Tag: investments

Categories
Personal Finance

John Bogle: “The stock market is a giant distraction.”

This guest post is written by Mike from the The Oblivious Investor.   This blog has been around for a few months and is very investment oriented (but not too techy) so I would recommend you check it out (I’m a regular reader).

For me, the above quote was enough to make Bogle’s Little Book of Common Sense Investing worth the read.

In just 7 words, Bogle manages to:

•    Provide an insightful piece of investing wisdom.
•    Make you question your assumptions.
•    Offend an entire industry.

So what is Bogle saying here? I think he’s making two distinct points. First, he’s making a statement about intelligent investing. Second, he’s offering a rather pointed criticism of the financial services industry.

Passive investing is a good thing

As to investment strategy, Bogle (as usual) is suggesting a system of passive investing. We can’t predict whether the market is about to go up or about to go down, and attempting to do so will only harm our performance. Similarly, attempting to pick individual stocks is unlikely to prove successful.

So if we stand to gain nothing by timing the market or picking stocks, what’s the point in watching the market? There is no point. All it can do it tempt us toward poor decisions. Better to ignore it.

Financial service is expensive

Bogle’s second point is one about the financial services industry in general, and it’s a bit less obvious. At their most fundamental level, financial markets exist to connect providers of capital (investors) with users of capital (businesses). Without a doubt, this is a valuable service.

However, in recent decades, the financial services industry has convinced us that it performs another service as well: Enhancement of investment returns. This is, however, impossible by definition.

There’s no way that investors—as a group—can earn more than the total earnings of the businesses in which they invest. The total return earned by investors must be equal to the return earned by the businesses in our economy, minus the costs of investing.

We can therefore conclude that, rather than enhancing investor returns, the financial services industry must in fact be reducing investor returns by the sum total of all the fees that they charge us. Sadly, these costs of investing—mutual fund sales loads, fund operating expenses, brokerage fees, etc.—now total in the hundreds of billions of dollars per year.

Conclusion – ignore the market

I think Bogle’s reference to the stock market as a “giant distraction” is his way of telling the reader precisely how much value he sees in the services offered by most firms in the industry.

Takeaway lessons for us:
1.    Turn off BNN and CNBC, and
2.    Do your best to minimize the investment costs you pay.

About the Author: Mike writes at The Oblivious Investor, where he regularly reminds readers to ignore the noise of the market. If you like this post, subscribe to his blog to read more.

Categories
Investing

RBC Direct Discount Brokerage Review

I recently moved my investment accounts from Questrade to RBC Direct in order to take advantage of the RBC 1% rebate deal so I thought it would only be fitting to do a review of their services.

Who are they?

RBC Direct is the discount brokerage arm of the Royal Bank of Canada which is the biggest Canadian bank.

Good things about RBC Direct

I like the trading platform – it looks nice, easy to use and is well designed.  There is also access to analysts reports etc.  It does the job.

If you would like to compare all the different Canadian discount brokerages, check out the Canadian discount brokerage comparison.

Bad things about RBC Direct

Everything else.  🙂

Fees – ridiculous fees in my opinion.  $10/trade is not bad for a passive investor but why anyone would pay $29 a trade is beyond my comprehension.  I’ve outlined the fees at the bottom of the post.

No electronic money movement unless you have a RBC bank account.  This is the stupidest thing about RBC – yes, I understand they want to ‘bundle’ all their services but forcing investors to open up new accounts to use their discount brokerage when most of the other discount brokerages offer excellent electronic money movement options is just bad business.  Get out of the stone age RBC!

In order for me to put money into the account, I have to write a cheque and mail it to them.  If I want to remove any money – I have to pay $10 for a cheque to be written.  My plan is to keep all cash in the account until next year when I can move back to Questrade and then withdraw it electronically.  The most annoying part of this is that when I looked into the 1% deal – a customer service rep told me on the phone that I could do electronic money movement which turned out to be false.  Speaking of customer service….

Bad Customer service

I won’t bore you will the multitude of issues I’ve encountered with RBC but suffice to say that I think their computer system was probably build sometime in the 20’s which makes it very hard for the customer service reps to do their job.

Most of the reps are pretty good although one time I called without an account number and the rep told me it was “very hard to look up an account without the account number”.  I challenged him on it and he somehow was able to find the account immediately just using my name.  Kudos jackass…kudos.

Conclusion

I can’t really recommend RBC Direct since I really don’t like them and can’t wait to collect my 1% and go back to Questrade.  However, if you already do your banking with RBC and have a $100,000 in assets then they are not a bad choice.  If you don’t meet those criteria then look elsewhere.

Trading Fees

  • $28.95 per trade unless you have $100,000 in household assets at RBC Direct or complete more than 30 trades per quarter.
  • $9.95 if you have $100,000 in household assets at RBC Direct.
  • $9.95 if you make between 30 and 149 trades per quarter.
  • $6.95 for those super-active traders who do at least 150 trades per quarter.

Annual account fees

  • No fees if total client assets are $15,000 or more.
  • If assets are less than $15,000, a $25 quarterly fee will be charged regardless of the number of accounts.  Can be avoided by making three or more trades in all accounts

Other discount brokerages reviews

Questrade discount brokerage review.

Categories
Personal Finance

Happy New Year and Stock Picks For 2009

Happy New Year to all our readers – last year was a tough one in the markets but I can’t complain.  My financial situation is better now than it was last year thanks to some aggressive mortgage paydown.  In other areas of my life – our son is a year older and is healthy, happy (most of the time) and doing very well.  We also celebrated the birth of our daughter in March who is also healthy, happy (most of the time) and progressing quite well.

I also started a new site called ABCs of Investing which deals with very basic investment terms and concepts using 2 short posts per week.  A sample post explains exactly what the top down investing method is.  Alternatively, a bottoms up investing style might be more to your liking.

A special thanks goes out to Mr. Cheap who bought both my son and daughter a share of BMO each and created a DRIP.  A very generous gift and very time consuming as well to set the DRIP up.

So even with the crappy markets – 2008 was a great year!

Stock picks

I entered into a stock picking contest with some other bloggers – who shall rue the day they decided to do battle with Four Pillars!  🙂

Traditionally, the only way to do well with stock picking contests is to swing for the fences and hope for the best.  With that in mind I picked 4 small Canadian oil stocks which have been beaten down quite a bit.  If oil rebounds next year then these stocks should perform quite well.  There are probably better plays on the price of oil but this is the best I could do on 3 minutes of research.  Keep in mind these are pretty much random selections – do not consider this a recommendation or any kind of advice!

BCF.to – Bronco Energy $1.27.  I started watching this stock a few months ago when it was trading at $10 (it’s now less than $1.50).  My Dad saw some analyst recommending it on BNN – great call – down 85%!

HOC.to – Holly Corp  $3.65

TOG.to – TriStar Oil and Gas  $11.41

CLL.to – Connacher Oil Gas  $0.74





The other competitors (click to see their picks)

The Wild Investor stock picks

Zack Stocks stock picks

Dividend Growth Investor stock picks

My Traders Journal stock picks

Where Does All My Money Go stock picks

Intelligent Speculator stock picks

The Financial Blogger stock picks

Million Dollar Journey stock picks


Categories
Money

Will There Be A Second Stimulus Check In 2009?

The question all Americans want to know is whether they will receive a late Christmas present this year in the form of a 2nd economic stimulus check.

In 2008 the government sent out economic stimulus checks to 130 million Americans with the idea that this money would be spent on consumer goods and services thereby stimulating the economy. While the program was considered a success by some – it didn’t prevent the economy from slowing down into a recession with the possibility of a depression.

President-elect Obama has proposed an economic stimulus package for 2009 which will total almost 1 trillion dollars – or about $3300 for every single American.

Second economic stimulus check

So far there has been no mention of any stimulus checks (like in 2008) however that doesn’t mean it won’t happen. Nothing has been approved or finalized so it is still possible. If a second economic stimulus check is going to happen in 2009 it would be more likely to appear later in the year if it looks like the initial stimulus efforts are not doing enough to get the economy going.

Stimulus tax cuts

Obama has proposed stimulus tax cuts of $1,000 for couples and $500 for individuals. If this passes, it might be the closest thing to an actual stimulus check that most Americans will receive in 2009. This kind of stimulus is not as much fun as getting a large check all at once since it would take the form of reduced withholding taxes on regular paychecks. However, in the end – extra money is extra money.

Emergency Energy rebate

One of the more controversial initiatives is an energy relief plan to help Americans pay their energy bills this winter. The $1,000 emergency energy rebate would be given directly to Americans and would be paid for by windfall profit taxes on the large oil companies.
This particular initiative might not have much of a chance given that with the rapidly dropping price of oil, home heating costs are going to be a lot lower than initially predicted as recently as a couple of months ago.

Infrastructure stimulus spending

The Obama stimulus plan is calling for a huge investment in roads and bridges and mass transit improvements. This will total $850 billion over 2 years. This portion of the plan is the main driver behind the goal to create 2.5 million jobs over 2 years.

$250 stimulus check for select groups

There will be a $250 stimulus check for select groups.

Categories
Book Review

Book Review: Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

I first heard about Malcolm Gladwell’s new book, “Outliers: The Story of Success” about a month ago and was delighted that he was putting out a new book. I was wildly enthusiastic about “Blink” and “The Tipping Point” and after reading an extract online I couldn’t wait. By a happy coincidence, a friend gave me an early Christmas gift, and it was Outliers!

In “Blink” Gladwell looked at very fast cognition (things your brain processes in the blink of an eye). In “The Tipping Point” he looked at what led to ideas propagating and spreading through society (why some take off and why some die). In this book he looks at incredibly successful people (they’re the outliers) and argues that there’s more behind their success than the myth society tells us about them (that they’re naturally brilliant & gifted).

As with all of Gladwell’s work, he’s a delight to read. He takes an interesting idea, chews away at it, and presents his thoughts, building a surprising, yet plausible, model around them. In “Freakanomics” they debunked one of the big ideas he argued for in “The Tipping Point”, so that’s the one danger of Gladwell’s work: he’s very persuasive, even when he’s wrong.

The idea behind this work is that people who are great at something (we’re talking world class talent) are great primarily because of the time they’ve invested, rather than an inherent ability. A certain threshold of “raw ability” is necessary (which is lower than you’d think), but beyond that it’s often luck whether they managed to accumulate the time required to become world-class. The time investment, he argues, that’s needed is 10,000 hours, and its often circumstance that determines whether someone who has the interest to invest that amount of time is also given the opportunity.

He gives examples supporting this from violinists at an elite Berlin music academy, Canadian hockey players, high-tech entrepreneurs, and the Beatles (apparently they’re some minstrels from England achieved a bit of fame a long time ago).

Following up on the lucky circumstances, he also builds the case that even a small lucky break early on compounds as someone who has shown an “early aptitude” is given more opportunities, which leads to an increase in aptitude, in a reinforcing cycle until they accumulate the hours to become good or extraordinary at something. He argues that the reason Chinese people are often good at math is because Mandarin has a cleaner, more regular syntax for naming numbers. This gives young Chinese students a leg up when they first start learning math, and they’re able to build on this lead (and have a positive first experience with the subject).

He presents counter examples of Lewis Terman’s study of high IQ students (they tracked the top 1% of the top 1%) in California, who didn’t really amount to much as a group (and even within the group, socio-economic status was a better indicator of success than their IQ). Terman’s study rejected two boys as not smart enough to participate who went on to win Nobel prizes.

The take-aways from the book were that if you want to be really good at something, you’ve got to put in the time (along with meeting SOME requirements, you’ll never play in the NBA if you 5’3). You’re fooling yourself if you think you’ll just naturally be world class at something. The trick is to keep practising, and the people who will excel are those who find the motivation to keep at it. If you want to excel in your profession, put in the time at the activities that are important to it. If you want to learn a new skill, put in the hours of study and practising. There’s no royal road to excellence.

I highly recommend putting this book on your Christmas (or Hanukkah, or winter’s solstice) list. Its a fun, fast read.

I kept wondering if he’d mention an age limit, but he didn’t, so maybe it’s still possible for me to get cracking on my 10,000 hours and win a gold metal in Olympic gymnastics!

Categories
Investing

The Death Of Index Investing And Other Silly Stats

I recently came across yet another post on investing which goes something along the lines of “If you invested 10 years ago in the Dow then you would have earned exactly nothing in that time”.  I hate to pick on any one blogger since I’ve read these articles all across the blogosphere but this one is the latest and he also had the temerity to tie in poor index performance with the death of index investing.  Of course all the stock pickers out there ALWAYS beat the index so poor market are no concern to them…!  I want to emphasise that Jacob at Extreme Early Retirement does a great job with his blog and I don’t want to sound like I don’t like the blog – just that one post!  🙂

What about the dividends?

Usually these posts look at the point value of an index at a previous time, say 10 years ago and compare it to the present index point value.  This is incorrect because they are missing dividends.  Published index returns always included reinvested dividends and any type of analysis on index performance should always include the same.  Admittedly, if you are looking at a 10 year period where the index point value hasn’t changed, the addition of dividends isn’t going to change the argument very much but it should be there.

Selectivity of stats

Why is it that all the articles always pick the worst peak to trough period to illustrate their rather suspect point that maybe equity investing or even index investing is evil?  Have you ever heard of such a person who invests all their money on the same day the markets peak and then doesn’t invest any more?  Doesn’t seem all that likely to me.  Most people invest their money over time because that’s how they earn it, then save it, then invest it.  Picking one particular time period to prove or disprove a theory is like measuring your gas mileage one mile at a time and then using the best or worst mile to prove your point.

Investment performance

And what about active stock pickers – did they all do better than the indexers over that period?  Or did some of them do better, some of them the same, and some of them didn’t do as well?  I’ve asked many bloggers and non-bloggers who claim they can beat the index by picking their own stocks to prove it – measure their performance and let me know if they did better than the market or not.  You know what?  Not one of them has ever shown that they can beat the market – oddly enough, most of them don’t even bother to measure their performance.  How can someone who doesn’t even know how their own investment method measures up criticize someone else’s?

What is average?

One of the criticisms of indexing is that you will only achieve “average” results – again – will I do better by randomly picking stocks or paying someone lots of money to pick them for me?  One thing about indexing is that you will get the index return minus a very small fee – you will never beat the index but more importantly you won’t underperform the index (except for the small fee) either.  Active pickers can certainly outperform the market but they can also underperform as well – sometimes by a huge margin.  I like making money – if I thought it was possible for me to beat the market then you can rest assured that I would give it my best effort.

Dividends, smividends

Ok – one more rant… I like getting dividends just as much as the next investor but I really think there is an over-weighting on the importance of dividends in the blogosphere.  Yes, the idea of living off your dividends is nice but investment performance measures total return which is capital gains plus any reinvested dividends and interest payments.  That’s it.  I don’t care in what form the company pays out in the end – if the total return is higher, then its a better investment.  If that includes dividends, fine – if not, that’s fine too.

Categories
Investing

Will A Big Canadian Bank Fail?

I have to admit that while I haven’t been bothered by the falling markets, today I found it a bit tough for some reason.  It seems like every day the market falls and if it’s only 1 or 2% then that is ok.  Well today the Canadian market fell 9%.  9%!!! That would be a bad year by itself and it was only one crappy trading day of many crappy trading days.  The worst part was the banks – they have been pummelled this year and today the big 5 went down by an average of almost 13%.  13%!!! Very depressing I thinks.

Now, I haven’t gone all anti-Bernstein or anything – I have no plans to sell any equities under any circumstance.  What my concern is now is will one of the big Canadian banks fail? Here are some things I’m worried about:

Canadian banks own bad US mortgages as well

Our banking system was recently named as the best in the world.  Our lending standards were much stricter than the US banks so everything should be ok?  The only problem is that from what I understand, the US banks got in trouble buying investments containing bad mortgages – it wasn’t necessarily all just from writing bad mortgages themselves.

The problem is that the Canadian banks also bought these same investments and have been slowly taking related writedowns all the while not talking about what their real exposure is.  These investments were enough to bring down some big US banks so why can’t they bring down a Canadian bank?  Yes, the Canadian banks have good business models so did Washington Mutual and Wachovia.  They had customers, lots of assets – a normal bank in other words – but they lost it all on the investment side.

A bad dividend trend

The thing that concerns me is that the US banks I mentioned all paid a dividend at one time.  When the stock went down the dividend yield went up…and up and up and up.  First there was a dividend cut and then the bank went out of business.

The dividend yields for the Canadian banks in order are:

  • BMO 8.4%
  • CIBC 7.3%
  • BNS 5.9%
  • Royal 5.6%
  • TD 5.4%

The ones that really stand out for me are BMO and CIBC – 7 or 8% dividends that don’t pay return of capital are too high.  Either they are mispriced or investors are expecting a dividend cut.  Now we haven’t seen the double digit dividend yields enjoyed by the US banks before they went belly up but the yield on BMO and CIBC has roughly doubled over the last year or so.

Summary

I really hope that none of the banks go under but I am concerned about it.  Can anyone please tell me that I’m wrong??

Categories
Investing

Leveraged Investments – Exit Strategies

This is another post in the “Leveraged Investments” series. Check out the previous post entitled “Interest Rate Exposure”.

One of the phases of my leveraged strategy which I have done some thinking about, but haven’t come to any conclusions is the exit strategy. My basic plan so far involves keeping the equity positions and loan in place until after I have retired and then figuring out what to do at that time.

Some of the possible options I’ve come up with:

1. Keep the equities and the loan in retirement because the dividend income can provide a portion of my retirement income.

The problem with this plan is that I don’t want the interest rate risk while I’m retired. If the leveraged portfolio is providing a few thousand dollars of income each year then that’s fine, but if that income varies with interest rates then that’s not really good income for retirement. The other problem is that I will definitely be in a lower tax bracket so the tax rebate won’t be as good as when I’m working. On the plus side the dividend tax will be lower or perhaps non-existent in retirement. Perhaps the banks will have a senior’s lending rate by then??

2. Keep the equities and pay off the loan during or close to retirement.

This would be great however there is a small problem in that I want to pay off my mortgage and maximize my rrsp above all other financial goals and it’s debatable if I would have enough money to pay off the investment loan as well if it ends up being fairly sizable. Another issue is whether this would be necessary. Depending on when I retire and what kind of lifestyle we want, the rrsp might provide all the income we need, so working an extra year or two in order to pay off the investment loan might not be required.

3. Sell all the equities over the first couple of years of retirement and pay off the loan. Then live for a year or two on the net proceeds.

This plan will work great if the stock prices are high but not so well in a bear market. The other issue is capital gains, obviously I want to spread them out but I also will be withdrawing money from my rrsp in retirement so I have to be able to balance these two actions in order to minimize the taxes paid.

4. Sell enough equities to pay off the loan and keep the remaining equities.

This could be a good option if the plan is very successful and there is lots of capital gain.

Obviously I don’t really need to worry about this for a while and the success of the plan will have a big impact on what type of exit strategy I end up utilizing.

See the last post in this series called “There’s a fine line between good and evil”.