|
Demon_Corsair posted:Just wanted to make sure I have this right. I currently have a TD TFSA. So to get access to the e-series, I have to convert it to a mutual fund TFSA then fill out the form saying I want to convert it to an e-series TFSA? You will want a TD Waterhouse TFSA, which is capable of holding stocks, bonds, etf, cash, and mutual funds. There is no reason to have anything other than this type of TFSA - it is objectively the best. You'll need to manage the investments yourself, but you can buy e-series commission free and the tried and true advice in here re: index based ETF's is ideal. You can move your RRSP to Waterhouse as well. There are essentially two kinds they offer...a standard (limited to mutual funds and cash) RRSP and a "Self Directed" RRSP. The latter allows you to invest in Stocks, ETF, Mutual Funds, etc and is the only type of RRSP anyone should hold, in my opinion. Again, a well balanced portfolio of equity/bond, with some exposure to US and Foreign Markets (i.e. not all Canadian) is ideal and pretty simple to achieve. You cannot call for investment advice if you're using a Self Directed fund, but unless you've got high six/low seven figures invested and have access to the right services, you should not be letting a mutual fund sales person run your investments for you. The right advice is out there and essentially free. Ahz posted:When I looked into it a little while back I found it makes sense for people who aren't too on the ball with dumping as much as they can into a mortgage. It's very convenient as a way of forced savings if you remain disciplined. Assuming your house is an appreciating, or at the very least, non depreciating asset, which everyone under 50 in Canada does these days, and which is not always accurate. To wit, the millions who lost not only their homes, but also all the "forced savings" payments they made into those homes, during the downturn in the US a few years back. Saltin fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Oct 29, 2013 |
#
¿
Oct 29, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:16 |
|
|
Demon_Corsair posted:Is the moneysense guide to perfect portfolio a good primer? Trying to dig up info on canada couch potato is just painful. 3 items per page? are you loving kidding me? What are your investment objectives?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
Ahz posted:If you're planning to min/max your investment strategy for maximum yield per year against mortgage interest/loan interest/capital gains etc. then you aren't the type even considering the manulife one account. Typically those looking into an account like that just want to get their house paid of as soon as possible for peace of mind. Canada is also quite a bit different than the US for recourse on mortgage debt and the more equity you have, the better off you usually are. Yeah, look, I wasn't writing specifically about the manulife one account, but I agree with you there. What I'm saying is that the premise of the "house as investment" is fundamentally flawed, in my estimation. We don't have to agree about that. Also, while I agree that US and Canada are different with regard to mortgage recourse, they are not different in regard to being affected by economic forces. This is not the place to discuss Canadian real-estate and whether a correction is imminent , but that's why I said what I said. I own a home, so I'm not one of those "never buy a house" people, but I do believe it's true that a house is not an investment, it's a place to live. It's ok for people to think otherwise. Demon_Corsair posted:Yea, I am already with TD. So I just have to go into open an TD waterhouse account then I can move my existing RRSP across. Do I need to fill out the same form that is needed for a TFSA to get e-series? Yep, you can transfer from one RRSP to another no problem, it's not a tax event. For the TFSA, my experience is you just need a TD Waterhouse TFSA and you can fill it with whatever you like. My TD Waterhouse TFSA has access to everything a regular investment account would buy. I'd also add that with Waterhouse TFSA a lot of ETFs which are, I believe as or in cases more attractive than E-Series mutual fund stuff become available. Check out iShares ETF's. There's one for everything. Something decent like XIU, for example, has a MER of 0.18% and pays 3% a year in dividend yield while tracking the S&P 60. It is also highly liquid, trading 5 million units a day on average. Mutual funds are not as liquid and often have stipulations re holding periods and associated early redemption penalties. On the other hand If you don't qualify for the 9.99 flat trades with Waterhouse the e-series may still be cheaper in some cases. At least compare them. More options is better, especially as you move into the six figure nest egg range. Saltin fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Oct 30, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Download the forms to open a mutual funds account and then conversion form. Fill them out, go to the bank and open a mutual funds account then drop off the conversion form once you have your account information. It is this simple. Saltin fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Oct 30, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:I believe "self directed" is bank nomenclature for "we don't 'oversee' or 'add value' to what goes on here". By contrast, any mutual funds including e-series bought through TD Mutual Funds (as opposed to TD Waterhouse) is "overseen" by the bank. If you frequently buy/sell to try and time the market or make purchases inconsistent with the bullshit risk analysis survey they have you do, they reserve the right to refuse it until they talk it over with you or some such. Self Directed means a bit more than that. A self directed RRSP is capable of holding a larger variety of securities than a run of the mill RRSP. Self Directed RRSP's can hold equities (stock, ETF) in addition to Mutual funds from all sorts of Fund providers. There are other types of investments that are only possible in a self direct RRSP, but that is one of the biggest differences. Otherwise you are right - another feature is that no one watches over your trades, which to be honest is great because when I want to buy and/or sell I want to do it immediately. I would argue that it is the only type of RRSP worth opening. Everyone needs to take an active interest in securing their future and it really is a drat shame they don't teach more about it in high school, at the very least. I read books and even took the Canadian Securities Course to shore up my understanding of investing and financial markets and under my own power am well on my way to reaching my retirement goals as well as saving for my daughter's education with an RESP I manage by myself. Anyone can learn about this stuff, and everyone should. Complicated investment schemes are actually the enemy when you get started anyhow, so there is no excuse. Saltin fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Nov 1, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 13:11
|
|
|
tuyop posted:For the sake of argument, let's assume (gross) earnings of 100k/year with living expenses of 25k/year. Without doubt earners in the highest tax bracket benefit the most from the RRSP. Also without doubt, taxes will be higher in 20-30 years when you intend to draw on it, and 25k will be far less to live on than the already extremely modest amount it is today. Long story short - don't expect the spread between "tax benefit I enjoy today" versus "taxes I have to pay tomorrow" to be as big as you think it's going to be. I am not criticizing the RRSP at all, but, the TFSA is a million loving times better in almost every case, and should be topped out first, as a priority, by everyone who is not the very highest marginal tax bracket today (and even those who are in that bracket should max the TFSA every year). The TFSA is the greatest thing ever. If you need to understand why, just ask yourself this question... Where would you rather have most of your money when you retire? Anyhow - I realize you are responding to someone who has questions regarding an ESOP, and I would say that anytime the company is matching your money you should take a long hard look at it, regardless of the style of account it must sit in. The one caveat would be to read the ESOP agreement fully and understand it completely. The biggest problem with ESOPs is liquidity. There are often all sorts of stipulations about how much and when you can cash in - sometimes at the Boards discretion. Be very clear on what is what in that regard. Saltin fucked around with this message at 02:21 on Nov 4, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
tuyop posted:So I got married this year, it's pretty great, but I'm trying to make a list of financial and bureaucratic stuff that we have to take care of. There's nothing you need to do yet. Come tax time you will both check the married box and there is a box where they ask for your partner's income. Expect to get less back as a result. There are all sorts of strategies available to you with regard to RRSP/TFSA and it is worthwhile knowing them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
Kal Torak posted:This is not true. You are required to advise CRA of your marital status change by the end of the month following the month of the status change. From a practical point it is only strictly necessary if you are receiving some sort of benefit from the government that would be reduced by you getting married. It's a short list of things. Even if you forgot, you'd just get a bill for the difference to recover the overpayments (which would suck, admittedly). If you are a young dude/lady who just got married, is making an income and have no special payments coming to you from any government body, it is fine to just check the box on your next tax return. That is exactly what I did, worked out fine. Thanks for pointing it out though - it's obviously the "by the book" thing to do. Kashwashwa posted:Yeah, I did a bit more reading after my post and realized the error in thinking. This would depend on what you earn now, and how much you have in your RRSP. Saltin fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Nov 4, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
I have been using TD Waterhouse for over a decade and they are pretty much perfect for me. I do use TD Canada Trust for my regular banking accounts and mortgage. It is a few clicks to move money from any of my accounts to another, and the web interface is generally solid and even slick since the latest updates. One of the things I really like about it is that it quickly shows me my net worth by giving me a consolidated view of my finances. It is fun to watch it go up.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Ah, you have to be at least 18 years old to have one, I just looked up. I was thinking, as if you don't all open them for your children and pump in the 5 and a half k a year, every year.. so once they can take over they're already playing with a decent portfolio? So from 18 to 48 if you do it every year that's .. 165 grand. No it's not that much money and you can see how the investment returns need to come back into the account otherwise you're not going to have enough to retire on. Well, let's be honest - the government is not interested in allowing you to shelter all of your investments completely tax free. The TFSA is the primary vehicle that Canadians should be attempting to max out on a yearly basis, but it is only part of an overall retirement strategy. Unsheltered investments (where it makes sense, like Canadian dividend paying equity, for example), and the RRSP are both necessary as well. Another thing to keep in mind, if you are married, is you get access to your spouses contribution space, if they are not using it and are willing to let you. My wife has a proper pension plan, for example, and I don't, but, I have buckets of cash I need to stash somewhere. Her unused TFSA space is perfect for that. That gives me 51,000 in space and more than double the 165 you came up with long term. I'd rather have ~$320k in a TFSA than $500k in an RRSP, anytime. The TFSA is worth more. Having said that, the statistics about how TFSAs are actually used in Canada are dismal. Half of the people that have opened a TFSA have no money in it, and of the other half, 80% of them use them quite literally as a savings account, earning 1% or less in interest. Hey look it's one of those people VVVVVVVV Congrats on getting serious : ) mik posted:I want to move some of my TFSA cash (it's literally in cash) out of TD into a bespoke broker I have a TFSA account with - the broker gave me some forms to give to TD to handle the transfer. But why wouldn't I just move cash out of my TD TFSA account into my TD Chequing account, and then since my chequing account is attached to my broker's account, just transfer it immediately through there. Would I technically have to wait until 2014 to move the money into the new TFSA if I withdraw in 2013? Yes you would need to wait until Jan 1 2014. Saltin fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Nov 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
tuyop posted:/\/\ I think the difference between investments in a TFSA and taxable accounts is just, simply, your tax rate + (your rate of return * your tax rate). So a 7% return in a TFSA, at a 30% tax rate, is a kickass 9.1%. And we're bitching about .5% MERs! It's a lot more sophisticated than that. In a non-sheltered account, taxable gains are taxed at an inclusion rate - essentially you only pay tax (at your marginal rate) on 50% of the gain you have realized. You can also write off your losses against your gains, which you cannot do in a TFSA or RRSP, for example. Finally, qualifying Canadian dividends are taxed at a very low rate (relative to most people's marginal rate) as well. The truth is that even in a non sheltered account, there are all sorts of tax benefits to be had.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2013 13:37
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Other than deduction for losses, what benefits are you thinking of? Honest question.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2013 15:13
|
|
|
Kal Torak posted:Which is why any calculator you use has to make some assumptions. Ok fine dude, but the assumption is not "your marginal rate".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
The truth is that most people do not ever deal with the investment/discount brokerage units of their bank and trust whatever the under-qualified lady at their branch bank says. If you go into TD Canada Trust and ask to open a TFSA, they will open a TFSA account in which you can "save" your money. It is strategically advantageous to them, as they will take your dough, pay you essentially nothing for it, charge you fees, and use your money to make real money for them . They see the TFSA as a way to increase deposits. This is disingenuous, but as we've discussed, that's what you get for trusting the nice lady at the bank. Also, you only need to educate yourself to a pretty basic level of understanding to be more qualified than anyone who works at a branch bank with regard to how your money should be invested. The cost of not doing that is your financial future in many cases.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:I asked in the other thread but didn't get a response. Index. Diversification.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2013 13:09
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Either I'm misunderstanding you, or you're misunderstanding me. Why we buy bonds is a fundamental, but why the index rather than actual bonds? Liquidity? As it's a exchange traded stock you can sell out your position very quickly. Or do you mean diversification and in an index fund that indexes a combination of bonds - corporate and government, perhaps even different government's bonds - all further diversifying the position? Yes you're misunderstanding me. Only sophisticated investors should ever be looking at a single bond or equity issue, and even when they do, they are considering it within the context of a portfolio that comprises many issues. You can't manage that complexity. Anyone in this thread who is actually learning something should limit their investments to index or other funds which comprise a basket of bonds/equity. As an example (and just that, I am not advising this is an ideal ETF) - http://ca.ishares.com/product_info/fund/holdings/CVD.htm You can see the holdings comprise a mix of corporate debt issues with all sorts of different coupon/rate/maturity variables. You can get ones that mix federal/provincial/muni/corporate in all sorts of combinations. You cannot get access to a single issue, in general, with the right risk:return rate dynamic (read:4-7%) anyhow, because the blocks you need to buy in are often in the 6 figure range. There is no reason for a retail investor to own a single issue, ever. Saltin fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Nov 13, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2013 15:28
|
|
|
Franks Happy Place posted:*When government lets go of their low-interest policy, yields will spike and bond values will poo poo the bed, all at once. It's like owning a ticking bomb. Sure, but it seems unlikely to happen any time soon - the yield curve on US T-bills is generally a decent bellwether and it's basically flat for the next 2 years and slightly rising to year 5. Also, it's not so much the low interest environment disappearing as it is the massive amount of bond buying the US gov't is doing to prop up the economy. When they stop doing that the impact will be as you say, and much more succinct than slowly rising interest rates. The gov't stopping the bond buying program is a reality, many are expecting things to start happening this coming spring. But even if you don't buy into that, which is fine, remember that bond prices only matter if you're selling or buying them. If you hold to maturity, assuming no credit risk (using the T-Bill example again), you'll get your investment back, and additionally, the bond will continue to pay you on schedule. In an ETF with a basket of bonds, the manager would be making intelligent decisions about whether to sell or hold certain issues in the situation you are describing. It's just a bit of complicated math to get your answer (loss of principal on sale versus higher rate on newer opportunity) It'll definitely happen sooner or later (your scenario - it's a definite), but it's not a reason to not hold bonds - remember they always pay coupon at redemption and they always pay you interest payments as per schedule, regardless of what happens (again, I am removing credit risk from the equation for simplicity, and ignoring callable bonds too). In the right mix, bonds are a fine thing to have in a portfolio, especially one that is long term in design. Saltin fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Nov 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:So does that mean that if you hold a bond ETF for as long as the longest maturity within, you can't possibly lose any principal (assuming no credit risk, like you say)? Realistically many bond ETF's are being rebalanced once in a while, so losses and gains from par value are inevitable.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2013 13:20
|
|
|
TheOtherContraGuy posted:Have there been any studies that prove that ETFs outperform their passive index fund counterparts? They tend to have a slightly lower MER but I have this niggling doubt that ETFs are a way of reintroducing commissions into the portfolio of conservative, passive investors. Most of the discussion re: ETFs here has been in relation to passive index fund ETFs. For a beginner investor there is no reason to buy anything other than index. Also if you are paying $29.99 for a trade, you should probably not be buying ETFs yet. Stick to low MER index based mutual funds like the e-series people here love so much. Once you've got enough captial to enjoy $9.99 flat trades (50k at Waterhouse, for example), you should be using ETFs instead because they are amazingly liquid and often offer even lower MERs.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
You have to understand a sector, the players and the influencing economic forces pretty well (not to mention the actual companies) before you get investing in individual equities. I focus on Resources in this regard and have done pretty well, though it is a belly churning proposition to be honest and the sector has been pretty dead money in the last year and a half. The best result I've had is holding a met coal company (WTN) that was bought out by Walter Energy a few years ago (my average share price was about $1.50 and I got $11.50 a share when the buyout was announced). Buying a mid-tier coal producer during the downturn got me a lot of "wtf you're nuts" type of responses, but I knew they were well run, had great access to rail and seaborne port, and could produce at a price that was viable for the time. I also made out well with Teck Resources (TCK.B) during the downturn when everyone thought they were going to default of the debt they incurred to buy Fording Coal. Turns out the banks love to lend to assets, and the $5 stock went back to $40+ (Teck is a very well lead and run company, but the recent year and a bit sees them trading between $27 and $29 recently). Take wins like that with a grain of salt too - they all centre on the downturn in 2008 and taking advantage of the opportunities it presented. It was probably a once in a lifetime thing. On the flip side I've lost five figures in the last year and a half (so far) on a start up Potash company that has a world class resource but not enough money to develop it (yet). It's like a soap opera this stuff. Anyhow, it is a betting game, but it's more like poker than something silly like roulette- you have information available that can actually increase your chances of making a good bet and before you lay the money out you have to understand and process that data as best you can. It is a lot of work sometimes, and even after doing it, you can still crash and burn. Also it should only be a very small percentage of your overall portfolio if it is retirement oriented. Saltin fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Nov 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
Kal Torak posted:KRN? WPX
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 00:17
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:PSA: how not to pick a bank: in accordance with gimmicky bullshit like concert tokens or free movie passes. Scotiabank blazed the latter trail - now TD is getting into the game with some stupid concert thing: Scotiabank's "Richer than you think" motto applies to people who bought BNS mid June to mid July, but definitely not most of their customers. The only way to beat them is to join them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2013 01:20
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:How am I doing? The fundamentals are fine, of course, but the situation today is that interest rates cannot (realistically) fall any further and that much of the bond market is propped up by QE (this is true). There is a strong argument that given this, bond prices have only one way to go. Not that there is anything wrong with cheaper bonds if you are a net bond buyer across the next 25 years.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
slidebite posted:The dollar has taken a big stinky poo poo against the US$ the last little bit, hasn't it? The US economy is bouncing back in a significant way. Additionally, the Canadian Fed's latest announcement was very "interest rates are not going anywhere for a while guys", which was a big change in tone from even 3 months prior.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
The IRS absolutely treats income in a TFSA as taxable for US residents.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2013 13:29
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:I happen to disagree with this advice, for what it's worth. Unless you're realizing a massive tax saving today via a refund (because your current salary is very high or it's a good commission year, etc), I wouldn't contribute to an RRSP. With an RRSP, you trade known and efficient tax today for unknown and possibly inefficient tax (no discount for dividends or capital gains) tax tomorrow. I prefer the former, in the absence of a substantial tax refund due to a high-marginal rate in a given year. This is generally correct in my estimation as well. I do contribute to my RRSP, but a significant portion of my earnings are taxed at the highest marginal rate, so it makes a decent amount of sense. The return it generates is pretty substantial. I also make sure my and my wife's TFSA is maxed before a penny goes into the RRSP.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Yeah, I think I'll be just fine staying away from RBCDS for now FX is complex, but in this case it is about the US economy bouncing back and Canada's commitment to a low interest rate environment for the foreseeable future. Don't underestimate the power of the latter.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 13:35
|
|
|
tuyop posted:Well I guess I might as well claim my pension then. Inflation has basically disappeared, which is a bad thing. If they touch rates to the upside they'll likely trigger a recession. On the flip side, Canadian's are gorging on debt (especially the mortgage variety) due to all the cheap money. I've actually read a few suggestions they might lower rates, but that'd be madness too. The Canadian Fed is really in a tough place. The ideal situation, as far as I can see it, is to leave things status quo, weaken the dollar versus USD as a deliberate strategy (keeping rates low will do this well), keep introducing other methods to control mortgage debt and the housing bubble (like killing the 40 year mortgage and needing a traditional 20% mortgage for homes over 1mil) and hope the rising markets in the US float our boat too. If there is a bright side to all of this it is that a strong US economy is generally good for business in Canada. Saltin fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Isn't keeping the dollar low against the USD a good thing for export anyway, since it makes us more attractive to them as suppliers? Or am I misremembering 11th grade econ? There are definite advantages. I'm not suggesting it is a "bad thing" at all. A lot of Canadian businesses that sell into the US enjoy the disparity. It also makes Canada a cheaper place to do business in for the US - so things like the film industry in Vancouver and Toronto benefit. There are downsides to it as well.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 16:05
|
|
|
The HBP should not be viewed as an interest free loan. When you withdraw $25k from your RRSP, the opportunity cost is the gains it could have made while invested. Depending on prevailing mortgage rates at the time, it is a really bad thing to use the HBP. Also a house is not an investment, so I discount that argument.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:I agree, but it really bothers my investing philosophy sensibilities as I'm fundamentally a value investor. I hate the idea that a company's or industry's financial success is predicated on the stupidity of its customers, not the actual value it brings to the world. If you can't beat them, join them. This is the same reason I am heavily invested in Canadian Banks. "You are richer than you think" only applies if you actually own BNS.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Most of these mutual fund jokers are outright thieves. That is a phenomenal metric and really needs to be mandatory on all prospectuses immediately, and since people don't read those, fund salespeople should have to tell the client before selling to them.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:It's not enough to make me change my own strategy, and of course we can debate endlessly about future rates, but it's food for thought.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2014 14:06
|
|
|
I know loads of guys that make six figures and don't contribute to a TFSA. It may only be something the well off can afford to contribute to, but there are plenty of people making good livings who are leveraged out the wazoo and completely cash poor due to the stainless/granite/nice house thing we have going on here.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
n00b posted:30% Cdn Bond Index -- MER 0.50% I've been wondering about the risk associated with Bond index funds given all the chatter about QE tapering. It can't be good for Bond index funds, and it's just a question of when, not if. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I am busy reducing my positions in this area, personally.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Sounds like you're trying to time your long term investments based on short term market speculation. I should be clear - I am invested heavily in the US as compared to Canada at the moment. It's a result of me believing about 2 years ago that the growth was in the US. The US markets have rewarded me well, especially this year. They have crushed Canadian returns. As a result I am modestly (as a percentage) invested in US bond index ETFs. They pay a tasty dividend, which is fine, but QE tapering is a concern and I was wondering what other people thought about that specifically. My own opinion is that it is not speculation that it'll happen, it's just a case of when and how much, which is an interesting conversation with real impacts. Saltin fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Jan 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I think the biggest concern (and one I'm definitely addressing) is the exposure to Canadian markets and its upcoming performance. I am heavily weighted on the Canadian side and as I move investment firms I'm taking the opportunity to spread that out. I'll probably be leaning on you folks here for critique and recommendations in the coming while The time to buy America was about 18 months ago. There is nothing wrong with diversifying your allocations regionally at any time, though. There are still a few bright spots in the Canadian story, I think - Energy is one of them - this segment is going to benefit from the softer dollar substantially as they tend to incur OPEX in CAD and Revenue in USD, in addition to being strangely undervalued to begin with in comparison to US peers. Something like XEG is what I am looking at personally. The banks will likely also continue to do well. Just an opinion. Do your own due diligence, of course.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:America is nearly half of the world if you go by market cap, so if you believe in indexing and diversifying there's never really a bad time to 'buy America'. Yeah I said that. As you likely know what I meant was America had a fantastic year in 2013.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
It sounds to me like you are agreeing with one another. I am certain Lexicon understands that 0.18 and 0.33 are fundamentally different numbers applied to large sums of money across a long period of time. He is the one that raised the quarter century measure for MER, so I expect he gets your point Kalenn. Compared to 2.00+ they are both infinitely better. Lexicon the one thing you missed with regard to ETF is, at the end of the day, a primary advantage for those of us who get involved a little more actively, and that is liquidity. XIU, as an example, I can literally sell and turn into cash in one second. You can't do that with any Mutual Fund I know of. I will also agree that there are plenty of ETF's which see lower volumes and are not much more liquid than a MF, but I tend to avoid them as a rule, because liquidity matters a whole lot to me.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:16 |
|
|
If you have to ask about shorting stocks on somethingawful.com you should not be shorting. So don't do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2014 13:31
|
|