Financial Markets Meltdown

[eric2381]

The longer these companies operate at profit and pay off debt, the higher they can raise their dividend payouts. It’s a matter of time. The more debt they pay off, the more valuable each share of the company becomes.

[lmtada]

Excellent points. This is big issue, drives me nuts. GST tax calculated on top of a tax. Tax on a tax. Criminal.

Originally Posted by Dean2

Thanks Jim.

Speaking of tax, Alberta is talking about putting the 14 cents per litre gas tax back in place as the price of gas has dropped below the threshold. Just for interest sake, taxes in cents per litre, Federal Fuel and Carbon tax is 24.31 on gas, 21.38 on diesel, B.C. adds 23.51 on gas and 31.85 Diesel, Sask 15 cents on both. Then there is 6 to 7 cents a litre GST and in all provinces with a sales tax you have to add that too. That means in Alberta, with the gas tax back on, 45% of the cost of a litre of gas is tax, and as usual the Feds account forthe majority of it. In other provinces taxes are 52 to 56%. Yet politicians LOVE to blame the greedy Oil Companies.

I guess that is their version of Merry Christmas from the Government, along with all the other tax increase set to come in 2024.

[Fisherdan]

Originally Posted by Dean2

Biggest issue is still inflation running well above the U.S. and Canada target rates. Inflation is not showing any real signs of abating as quickly as both Central Banks claim it will. Once again, the Bank's seem to think that if they wish something and talk about it it will happen. Hasn't so far. Spending by all levels of government is still massively out of control, and this will continue to drive inflation. In Canada the average worker loses more than 50% of his income to taxes. Taxes are the single largest expense for all households. That is simply wrong.

Merry Christmas to you too.

A couple thoughts I heard… with inflation, maybe they don’t want it to go down too much. Or at least they don’t mind having it stick higher for some time. Shrink government debts that way.

Also, US election coming up next year. So maybe just try to kick the can down the road until after the election.

[DiabeticKripple]

Should a guy be investing in GIC or Mutual Funds with these higher rates?

I’ve got some cash sitting in my TFSA. I have 100% stocks, no other investments. Probably a good idea to branch out into some lower risk investments.

[Cement Bench]

Originally Posted by DiabeticKripple

Should a guy be investing in GIC or Mutual Funds with these higher rates?

I’ve got some cash sitting in my TFSA. I have 100% stocks, no other investments. Probably a good idea to branch out into some lower risk investments.

how long you got before you need the money

BANK STOCKS BANK STOCKS, BANK STOCKS

Scotia bank almost 7 % dividend income for outside Tisa

we need a bank stock only thread which I may start over the holidays

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by DiabeticKripple

Should a guy be investing in GIC or Mutual Funds with these higher rates?

I’ve got some cash sitting in my TFSA. I have 100% stocks, no other investments. Probably a good idea to branch out into some lower risk investments.

Top GIC rates are 5%. If you are in the 50% tax bracket, that means you are earning 2.5% after tax. Inflation, even by the government's artificially low numbers is, 3.1%. Your money is shrinking in spending power by .6% a year minimum.

Mutual funds have huge MERs, and are effectively just a collection of stocks or bonds, depending on type. They are a bad deal for almost all people due to the very large fees, and quite a few Mutual funds are actually funds holding other mutual funds, so your fee load can be double or triple the posted MER because each of those funds have MERs of their own.

ETFs are a much better deal, far lower MER. If it is in a taxable account, and you are already at $45,000 a year in dividend income, look at HXT and HXS. Make sure you understand the investments before you buy it, they are derivative plays on the indexs but as all your gain is Capital gain, you don't pay tax till you sell them. Vanguard has almost identical funds, their VFV is HXS, that are not derivative and produce almost identical yields, so your annual gain is part dividend and part capital gain. If you are under the dividend income above, these have no counter party risk. Hope the info below helps.

https://wealthawesome.com/best-etf-c...US-Equity-ETFs


https://www.fool.ca/2022/04/07/vfv-v...ian-investors/

https://etfinsider.co/blog/comparison-vce-vs-hxt

https://piggybank.ca/investing/etf/best-etfs-canada

[DiabeticKripple]

Originally Posted by Dean2

Top GIC rates are 5%. If you are in the 50% tax bracket, that means you are earning 2.5% after tax. Inflation, even by the government's artificially low numbers is, 3.1%. Your money is shrinking in spending power by .6% a year minimum.

Mutual funds have huge MERs, and are effectively just a collection of stocks or bonds, depending on type. They are a bad deal for almost all people due to the very large fees, and quite a few Mutual funds are actually funds holding other mutual funds, so your fee load can be double or triple the posted MER because each of those funds have MERs of their own.

ETFs are a much better deal, far lower MER. If it is in a taxable account, and you are already at $45,000 a year in dividend income, look at HXT and HXS. Make sure you understand the investments before you buy it, they are derivative plays on the indexs but as all your gain is Capital gain, you don't pay tax till you sell them. Vanguard has almost identical funds, their VFV is HXS, that are not derivative and produce almost identical yields, so your annual gain is part dividend and part capital gain. If you are under the dividend income above, these have no counter party risk. Hope the info below helps.


https://www.fool.ca/2022/04/07/vfv-v...ian-investors/

https://etfinsider.co/blog/comparison-vce-vs-hxt

https://piggybank.ca/investing/etf/best-etfs-canada

Thank you Dean! I hold a sizeable portion of my portfolio in VOO, good to know there’s a CAD option so I don’t get screwed on exchange rates.

[Dean2]

I always read Charlies stuff but I thought this weeks was particularly insightful. It tells you how often the so called experts are wrong and how often conventional analysis is based on incorrect assumptions. Well worth the 5 minute read.

Just one example, there are many more in the article.

Bear Markets are always a sign of recession…



You can time a Bear Market bottom…



Well worth the read.

https://bilello.blog/2023/put-these-...l-2023-edition

My personal favourites.

Putting money under your mattress is an effective strategy to combat inflation…




Bonds are risk-free…



I wish you all a Happy and prosperous New Year.

[glen moa]

Is it so complicated because that makes it easy to steal people’s money?

[glen moa]

So much of the market just costs people money. You have insider trading, high manager fees, lies of prospects, gov bailouts, everyone has their own inflation rate based on their own situation, etc.
it’s like it’s set up on purpose to hurt people.

Thanks Dean2 for helping us find the truth.

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by glen moa

Is it so complicated because that makes it easy to steal people’s money?

Very reasonable point Glen.

If you read through all my posts, just in this thread alone, my recommendations and suggested methods have never changed. In reality, making money in the markets is not all that complicated, it just takes common sense and patience. That said, people can lose a lot of money if they ignore the basics and try to get a home run on every investment, think Crypto, Meme stocks, Brex, Cannabis stocks and the list is endless. That is when the greed sets in and people start listening to all the new experts, about how things are different this time and how you can get rich if you just listen to them. Every large successful scam relies on peoples greed; From the Ugandan Prince, to all the pumped penny stocks, Crypto, fake mines, guys selling royalty rights to gambling or porn websites, guns for sale WAY too cheap right on this very site, and many other scams, there are a ton of people looking to fleece the greedy, stupid or those too trusting.

As always, if it seems too good to be true, it always is.

[big zeke]

Dean makes a good point...I make a practise of watching the movie "Wall Street" at least annually just to curb my own appetite.

This year has treated me well but I need to get a sense of what you all are seeing in your own portfolios for a total return rate. The infomercials on BNN spout out BS numbers so I don't see them as a reliable dataset.

I have both Reg and non-Reg holdings, roughly split between Toronto and US, slight bias towards tech, no fringe investments (pot, crypto etc) with a few ETFs used to cover monthly bills. All moderate to low risk investments.

For me the challenge will be having similar returns in 24

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by glen moa

So much of the market just costs people money. You have insider trading, high manager fees, lies of prospects, gov bailouts, everyone has their own inflation rate based on their own situation, etc.
it’s like it’s set up on purpose to hurt people.

Thanks Dean2 for helping us find the truth.

To be honest, the crooks don't worry me nearly as much as the great many truly incompetent folks working as investment advisors. The amount of bad advice, being given out in good faith, is staggering and expensive for those listening to it. The number of portfolios I have reviewed in the past few years, setup along conventional Conservative investor lines and usually comprised of mutual funds with high fees, that have produced staggeringly small returns for decades is truly amazing.

I really don't understand how people can see 1 to 4% gains, and in some cases losses, over a long period of time, and yet they still keep dealing with the same advisor.

It is why I still post on this thread regularly in hopes of getting quality and balanced information into the hands of the average investor. At least then they have an idea of what they should be seeing for results and returns. Hopefully it gives them a balanced point of view versus what they are getting fed by their advisor. No one should accept average growth of less than 5% a year over a 3 year period or you might as well be 100% in GICs or Gov Bonds.

[flydude]

My ARM stock is up +28.62% since the IPO.

[KGB]

Originally Posted by flydude

My ARM stock is up +28.62% since the IPO.

Should’ve bought Nvidia a year ago…

[roper1]

Originally Posted by Dean2

To be honest, the crooks don't worry me nearly as much as the great many truly incompetent folks working as investment advisors. The amount of bad advice, being given out in good faith, is staggering and expensive for those listening to it. The number of portfolios I have reviewed in the past few years, setup along conventional Conservative investor lines and usually comprised of mutual funds with high fees, that have produced staggeringly small returns for decades is truly amazing.

I really don't understand how people can see 1 to 4% gains, and in some cases losses, over a long period of time, and yet they still keep dealing with the same advisor.

It is why I still post on this thread regularly in hopes of getting quality and balanced information into the hands of the average investor. At least then they have an idea of what they should be seeing for results and returns. Hopefully it gives them a balanced point of view versus what they are getting fed by their advisor. No one should accept average growth of less than 5% a year over a 3 year period or you might as well be 100% in GICs or Gov Bonds.

Thanks for the very good advice Dean!!!

[Jim Blake]

Originally Posted by Dean2

To be honest, the crooks don't worry me nearly as much as the great many truly incompetent folks working as investment advisors. The amount of bad advice, being given out in good faith, is staggering and expensive for those listening to it. The number of portfolios I have reviewed in the past few years, setup along conventional Conservative investor lines and usually comprised of mutual funds with high fees, that have produced staggeringly small returns for decades is truly amazing.

I really don't understand how people can see 1 to 4% gains, and in some cases losses, over a long period of time, and yet they still keep dealing with the same advisor.

It is why I still post on this thread regularly in hopes of getting quality and balanced information into the hands of the average investor. At least then they have an idea of what they should be seeing for results and returns. Hopefully it gives them a balanced point of view versus what they are getting fed by their advisor. No one should accept average growth of less than 5% a year over a 3 year period or you might as well be 100% in GICs or Gov Bonds.

Since following Dean's strategy we have made more RRSP money in six months than we did in 4 years with a so called "Financial Advisor". The dividend reinvestment is HUGE in investment gains!!

Thanks again Dean for allowing us and AO Members to benefit from your insight!!!!

[Map Maker]

Don’t want this to be a ****ing match but I think it would benefit to see where our returns are. ( hence take all numbers with a grain of salt)

For Jan to dec 2023
My personal rate of return for my Tfsa is 22% ( from my banks posted personal rate of return)
My Tfsa was the best of all my accounts and gives 3.7% dividends.
(Best stocks Netflix and US steel X )

[big zeke]

Thanks for that Map...my numbers are similar and a welcome difference from last year. I have a pile of Nvidia (never heard of them before my FA suggested them 2 yrs ago) and a splash of Shopify (again courtesy the FA).

Don't get me wrong he also suggested Franco Nevada and a bunch of do nothing bonds; never lost money just never made much. A couple 12-15% ETFs cover my day to day expenses, the rest is reinvested.

We talk a couple times a month and he always has some new idea, we execute on about 1/3 of them. For me he is definately worth his fees.

I do agree with Dean that there is an obscene number of car salesmen come financial experts; it takes about 2 mins to sniff them out. They generally falter when asked about the tech analysis that their recommendations are based on

If he can match my growth in 24 I'll be a happy guy

[CDN offroader]

Originally Posted by Dean2

I really don't understand how people can see 1 to 4% gains, and in some cases losses, over a long period of time, and yet they still keep dealing with the same advisor.

I've recently taken over my MILs accounts, her advisor had money sitting in 0% GICs, the "good" one was returning about 1.5%. Her husband had done all the investing before he passed away, and she just let the advisor do whatever. Painful

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by CDN offroader

I've recently taken over my MILs accounts, her advisor had money sitting in 0% GICs, the "good" one was returning about 1.5%. Her husband had done all the investing before he passed away, and she just let the advisor do whatever. Painful

I hear you. Unfortunately there are hundreds of thousands of small invstors getting the same crappy advice, no real financial planning and attrocious performance.

[Glion]

Started this year with picking up some BCE and Tesla. Tesla I have held before and sold, but it is a long term hold for me ( I am youngish) BCE is strictly for the dividend and I will see if they keep it at this rate.

[59whiskers]

If a financial adviser cannot generate at least 5 to 10 percent rate of return on a portfolio it is time find someone who will. It might not hurt to find another advisor to invest with at the same time. Let the 2 advisors compete for your investment business. Did that with GIC’s and mutual funds back in the day.

[eric2381]

My thoughts are most advisors are salesmen. They say the right thing to attract people in the door. And they continue saying the right thing to keep them there. People should invest in themselves by educating themselves and putting in the work so they are more knowledgeable in managing their own money. Investing in your own knowledge is always the investment that pays off the most.

[big zeke]

Originally Posted by 59whiskers

If a financial adviser cannot generate at least 5 to 10 percent rate of return on a portfolio it is time find someone who will. It might not hurt to find another advisor to invest with at the same time. Let the 2 advisors compete for your investment business. Did that with GIC’s and mutual funds back in the day.

What you suggest is theoretically sound, the only problem is that the nest egg you'll be investing needs to be large enough to interest a skilled investor. If you start with 100k and split that between 2 advisors (with an assumed fee of 1%) I seriously doubt you'll interest anyone with more than a childs understanding of investing. If the nest egg is significant, you probably don't need a lot of guidance in investing.

I do agree that you need to educate yourself both on investing tools (ETFs vs GICs vs bonds vs stocks etc) as well as risk and investable industries. Keep in mind stock promoters are everywhere and data can be pared to support many BS stories. You are the only one who can protect yourself no matter what the investing guy tells you. I accept about 1/3 of the suggestions my guy makes...he is a salesman after all.

[Dean2]

Big Zeke _ you hit the nail on the head. No good quality advisor is going to look at an account that is less than a million, the really good ones, $5 million and up. It is exactly why so many folks are stuck with low quality, poorly educated advisors that work in the mass market. Anybody that starts out in the mass market that is really good, ends up moving up into the higher tiers really quickly. You can get guys to compete by splitting a ten million portfolio, you won't get that to happen with $200,000 bucks as most of the advisors in that range are salaried, with perhaps a small incentive overlay, despite the fact the companies they work for, Banks, Life Insurance Companies, Investment houses etc. are charging 1 to 2% of the portfolio value for management, and that is over and above Mutual Fund or any other fees. If you ask most people dealing with an in-house advisor, they have no idea what so ever that these extra fees are being charged. Most are shocked when they ask the specific question.(So on a $200,000 portfolio you are paying the Bank between $2 and $4,000 a year, for the crap advice you are getting from their advisor, over and above the 2% average MER for the in-house mutual funds they have you in, and up to 6% MER if those mutual funds are funds comprised of other mutual funds.)

So give that some thought, your fees are min $5,000 a year to as much as $16,000, and people wonder why they get next to no return over years and years of being invested. Someone else is skimming off all the cream, and then some in many cases.

Most people would be far better off with a pay for service Financial planner. These guys charge a flat hourly rate, most of the better ones are in the $250 and up range, but they have a responsibility to provide you with a quality overall financial plan. You can pay for a lot of professional time and still pay WAY less than you are getting pillaged for already.

[KGB]

I had a friend who worked for the very well known wealth management company dealing with the high net worth individuals. Every time I asked him for a tip the answer was the same- slow and steady… I asked him why don’t you give me some really hot tip so I get rich fast. He said there is no such a thing. I asked him about really good financial advisor who knows everything. He said those ones are not advising anymore but instead sitting on their yachts surrounded by a 25 years old chicks drinking expensive champagne all day long. They don’t have to work anymore.
The ones that are still working- well you got it, they need you and your fees to make money. Some are just a little bit better than others.

[Map Maker]

Originally Posted by KGB

I had a friend who worked for the very well known wealth management company dealing with the high net worth individuals. Every time I asked him for a tip the answer was the same- slow and steady… I asked him why don’t you give me some really hot tip so I get rich fast. He said there is no such a thing. I asked him about really good financial advisor who knows everything. He said those ones are not advising anymore but instead sitting on their yachts surrounded by a 25 years old chicks drinking expensive champagne all day long. They don’t have to work anymore.
The ones that are still working- well you got it, they need you and your fees to make money. Some are just a little bit better than others.

Not sure I believe that. For sure there are people that put their money in a single stock and hit big ( watch the movie GameStop) but for every 1 of those, there are 100 others that lost everything.

I know I used to get some pretty big gains when I was younger and didn’t have much to invest and could handle more risk. I mostly bought stocks in $2-$5 range. A lot of 5x gain and a lot of bankruptcies as well.
When you get older and have a lot to invest, you have to go slow and steady and you wouldn’t be able to sleep at night.

I would think a 10 year average for a seasoned self investor would be about 8-12% a year.
A regular financial advisor would be around 4-6% fees included.

[eric2381]

Originally Posted by KGB

I had a friend who worked for the very well known wealth management company dealing with the high net worth individuals. Every time I asked him for a tip the answer was the same- slow and steady… I asked him why don’t you give me some really hot tip so I get rich fast. He said there is no such a thing. I asked him about really good financial advisor who knows everything. He said those ones are not advising anymore but instead sitting on their yachts surrounded by a 25 years old chicks drinking expensive champagne all day long. They don’t have to work anymore.
The ones that are still working- well you got it, they need you and your fees to make money. Some are just a little bit better than others.

I’ve thought this for a long time. If they are any good, they don’t work for the commercial banks serving Joe blow. The people working there that a large number of people trust their money with, are just going thru the paces and putting in their time and enjoying their two weeks paid vacation a year and their 40hrs a week and salary.

[Dean2]

You know KGB.I have heard this old wives tale for decades. If it is true explain to me why Charlie Munger, Warren Buffet, Elon Musk, and the CEOs of every North American bank, not to mention all the other folks that get paid multiple millions a year are still working. They sure as hell dont need the money. Why aren't they all sitting on yatchs drinking Champagne with your mythical investment gurus?