Bullish Billionaire Tepper Trims Financials, Makes Selected Buys (BAC, WFC, C, LCC, UAL, CF, DF, HPQ, IP, M, AMAT, MU, MSFT)
Billionaire David Tepper returned investors an astounding 132% net of fees in 2009 and 21% in 2010, and, as 2011 got underway, the fund manager remained bullish, telling CNBC in January that he’s “cautious but optimistic” about equity markets and the economy. Given Tepper’s outlook, his recently disclosed end-of-Q1 equity holdings, which show a big move away from bank stocks, are in focus.
A look at Appaloosa Management’s top-15 U.S.-listed equity holdings from across all its funds at the end of Q1 shows that Tepper was cutting the finanacials exposure he’d added in late 2010. During Q1, the firm trimmed stakes in names like Bank of America (BAC), Wells Fargo (WFC), and Citigroup (C), though the latter remained the firm’s largest, U.S.-listed, equity holding at the end of Q1. Tepper had been selling banks during Q3 2010 before going on a Q4 buying spree.
Meanwhile, Tepper was adding to an array of eclectic goldings during Q1, including airlines US Airways Group (LCC) and United Continental Holdings (UAL), fertilizer firm CF Industries Holdings (CF), dairy products producer Dean Foods (DF), beleaguered tech giant Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), paper producer International Paper (IP), and department store Macy’s (M). Aside from HP, Tepper was mostly trimming his top tech stakes, decreasing positions in names like Applied Materials (AMAT), Micron Technology (MU), and Microsoft (MSFT).
Looking at tickerspy.com’s graph charting the performance of Appaloosa’s end-of-Q1 holdings so far in Q2, one can see that they are trailing the market. If you want to see how your performance stacks up to Tepper’s or just see some of Appaloosa’s other holdings, visit tickerspy.com to see the firm’s top holdings and a chart of their combined performance.
Pro portfolio performance is based on institutions’ top-15 holdings as disclosed in quarter-end filings with the SEC. Pro performance does not take into account additional holdings beyond the top 15 nor does it include positions that are not required to be disclosed by the SEC. As such, Pro portfolio performance should be considered an approximation and not a precise record of how an institution has performed over time.
|Home | Find | Research | Track | Register | My Account | Logout||Web site design by LightMix|
|© 2011 Indie research Corp. All rights reserved.|