NEW YORK (ETF Expert) -- Investors are punishing commodity-rich countries yet again. As popular developed market funds like iShares MSCI United Kingdom (EWU) - Get iShares MSCI United Kingdom ETF Report prosper, iShares MSCI Canada (EWC) - Get iShares MSCI Canada ETF Report and its heavy energy allocation keep the exchange-traded tracker languishing near 52-week lows.
Similarly, iShares MSCI Frontier Markets 100 (FM) - Get iShares MSCI Frontier and Select EM ETF Report continues attracting buyers, whereas copper king Chile via iShares MSCI Chile (ECH) - Get iShares MSCI Chile ETF Report has seen its fortunes evaporate over the course of three years.
Retail investors are not the only group convinced that most commodities will drag on buy-no-hold portfolios. The majority of money managers and institutional advisers are equally negative on everything from gold to industrial metals to wheat. The reasoning may differ -- stronger U.S. dollar, weak emerging market demand, global deflation -- yet the conclusions are eerily similar.
Perhaps ironically, the herd appears to be ignoring the reality that it is buying stocks near all-time highs while simultaneously dismissing the potential of commodities after years of disappointment. In 2013, the S&P 500 garnered more than 29%; the iShares S&P GSCI Commodity Index (GSG) - Get iShares S&P GSCI Commodity Indexed Trust Report logged -3.5%.
Over the last three years, the disparity is even more shocking, as the S&P 500 registered approximately 42.5% at the expense of commodity declines of roughly -10%. Yet, nobody seems to be discussing the possibility that commodities could be offering a better "buy low" risk-reward opportunity.
In truth, I have talked about the adverse effects that global deflation scares might have on a number of commodities. This might be reason enough to look away from total commodity index funds like GSG. For that matter, GSG has not been able to sustain itself above a long-term 200-day trendline, further muddying the technical picture.
Nevertheless, it seems counter-intuitive for the same analysts to recognize economic improvement in the U.S., Europe and China, and not anticipate a better advance for commodities. Soft commodities as a group have been particularly hard hit, from sugar to corn to soybeans. Still, if growth were to improve in these regions, couldn't the so-called "agri-related" stuff benefit? If European and Japanese contraction has actually reversed itself, and the emerging markets stabilize, wouldn't that be a net positive for commodity demand?
Since I have yet to see the technical indicators change for the crushed commodity arena, I have chosen a slightly different path in the quest to "buy lower." Back in November, I liked the value play being offered by an ETF tracking the Market Vectors Global Agribusiness Index.
Specifically, Market Vectors Agribusiness (MOO) - Get VanEck Agribusiness ETF Report had been capturing beaten-down companies like Deere (DE) - Get Deere & Company Report and Potash Corp (POT) , companies that had been hurting due to weakness in fertilizer production and equipment building. Even then, the technical picture was beginning to reflect the favorable valuation. Today, the price of MOO is solidly above its 200-day moving average. Equally compelling, the 50-day climbed above its 200-day at the start of December, further solidifying demand for the global asset.
This article represents the opinion of a contributor and not necessarily that of TheStreet or its editorial staff.
Certified Financial Planner Gary A. Gordon, MS, is the president of
, an SEC-registered investment adviser in California. He has more than 23 years of experience as a personal coach in ¿money matters,¿ including risk assessment, small-business development and portfolio management, and has taught finance in Mexico, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan and the U.S. He wrote the draft copy for ¿Maverick Investing,¿ a McGraw-Hill publication, and writes commentary for Seeking Alpha in addition to ETF Expert, for which he also hosts the