Class B shares, Liberty/RLG warrants, and contingent shares remain unlisted and closely held by the original SPAC owners and lending group. Note: shareholders below are locked up until September 2010 for 50% of holdings below, 50% until mid 2011.
Party |
# Ordinary |
# Class B |
# Sh Warrants |
Total |
% of Tot Issue |
TDR Capital |
0 |
18,107,972 |
0 |
18,107,972 |
14.35% |
Royal London |
0 |
6,180,000 |
12,360,000 |
18,540,000 |
14.69% |
Xercise |
0 |
15,978,373 |
0 |
15,978,373 |
12.66% |
ME Franklin |
8,954,640 |
0 |
5,702,300 |
14,656,940 |
11.61% |
Tarragona |
8,954,640 |
0 |
5,702,300 |
14,656,940 |
11.61% |
Citi |
5,623,476 |
0 |
3,958,610 |
9,582,086 |
7.59% |
Source: LSE Summary Document, 11/12/09
Capital Structure
The merger of Phoenix and Liberty created a highly complicated debt and equity structure, with several layers of warrants, contingent shares and dual class common shares held by the banks that financed the Phoenix/Resolution merger, Liberty holders, and Phoenix/Resolution holders. Important to note is that the Company's bank debt resides outside of the regulated group and hence is not included in IGD and Pillar 1&2 capital requirements. Summary of the initial debt and equity structure is below:
Facility |
Amount |
Pricing |
Maturity |
Notes |
Existing bank debt |
425 |
L +125bps |
2016 |
£25m p.a. 2011-2015, bln 2016 |
Lender loan notes |
75 |
L +100bps cash or PIK |
2024 |
Non-amortising |
Total Pearl Bank Debt |
500 |
|||
Facility A |
1,275 |
L+100bps cash + 100bps cash or PIK |
2014 |
£125m p.a. from 2011, bln 2014 |
Facility B |
493 |
L+125bps cash + 75bps cash or PIK |
2015 |
Non-amortising |
Facility C |
493 |
L+175bps cash + 25bps cash or PIK |
2016 |
Non-amortising |
Total Impala bank |
2,261 |
|||
Total Bank Debt |
2,761 |
Excluded from IGD Capital |
||
Tier I bonds |
425 |
|||
Tier 2 bonds |
200 |
|||
Total Debt |
3,386 |
Shares |
Original |
Ordinary Shares |
76.46 |
Class B Ordinary Shares |
49.77 |
Liberty Warrants |
41.50 |
Earn-Out/Contingent Shares |
35.00 |
Royal London Warrants |
12.36 |
Lender Warrants |
5.00 |
Management Incentive |
3.00 |
Liberty Sponsors |
1.00 |
Total Shares |
224.09 |
% Dilutive Instruments |
78% |
Prior to achieving a primary LSE listing, the Company needs to reduce its total dilutive shares to < 20% (LSE listing guidelines). In a first stage, the Company initiated an exchange offer for all of the Liberty/insider warrants (exchangeable into Class B shares) and 73% of the public warrants (exchangeable for ordinary shares) for 0.181818/share in December 2009, and full take up was achieved. As a result, the % of dilutive instruments declined from 78% to 49%
1ST EXCHANGE |
Shares |
Original |
1st Exchange |
|||
Warrants |
Quantum |
Shares |
Ordinary Shares |
76.46 |
80.43 |
|
Liberty Warrants |
Class B Shares |
49.77 |
51.86 |
|||
Insiders - To Class B |
11.50 |
100% |
2.09 |
Liberty Warrants |
41.50 |
8.17 |
Public - To Ord (up to 22m) |
30.00 |
73% |
3.97 |
Contingent Shares |
35.00 |
35.00 |
Royal London Warrants |
12.36 |
0% |
0.00 |
RL Warrants |
12.36 |
12.36 |
Lender Warrants |
5.00 |
0% |
0.00 |
Lender Warrants |
5.00 |
5.00 |
exchange terms |
0.18 |
Mgmt Incentive |
3.00 |
3.00 |
||
Total Share Exchange |
6.06 |
Liberty Sponsors |
1.00 |
1.00 |
||
|
|
|
|
Total Shares |
224.09 |
196.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Dilutive Instruments |
78% |
49% |
Given management's stated intention to achieve a primary listing by 1H10 (dilutive securities must be below 20% threshold), we anticipate that management will convert the earn-out shares into class B ordinary shares (cashless transaction), held in escrow and thus removed from the LSE dilutive security definition, to be released over time at the current strike prices (equal installments at €13, 14, & 15/share). RGL has stated its desire to hold its warrants so we do not believe a further exchange; rather the warrants will remain in place with their existing strikes. As a result, we anticipate the pre-listing share structure to be as follows:
Shares |
Original |
1st Exchange |
Shr. Conv |
Notes |
||
Ordinary Shares |
76.46 |
80.43 |
80.43 |
|||
Class B Ordinary Shares |
49.77 |
51.86 |
51.86 |
|||
Liberty Warrants |
41.50 |
8.17 |
8.17 |
Old Liberty Shareholders, EUR 11 strike |
||
Earn-Out/Contingent Shares |
35.00 |
35.00 |
35.00 |
Convert, held in escrow 13, 14, & 15 strike prices |
||
Royal London Warrants |
12.36 |
12.36 |
12.36 |
EUR 11 strike |
||
Lender Warrants |
5.00 |
5.00 |
5.00 |
GBP 15 strike |
||
Management Incentive |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
|||
Liberty Sponsors |
1.00 |
1.00 |
1.00 |
EUR 16.50 strike |
||
Total Shares |
224.09 |
196.82 |
196.82 |
|||
% Dilutive Instruments |
78% |
49% |
18% |
|||
Shares Outstanding @ Var Px |
||||||
<11 |
126.23 |
132.29 |
132.29 |
|||
11 |
186.09 |
152.82 |
152.82 |
EUR11 Warrants Exercised |
||
13 |
197.76 |
164.49 |
164.49 |
33% of Contingent Shares Exercised |
||
14 |
209.42 |
176.15 |
176.15 |
66% of Contingent Shares Exercised |
||
>15 |
221.09 |
193.82 |
193.82 |
100% of Contingent Shares Exercised |
While a number of iterations are possible to reduce the total dilutive shares, we anticipate any offer will have a high likelihood of success given the holder composition concentrated among insiders looking for an appreciation and liquidity event. For purposes of our analysis, we will refer to two share holding structures, no conversion (share count and structure remains as is today) and conversion (assuming shares are as shown under the Share Conv column above).
Cash Flow Profile
Managed effectively, a closed-end life fund operator is a highly stable, highly efficient cash flow machine. With a conservatively managed balance sheet and no new business generation year over year, costs are diminimus and cash flow returns to the group dependable over the life of an insurance policy. Given limited data currently, we have forecasted a conservative cash flow profile for the Company's existing portfolio, assuming no acquisitions, limited synergies from the asset management business, and approximately 72% of the life co synergies the company has forecasted (which they believe are conservative). Meaningful cash realization synergies exist in closed end fund consolidations, all of which are excluded from the cash flow forecast below (see Company overview for details on capital release mechanisms).
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
Notes |
||
VIF Release |
233.2 |
247.2 |
262.0 |
277.7 |
255.3 |
270.7 |
Management Guided VIF at 6% p.a. growth |
|
Capital Run-Off |
130.0 |
130.0 |
130.0 |
130.0 |
130.0 |
130.0 |
~ 1% |
|
Synergies (mgmt est 500m over 12 years) |
30.0 |
30.0 |
30.0 |
30.0 |
30.0 |
30.0 |
72% of mgmt estimate |
|
Life Company Cash Flow |
393.2 |
407.2 |
422.0 |
437.7 |
415.3 |
430.7 |
||
Asset Management |
40.0 |
40.0 |
40.0 |
40.0 |
40.0 |
40.0 |
0.17% on 60m avg AUM |
|
Service Companies |
46.5 |
43.2 |
40.2 |
37.4 |
34.8 |
32.3 |
est. w/ asset run off |
|
Tax Recoveries |
50.0 |
50.0 |
50.0 |
50.0 |
50.0 |
50.0 |
||
Total Cash Inflows |
529.7 |
540.4 |
552.2 |
565.1 |
540.1 |
553.0 |
||
Operating Costs |
25.6 |
26.3 |
26.9 |
27.6 |
28.3 |
29.0 |
2.5% inflationary growth |
|
Pension |
33.0 |
33.0 |
33.0 |
33.0 |
33.0 |
33.0 |
per FY2009 results |
|
Outsource IT |
10.0 |
10.0 |
10.0 |
10.0 |
10.0 |
10.0 |
||
Interest Expense |
139.9 |
143.6 |
142.6 |
138.8 |
133.5 |
127.1 |
per FY2009 results + Tier 1 |
|
Amortization |
276.0 |
150.0 |
150.0 |
150.0 |
150.0 |
150.0 |
10% bank debt paid in 2010 (prepayment), contractual thereafter |
|
Total Cash Outflows |
484.6 |
362.9 |
362.5 |
359.4 |
354.8 |
349.1 |
||
Net Cash Flow |
45.1 |
177.6 |
189.7 |
205.7 |
185.3 |
203.9 |
||
Free Cash Flow Yield |
4.1% |
16.2% |
17.3% |
18.8% |
16.9% |
18.6% |
||
Dividend |
14.1 |
88.8 |
94.9 |
102.9 |
92.7 |
102.0 |
2010 prorata EUR0.50/share, 50% of FCF thereafter |
|
Shares (Issued & Outstanding) |
132.29 |
132.29 |
132.29 |
132.29 |
132.29 |
132.29 |
||
Dividend Per Share |
0.11 |
0.67 |
0.72 |
0.78 |
0.70 |
0.77 |
||
EUR Dividend Per Share |
0.13 |
0.79 |
0.84 |
0.91 |
0.82 |
0.90 |
||
Dividend Yield |
6.0% |
9.5% |
10.1% |
11.0% |
9.9% |
10.9% |
annualized 2010 |
Portfolio Sensitivity
The Company also discloses its relative portfolio sensivity to various changes in annuity/lapse rates, yields, spreads, and equity and property performance. Shown below, we've outlined the anticipated change in EV based on market performance assumptions, coupled with managements estimate of full year incremental cash flow, to arrive at an estimated EV to use as the basis of our valuation:
As of Dec 2009 |
Estimate |
||||
Gross EV |
2009 |
EV Sensitivity |
EV Impact |
Multiplier |
Change in EV |
Life Co NAV |
2,234.00 |
Risk Free Rate +1% |
(167.00) |
0.3 |
(50.1) |
Life Co VIF |
2,497.00 |
Risk Free Rate -1% |
135.00 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
Management Services |
56.00 |
Equity/Property -10% |
(156.00) |
(0.5) |
78.0 |
Asset Management |
39.00 |
Credit Spreads + 100bps |
(365.00) |
0.3 |
(109.5) |
Lapse Rates -25% |
(19.00) |
0.0 |
0.0 |
||
Lapse Rates +25% |
8.00 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
||
Annuity Mortality -5% |
(183.00) |
0.0 |
0.0 |
||
Incremental CF |
495.14 |
||||
|
|||||
Estimate |
|||||
FY2009 |
FY2009 |
FY2010 |
|||
|
|||||
Total Gross EV |
4,826.00 |
4,826.00 |
5,239.54 |
||
|
|||||
Bank Debt & Accrued |
(2,999.00) |
-2999 |
(2,723.00) |
||
|
|||||
Hold Co Total Debt |
(2,999.00) |
-2999 |
(2,723.00) |
||
|
|||||
Warrant Exercise |
0.00 |
||||
|
|||||
Net EV |
1,827.00 |
1,827.00 |
2,516.54 |
Scnario/Valuation Analysis
We've outlined four scenarios with two relative valuation steps to probability weight our risk/reward. We've utilized three primary sensitivites:
|
33% EV |
33% EV |
50% EV |
50% EV |
100% EV |
100% EV |
|
Estimate |
No Conversion |
No Conversion |
Conversion |
Conversion |
Conversion |
Conversion |
|
FY2010 |
Market Roll |
No Roll |
Market Roll |
No Roll |
Market Roll |
No Roll |
|
|
|||||||
Total Gross EV |
5,239.54 |
4,436.26 |
5,239.54 |
4,436.26 |
5,239.54 |
4,436.26 |
5,239.54 |
|
|||||||
Bank Debt & Accrued |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
|
|||||||
Hold Co Total Debt |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
(2,723.00) |
|
|||||||
Warrant Exercise |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
201.60 |
201.60 |
|
|||||||
Net EV |
2,516.54 |
1,713.26 |
2,516.54 |
1,713.26 |
2,516.54 |
1,914.86 |
2,718.14 |
|
|||||||
Scenarios |
|
||||||
Net EV |
2,516.54 |
1,713.26 |
2,516.54 |
1,713.26 |
2,516.54 |
1,939.09 |
2,742.37 |
Net EV/Share (post warrant) |
19.02 |
12.95 |
19.02 |
12.95 |
19.02 |
11.01 |
14.15 |
Euro Equivalent |
22.26 |
15.16 |
22.26 |
15.16 |
22.26 |
12.88 |
16.56 |
Fully Diluted Price @ % EV |
11.13 |
5.00 |
7.35 |
7.58 |
11.13 |
12.88 |
16.56 |
As shown below, we assign a very low probability of the status quo valuation given the high likelihood of management executing on its restructuring. In fact, our probability weighted price of ~€12/share is highly conservative as it assigns no value to the significant level of positive EV effects from fund consolidations, synergies and increasing dividends over time.
Downside Protection/Implied Fair Value under status quo
Afforded via dividend yield (assuming a normalized €0.80/share dividend[1] remains constant). Note, the implied dividend yield is nearly 2x comparables - for the largest closed-end life fund in the UK. Probability weighted price under status quo implies ~ 45% upside. Upside achieved upon relisting and anticipated re-rate and excludes incremental capital and cost synergies.
Scenarios Weighting |
|||||
33% EV |
Price |
Weight Px |
Norm Div Yield |
Cur Div Yield |
|
No conversion, mkt roll |
5% |
5.00 |
0.25 |
16.0% |
11.31% |
No conversion, no roll |
5% |
7.35 |
0.37 |
10.9% |
7.45% |
50% EV |
|||||
Conversion, mkt roll |
15% |
7.58 |
1.14 |
10.6% |
7.46% |
Conversion, no roll |
30% |
11.13 |
3.34 |
7.2% |
4.92% |
100% EV |
|||||
Conversion, mkt roll |
15% |
12.88 |
1.93 |
6.2% |
4.34% |
Conversion, no roll |
30% |
16.56 |
4.97 |
4.8% |
3.29% |
100% |
11.99 |
6.7% |
Comps:
Simple comp analysis highlighting discount to EV and relative dividend yields underscores the valuation discrepency (note we have not evaluated P/E relative value due to the lack of IFRS accounts until 3/31, however the analyst community estimates the discount to peers is ~ 50-75% currently....although several maintain hold/inline ratings).
|
|
Mkt Cap |
|
P / DB Adj EV |
|
P/TNAV |
|||||
|
|
(EUR bn) |
|
2008 |
2009E |
2010E |
2011E |
|
2009E |
2010E |
2011E |
UK primaries |
38.4 |
|
109% |
103% |
96% |
88% |
|
174% |
154% |
136% |
|
|
Aviva |
11.1 |
|
99% |
100% |
93% |
81% |
|
234% |
197% |
163% |
|
Legal & General |
5.8 |
|
80% |
83% |
77% |
72% |
|
124% |
108% |
97% |
|
Old Mutual |
7.1 |
|
177% |
143% |
133% |
123% |
|
209% |
187% |
161% |
|
Phoenix |
1.1 |
|
86% |
65% |
56% |
53% |
|
n/a |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Prudential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resolution |
2.0 |
|
74% |
52% |
50% |
48% |
|
100% |
104% |
108% |
|
RSA |
4.8 |
|
119% |
137% |
128% |
119% |
|
137% |
128% |
119% |
|
St James's Place |
1.3 |
|
114% |
94% |
82% |
73% |
|
237% |
222% |
200% |
|
Standard Life |
5.2 |
|
77% |
76% |
70% |
68% |
|
133% |
130% |
127% |
|
|
Dividend yield |
|
Payout Ratio, % |
||||
|
|
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
|
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
|
|
5.0% |
6.0% |
6.4% |
|
35% |
58% |
61% |
Aviva |
|
6.9% |
7.3% |
7.7% |
|
54% |
54% |
57% |
Legal & General |
|
4.5% |
4.8% |
5.2% |
|
28% |
34% |
37% |
Old Mutual |
|
1.7% |
4.7% |
5.0% |
|
15% |
38% |
40% |
Phoenix |
|
2.0% |
6.1% |
7.4% |
|
n/a |
n/a |
n/a |
Prudential |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resolution |
|
3.7% |
5.6% |
5.6% |
|
-201% |
144% |
144% |
RSA |
|
6.8% |
7.1% |
7.3% |
|
58% |
62% |
65% |
St James's Place |
|
1.7% |
2.0% |
2.2% |
|
55% |
43% |
49% |
Standard Life |
|
6.1% |
6.4% |
6.7% |
|
102% |
97% |
101% |
Risks:
Risks are managable and identifiable, and we believe company specific risks are very low probability events given stability of the model.
[1] Dividends are currently limited to £65m for 2010 and 2011, rising to £80m in 2012 thereafter, however once 10% of bank debt is pre-paid, dividend can increase, and we reasonably assume a 50% of free cash flow payment stream in future years.
show sort by |
Are you sure you want to close this position The Phoenix Group?
By closing position, I’m notifying VIC Members that at today’s market price, I no longer am recommending this position.
Are you sure you want to Flag this idea The Phoenix Group for removal?
Flagging an idea indicates that the idea does not meet the standards of the club and you believe it should be removed from the site. Once a threshold has been reached the idea will be removed.
You currently do not have message posting privilages, there are 1 way you can get the privilage.
Apply for or reactivate your full membership
You can apply for full membership by submitting an investment idea of your own. Or if you are in reactivation status, you need to reactivate your full membership.
What is wrong with message, "".