STEELPATH MLP SELECT 40 FUND

Transcription

1 STEELPATH MLP SELECT 40 FUND MLPFX (A shares), MLPTX (Y shares), OSPSX (I shares) 2Q 2018 COMMENTARY AS OF 6/30/18 Oppenheimer SteelPath MLP Select 40 Fund Class A, Y and I Shares Average Annual Total Returns as of 6/30/2018 Portfolio Managers Stuart Cartner Since 3/2010 Oppenheimer SteelPath MLP Select 40 Fund (Class A shares without sales charge) Oppenheimer SteelPath MLP Select 40 Fund (Class A shares with sales charge) 2Q18 1-Year 3-Year 5-Year Since Inception 7.64% -4.25% -4.16% -1.51% 3.95% Brian Watson, CFA Since 3/2010 Client Portfolio Managers Chuck Anderson Chad Potter, CFA Average Industry Experience 25 years Oppenheimer SteelPath MLP Select 40 Fund (Class Y shares) Oppenheimer SteelPath MLP Select 40 Fund (Class I shares) Alerian MLP Index Total Return (AMZ) S&P 500 Index Returns for periods of less than one year are cumulative and not annualized. Annual Expense Ratios: Class A Shares: Gross: 1.21, Net: 1.11, Net expense net of deferred Income tax expense: 1.11 Class Y Shares: Gross: 0.96, Net: 0.86, Net expense net of deferred income tax expense: 0.86 Class I Shares: Gross: 0.79, Net: 0.79, Net expense net of deferred income tax expense: 0.79 The performance data quoted represents past performance, which does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Fund will fluctuate so that an investor s shares, when redeemed, may be worth more or less than the original cost. Current performance and expense ratios may be lower or higher than the data quoted. For performance data current to the most recent month-end, visit oppenheimerfunds.com or call CALL OPP ( ). Fund returns include changes in net asset value with dividends and capital gains reinvested. Class A and Y shares were launched 3/31/10. Class I shares were launched 6/28/13. Class A shares include the 5.75% maximum sales charge where indicated. Class Y and I shares are not subject to a sales charge. Returns do not consider capital gains or income taxes on an individual's investment. Generally, I shares are only available to institutional investors and can only be purchased with a $1 million initial investment. Generally, Y shares are only available to certain investors, including those in wrap-fee based programs or commissionable brokerage platforms that charge sales commission. See prospectus for details. The net expense ratio reflects that the Advisor has contractually agreed to limit fees and/or reimburse expenses (excluding certain expenses) until at least 3/29/19, however, the Fund s Board of Trustees may terminate or amend this arrangement prior to that date. The Manager can be reimbursed by the Fund within three years after the date the limitation an/or expense reimbursement has been made by the Manager, provided that such repayment does not cause the expenses of any class of the Fund to exceed the limits described in the notes to the fee table in the prospectus. The net expense ratio is also net of deferred income tax expense, if applicable, which represents an estimate of the Fund s potential tax liability. This expense may vary from year to year. Because the Fund's deferred income tax expense is excluded from the expense cap, the Fund's net expense is increased by the amount of this expense. A change in the estimate of deferred tax liability could result in a loss to net asset value. The majority of distributions have been classified as return of capital which reduces the investor s adjusted cost basis. See the prospectus for details. OppenheimerFunds is not undertaking to provide impartial investment advice or to provide advice in a fiduciary capacity. Not FDIC Insured May Lose Value Not Bank Guaranteed

2 Market Overview For the second quarter of 2018, master limited partnerships (MLPs), as measured by the Alerian MLP Index (AMZ), were up 9.5% on a price basis and generated an 11.8% total return when including the impact of distributions. For context, the broader market, as measured by the S&P 500, gained 2.9% on a price basis and 3.4% from a total return perspective. The need for additional midstream infrastructure to service growing volumes from the Permian basin became even more acute over the reporting period as production growth has exceeded even the most aggressive of previous industry predictions and appears set to overwhelm the energy infrastructure capacity bringing that crude oil and natural gas out of the basin. While there are multiple newbuild pipelines and expansions in-progress, the long construction times required for these projects mean that meaningful relief is unlikely to come until mid-2019, at the earliest. As such, Permian producers without sufficient takeaway capacity are likely to experience significantly worse pricing than peers with access to pipeline capacity. Some disadvantaged producers may slow their production growth until in-basin pricing recovers. Importantly, we believe certain midstream operators should enjoy both short-term and long-term benefits. Obviously, midstream operators are currently enjoying, and should continue to enjoy, the full utilization of their assets servicing the basin. Some operators may also capture wide short-term marketing margins. Over the long-term, midstream operators may benefit from an increased desire by producers to commit to existing or new capacity that can earn a transportation fee for an extended period. Most midstream subsectors experienced positive performance over the second quarter of On average, the Diversified and Gathering and Processing subsectors provided the best performance over the quarter, as each benefitted from increasing volume growth, particularly from liquids-rich basins, as well as the potential to capture marketing margins. Conversely, the Natural Gas Pipeline and Compression subsectors generated the least positive returns as the impact of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) tariff change decision announced during the first quarter continued to weigh on certain natural gas pipeline partnerships and Compression names lagged after outperforming over the prior quarter. First quarter midstream operating performance was reported during the period and was, on average, better than expectations with EBITDA, or Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, coming in 1.9% higher than consensus estimates and 3.8% higher than the fourth quarter of Midstream entities announced 37 distribution increases, 30 distributions that were unchanged from the fourth quarter, and four distribution reductions. Approximately $1.2 billion of new midstream equity (common and preferred) was issued over the quarter via marketed transactions and we estimate an additional $0.5 to $1.0 billion was issued through at-the-market programs in which primary units trade into the market anonymously throughout the normal trading day. We estimate MLP-focused investment vehicles, including closed-end funds, open-end funds and index-linked products, experienced approximately $1.8 billion of inflows over the quarter. This modest imbalance of visible equity supply and demand, particularly relating to common equity, likely partially contributed to the sector s relatively strong performance over the period. MLP capital investment over the quarter included approximately $1.9 billion of announced asset acquisitions and we estimate $5 to $6 billion of organic capital spending. New midstream project opportunities to alleviate localized capacity constraints, meet demand from new industrial capacity, and fulfill export demand continue to arise, particularly in premier basins such as the Permian, Midcontinent, and Appalachia as well as Gulf Coast port, refinery, and petrochemical facilities. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil priced at the Cushing hub ended the quarter at $74.15 per barrel, up 14% from the end of the first quarter and 61% higher than the year-ago period. The spread between Brent crude, a proxy for international crude prices, and WTI ended the quarter at $5.29 per barrel. As the aforementioned Permian capacity constraints increased, crude oil priced in Midland, TX weakened further relative to both WTI and the Gulf Coast, exiting the period at a $12.25 per barrel discount WTI and $15.25 discount to Gulf Coast prices, and continuing to support midstream providers seeking to contract new capacity from the basin. Henry Hub natural gas spot prices ended the quarter at $2.97 per million British thermal units (MMbtu), up 6% from the end of the first quarter and 0.9% higher than the year ago period. Natural gas prices in the Permian basin (Waha) weakened further over the quarter as regional production increases approach the usable takeaway capacity of the basin. Given the growth expectations for Permian sourced natural gas, negative basis differentials are likely to persist and thereby continue to incent new infrastructure construction. 2

3 Natural gas liquids (NGL) priced at Mont Belvieu ended the quarter at $35.74 per barrel, up 21% from the end of the first quarter and 55% higher than the year-ago period. Each of the NGL purity products experienced strong price gains over the quarter, with Isobutane exhibiting the strongest performance (+46%) and Natural Gasoline lagging (+8%). Frac spreads, a measure of natural gas processing economics, strengthened over the quarter to settle at $0.58 per gallon, up 29% from the end of the first quarter and 118% higher than the year-ago period. Generally, the greater the frac spread, the greater the incentive for producers to seek natural gas processing capacity. The backwardated structure (in which future prices are lower than near-term prices) of the crude oil futures curve steepened over the period as near-term pricing rose more than longer-dated prices. The longer term contango (in which future prices are higher than near-term prices) of the natural gas futures curve moderated over the period as pricing for nearer-dated contracts held steady while longer-dated prices declined. Generally, for any commodity, a backwardated futures market acts to deter storage by removing the ability for traders to purchase and store the commodity today to sell at a higher hedged price in the future. Generally, providers of storage services prefer a contango market and, therefore, market structure over the period became increasingly negative for contracting available crude storage, while remaining generally unfavorable for near-term natural gas storage. Please note, though we routinely review the pricing environments for the major energy commodities in our commentaries, we do so primarily to provide investors a more nuanced understanding of the broader energy markets. However, we choose to seek to exploit the logistical needs surrounding these products primarily through energy infrastructure MLPs that we believe are not overly exposed to changes in these prices. Over the quarter, the ten-year U.S. Treasury Bond yield increased by 12 basis points to end the period at 2.86%. The MLP yield spread at quarter-end, as measured by the implied yield of the AMZ index relative to the 10-year Treasury, narrowed by 87 basis points to 5.28%. The long-term average (2000-2Q2018) spread is 3.66%, which continues to suggest that 10-year treasury rates could increase materially before this spread approached its historical average. At period-end, the AMZ s indicated yield was 8.14%. Over the second quarter of 2018, REITs and utilities posted total returns of 10.0% and 3.7%, respectively, versus the AMZ s 11.8% gain. Price strength for these yield-oriented sectors likely reflects the relative stability of the interest rate environment over the period. Although MLPs are often associated with interest rates, given the yield-oriented return component, we believe energy market idiosyncrasies over the period continued to exert a stronger influence on midstream equities. We continue to believe midstream equity valuations are appealing and sector participants have improved their positioning for the future. While the AMZ is above the cyclical low, it remains at levels present before the shale production renaissance. Many MLPs have reached or are approaching a self-funding level of retained cash flows and the industry s heaviest capital spending obligations appear to be in the past. We believe this realignment of business and equity fundamentals has attractively positioned the sector for long-term investors seeking an attractive blend of current income, moderate growth, and, presently, attractive valuations. 3

4 Performance Attribution The most significant contributors from second quarter performance included: 1. Energy Transfer Partners LP (NYSE: ETP) Contribution: 1.14% 3 ETP outperformed over the period after reporting strong quarterly performance from its underlying operations. ETP is poised for significant growth in distributable cash flow as several billion dollars of newly constructed assets begin operations or continue to ramp up over the next several quarters. Additionally, ETP s robust portfolio of natural gas processing assets is expected to benefit from the recent expansion of processing facilities and ETP s Permian and Marcellus/Utica assets are poised to benefit from increasing activity driving cash flow growth. 2. Energy Transfer Equity LP (NYSE: ETE) Contribution: 1.10% 3 ETE outperformed over the period after reporting strong quarterly performance from its underlying MLP, Energy Transfer Partners (NYSE: ETP). ETE realized significant growth in distributable cash flow as a majority of IDR subsidies to ETP rolled off during the fourth quarter of Additionally, ETP s robust portfolio of natural gas processing assets is expected to benefit from the recent expansion of processing facilities and ETP s Permian and Marcellus/Utica assets are poised to benefit from increasing activity driving cash flow growth. 3. ONEOK Inc (NYSE: OKE) Contribution: 0.80% 3 OKE outperformed over the period following stronger than expected operating results as NGL pricing differentials provided a tailwind for the company s marketing and optimization units. OKE shares also benefitted from increased focus among some market participants on growth opportunities outside of the near-term congestion of the Permian basin. OKE operates a diversified portfolio of predominately fee-based assets that are expected to generate 9% to 11% annualized distribution growth through The most significant detractors from second quarter performance included: 1. TC Pipelines LP (NYSE: TCP) Contribution: -0.81% 3 TCP units underperformed over the period following the partnership s decision to reduce its distribution due to the projected decline in revenue caused by FERC s changes related to cost-of-service tariffs on interstate natural gas and liquids pipelines owned by MLPs. Despite the partnership s decision, we believe there are mitigating actions the partnership can take to lessen the decline in revenue. 2. EQT Midstream Partners LP (NYSE: EQM) Contribution: -0.16% 3 EQM units underperformed over the period due to continued uncertainty surrounding the spinoff of the midstream business from its parent company, EQT Corp (EQT) and due to legal issues facing the partnership s Mountain Valley Pipeline project. The fundamentals of the partnership remain unchanged and we expect it to continue to experience strong growth over the next few years as gas production in the Marcellus continues to rise. 3. Rice Midstream Partners LP (NYSE: RMP) Contribution: -0.10% 3 The partnership is set to be acquired my EQM later this year in a unit for unit transaction. The units of RMP followed the trading pattern of EQM over the quarter. 4

5 Yields by Asset Class 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 8.02% 4.23% 4.50% 3.50% 1.85% 2.86% 0.00% AMZ REITs BBB Utilities S&P Yr Treasury Source: Bloomberg. Data as of June 30, 2018 and is calculated using the most recent annualized distribution. MLPs are represented by the AMZ Index. Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) are represented by the FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index. BBB Bonds (BBB) are represented by the U.S. Corporate Bond BBB yield. Utilities are represented by the Dow Jones Utilities Index. 10-Year Treasuries are represented by the U.S. Treasury Bond 10-year yield. S&P 500 Index is an unmanaged capitalization-weighted index of 500 stocks listed on various exchanges. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Top Ten Holdings by Issuer 3 2nd Quarter 2018 (as of 6/30/2018) Energy Transfer Partners LP 5.6% Energy Transfer Equity LP 5.0 Enterprise Products Ptnrs LP 5.0 MPLX LP 4.6 Targa Resources Corp. 4.4 Magellan Midstream Partners LP 4.3 Holly Energy Partners LP 4.2 Andeavor Logistics LP 4.2 Tallgrass Energy GP LP 4.2 Genesis Energy LP 4.1 Sector Attribution Analysis 3 2nd Quarter 2018 (as of 6/30/2018) MLP Select 40 Fund Alerian MLP Index Attribution Analysis Average Weight Return Contribution to Return Average Weight Return Contribution to Return Sector Allocation Stock Selection Total Effect Coal Diversified Exploration & Production Gathering & Processing Natural Gas Pipelines Other Petroleum Transportation Propane Shipping Cash Totals Contribution to return is based on absolute stock performance in the portfolio. Attribution methodology notes: The analysis includes equity investments only and provides analysis of the effects of several portfolio management decisions, including allocation and security selection. All attribution effects are computed daily, linked through time, and do not reflect fees, expenses or transaction costs. The total returns displayed for the Fund and Benchmark do not capture the effect of daily cash flows and intra-day trading activity, and may be further impacted by pricing differentials, therefore they are subject to reasonable variance from the Fund s and the Benchmark s actual return. Past performance does not guarantee future results. 5

6 Sector Commentary Energy equities opened the quarter strong then held rather steady through quarter-end. Midstream equities followed a similar pattern, with sentiment improving as wide regional pricing differentials highlighted the need for additional midstream infrastructure to service growing volumes from the Permian basin. Accordingly, midstream operators are currently enjoying, and should continue to enjoy, the full utilization of their assets servicing the basin. Some operators may also capture wide short-term marketing margins. Over the long-term, midstream operators may benefit from an increased desire by producers to commit to existing or new capacity that can earn a transportation fee for an extended period. Outperformers Diversified partnerships provided the best performance over the quarter, benefitting from increasing volume growth, particularly from liquids-rich basins, as well as the potential to capture marketing margins. Gathering and Processing partnerships outperformed, also due to increasing volume growth, particularly from liquids-rich basins, as well as the potential to capture marketing margins. Underperformers Natural Gas Pipeline partnerships generated the least positive returns as the impact of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) tariff change decision announced during the first quarter continued to weigh on certain subsector constituents. Compression partnerships also lagged over the period after outperforming over the prior quarter. 6

7 SPECIAL RISKS Investing in MLPs involves additional risks as compared to the risks of investing in common stock, including risks related to cash flow, dilution and voting rights. The Fund s investments are concentrated in the energy infrastructure industry with an emphasis on securities issued by MLPs, which may increase volatility. Energy infrastructure companies are subject to risks specific to the industry such as fluctuations in commodity prices, reduced volumes of natural gas or other energy commodities, environmental hazards, changes in the macroeconomic or the regulatory environment or extreme weather. MLPs may trade less frequently than larger companies due to their smaller capitalizations which may result in erratic price movement or difficulty in buying or selling. MLPs are subject to significant regulation and may be adversely affected by changes in the regulatory environment including the risk that an MLP could lose its tax status as a partnership. Additional management fees and other expenses are associated with investing in MLP funds. The Fund is subject to certain MLP tax risks. An investment in the Fund does not offer the same tax benefits of a direct investment in an MLP. The Fund is organized as a Subchapter C Corporation and is subject to U.S. federal income tax on taxable income at the currently effective statutory tax rate as well as state and local income taxes. The potential tax benefit of investing in MLPs depend on them being treated as partnerships for federal income tax purposes. If the MLP is deemed to be a corporation, its income would be subject to federal taxation at the entity level, reducing the amount of cash available for distribution which could result in a reduction of the fund s value. MLP funds may accrue deferred income taxes for future tax liabilities associated with the portion of MLP distributions considered to be a tax-deferred return of capital and for any net operating gains as well as capital appreciation of its investments. This deferred tax liability, if applicable, is reflected in the daily NAV and as a result a MLP fund's aftertax performance could differ significantly from the underlying assets even if the pre-tax performance is closely tracked. The Fund is classified as a non-diversified fund and may invest a greater portion of its assets in the securities of a single issuer. 7

8 DISCLOSURES Past performance does not guarantee future results. 1. The Alerian MLP Index is a float-adjusted, capitalization-weighted index measuring master limited partnerships, whose constituents represent approximately 85% of total float-adjusted market capitalization. Index performance is shown for illustrative purposes and does not predict or depict performance of the fund. The index is unmanaged and cannot be purchased directly by investors. 2. The S&P 500 Index is a capitalization-weighted index of 500 stocks intended to be a representative sample of leading companies in leading industries within the U.S. economy. Index includes reinvestment of dividends but does not include fees, expenses or taxes. Index performance is shown for illustrative purposes and does not predict or depict performance of the fund. The index is unmanaged and cannot be purchased directly by investors. 3. Holdings, sector and country allocations are subject to change, do not constitute recommendations by OFI SteelPath, Inc., and are dollar-weighted based on assets. Attribution analysis is a process used to analyze the absolute return (often called contribution) and the excess return (often called relative return) between a portfolio and its benchmark. The total effect measures both the allocation effect to a sector as well as stock selection within a sector. Shares of Oppenheimer funds are not deposits or obligations of any bank, are not guaranteed by any bank, are not insured by the FDIC or any other agency, and involve investment risks, including the possible loss of the principal amount invested. These views represent the opinions of OppenheimerFunds and are not intended as investment advice or to predict or depict the performance of any investment. These views are as of the close of business on June 30, 2018, and are subject to change based on subsequent developments. The Fund s portfolio and strategies are subject to change. Total returns do not show the effects of income taxes on an individual s investment. Taxes may reduce an investor s actual investment returns on income or gains paid by the Fund or any gains realized if the investor sells his/her shares. This material is provided for general and educational purposes only, is not intended to provide legal or tax advice, and is not for use to avoid penalties that may be imposed under U.S. federal tax laws. OppenheimerFunds is not undertaking to provide impartial investment advice or to provide advice in a fiduciary capacity. Contact your attorney or other advisor regarding your specific legal, investment or tax situation. Before investing in any of the Oppenheimer funds, investors should carefully consider a fund s investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. Fund prospectuses and summary prospectuses contain this and other information about the funds, and may be obtained by asking your financial advisor, visiting oppenheimerfunds.com or calling CALL OPP ( ). Read prospectuses and summary prospectuses carefully before investing. Oppenheimer funds are distributed by OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. 225 Liberty Street, New York, NY OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. All rights reserved. CO July 16,