Today, I’m going to share with you a health care investment you’ve probably never considered… one that’s set to grow in step with the aging population, returning hefty yields along with steady capital growth. Let me explain…

Today, health care accounts for 15% of U.S. spending, about $2.2 trillion. That already staggering number is set to skyrocket in the next decade as the waves of the “silver tsunami” wash ashore.

You see, regardless of how healthy you are as you age, the majority of your lifetime medical expenses – approximately 80% – will come due in the final years of your life. As you would expect, a large portion of these dollars will flow to hospitals and assisted-living centers. So, as an investor, you might be tempted to buy the companies operating these medical centers and nursing homes. It’s not a bad idea… But I’ve got a much better one…

The safest way to play this megatrend is to buy the landlords… the companies that own hospital buildings, medical offices, and other health care facilities. Here’s why…

———- Advertisement ———-
Why We’re Doubling the Price of the #1 Research Service in the Industry

Beginning June 10th, one full year of the best-performing research advisory we publish will cost $4,000.

Click here for more information.
————————————

REITs, by law, must pay 90% of their income to shareholders. In return, these companies pay little to no taxes. Health care REITs lease their buildings to medical-service providers or “operators,” who sign 10- to 20-year leases and are responsible for all property taxes, utilities, and expenses.

So health care landlords are practically immune to rising energy costs. In addition, automatic rent escalators – about 2%-4% annually – protect landlords from inflation.

And people get sick and go to the doctor no matter what the economy is doing. That’s why medical stocks like health care REITs are the ultimate “defensive” stocks… investments that perform well regardless of tumultuous economic cycles.
Of course, the words “real estate” now make the average investor cringe… Nearly every REIT started to tumble early last year, and health care REITs were no exception. But consider this: While REITs in general have fallen another 15% in the last 12 months, health care REITs are about flat. And that’s not counting their 6% dividend yield, which is 50% higher than the general REIT industry.

Now take a look at this chart…

This plots the one-year performances of the Dow Jones REIT index (black) and bellwether health care REIT HCP Inc (blue). HCP is the market’s largest, most diversified health care REIT. And it’s led the charge into laboratory space in biotech hot spots like San Francisco and San Diego.

HCP is up about 20%, including dividends, since I introduced Growth Stock Wire readers to the idea of collecting “health care rent checks” in July last year. And it’s up 9% since I revisited the opportunity in November, while the S&P is down 4%.
HCP is one of four health care REIT recommendations I’ve made to my paid subscribers. Including dividends, we’re up an average 22% in just one year. But with America’s 60+ club adding 8,000 new members daily, I think this is just the beginning.

Good investing,

Rob Fannon
Source:The Safest Way to Profit as the Boomers Retire

Biotech stocks are notoriously volatile, of course. But this company’s case was unique… At the heart of the price swings were two conflicting academic studies, which produced what I call the “ivory tower glitch.”

Believe it or not, academic researchers tucked away in labs and classrooms can cause quite a raucous on Wall Street. Ever hold a biotech stock that drops or jumps 15%-20% in one day with no news, press release, or conference presentations to explain it? Chances are, your stock just experienced an ivory tower glitch. And you’ll likely find the culprit in the pages of academic journals like Nature, Science, The New England Journal of Medicine, or their smaller counterparts.

You see, biotech and drug companies need academic researchers to perform “objective” third-party clinical trials or lab testing for new drugs. After all, it looks great to list collaborators from Johns Hopkins, Harvard, or Stanford on your company website. But every now and then, these academic studies can torpedo a drug stock.

That’s exactly what happened to shares of molecular diagnostic company Cepheid (CPHD) earlier this year…

Cepheid makes a test for the so-called MRSA “superbug” – a hardy bacterium that wreaks havoc in hospitals. MRSA infections can be fatal, and treatment runs about $40,000 for those patients who do survive. Hospitals use Cepheid’s rapid MRSA detection technology to screen incoming patients and prevent the spread of infection, saving themselves the expense of treatment.

———- Advertisement ———-
Get Paid Royalties from Nevada’s Gold Mines!

It’s a retirement opportunity not found in any other U.S. state… a secret residents of Nevada have been quietly using for years to retire rich.

I recently spent five days in Nevada uncovering the full story. What I found could add an extra $30,350 to your retirement savings in the next 12-24 months.

Click here for my free report.
————————————–

However, an academic study published March 12 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (aka JAMA) concluded such infection monitoring provides hospitals no economic benefit. Cepheid’s stock plummeted.

Then a few days later, another academic article, this time from the Annals of Internal Medicine, directly refuted the JAMA article, claiming hospitals could hugely reduce costs and disease with active MRSA surveillance. Again, Cepheid shares were on the move, this time to the upside.

While the turmoil whipsawed most shareholders, shrewd investors had a chance to cash in on this ivory tower glitch. Let me explain…

Not every academic study is created equal. The trick for investors is finding the studies that likely won’t stand up to a stiff breeze. Here’s what to look for…  

1) Motivations. I check to see who “sponsored” the study… In other words, who signed the check? If the people paying for the study directly benefit from positive results, take it with a shaker of salt.

2) Publication. Just as in the popular press, academic publishing has a pecking order of prestige. Nature and Science, for example, have clout like the Wall Street Journal. The American Journal of Physiology, on the other hand, garners the same amount of respect as The West Fargo Pioneer.

3) Study design. Did the clinical trial contain five patients or 5,000? (The more the better.) Did the investigators use placebo controls? (Double-blind placebo studies yield more valuable results.) Did they use practical procedures? (Look for studies that mimic real-world situations.)

In the JAMA article that slammed Cepheid’s stock, the study only tested patients after they’d been in the hospital for 12 hours. Cepheid’s technology screens patients and visitors as they walk through the door. Moreover, infected patients weren’t notified or treated until 22.5 hours after being admitted to the hospital. One critic said the JAMA study was like “testing a recipe, but omitting half the ingredients or test-driving a car without the tires.” So it didn’t pass the design test.

Investors who quickly realized the JAMA article wouldn’t hold up under scrutiny were able to pocket quick 30%-50% gains on Cepheid’s temporary setback.

The next time you see a stock fall after an ivory tower glitch, dig a little deeper and ask the questions above. Done correctly, it’s one of the best ways to make money in early stage medical stocks.

Good investing,

Rob