no la.. gold investment is not for me at the moment!

Thanks for your advice. I will be cashing out from all my RHB OSK unit trusts except for RHB-OSK China India Dynamic Growth Fund. For me, any fund house such as RHB-OSK that does not encourage investors to do regular portfolio rebalance by imposing switching fees and redemption fee is OUT.

Investors should stay away from these type of fund houses if they are investing for the long run.

This post has been edited by Vanguard 2015: Mar 15 2015, 01:25 PM

Investors that are investing for the long run...does not do 'regular" portfolio rebalance...even if they do the rebalancing when they feel is the time, they may not be of the same fund house.....
just a thought...

It's interesting to know why or why not people choose amprecious. Thanks for the input!

Hi, I disagree with your view but that is the purpose of a forum, for members to exchange ideas and knowledge.

I am not an expert in unit trust. But I strongly believe that portfolio rebalancing, whether done once every 3-4 months, once every 6 months or once a year is crucial for the success of any long term investment in unit trusts. Unit trusts is not blue chip dividend shares where we buy and hold the shares forever (to quote Warren Buffett). We need to manage the risks against the expected reward.

For example, our asset allocation is 80% in equity unit trusts and 20% in bond funds. If after one year, our asset allocation drifts to 90% in equity unit trusts and 10% in bond funds, then we need to re-balance and sell off 10% of our equity funds and buy the bond funds. To avoid costs, we should transfer the profits into the same bond fund house to avoid paying the sales fees again when we switch back into the equity fund later. For eg. we will switch the profits from the Kenanga Growth fund into Kenanga Bond Fund.

There are tons of books in the market on asset allocation and portfolio rebalancing.

For serious long term investors who are investing for their children's education, retirement, etc. I find the following books extremely useful:-

(1) The Four Pillars of Investing by William J. Bernstein

(2) All About Asset Allocation by Richard Ferris

To all the sifus here, I hope you will not laugh at me for providing such basic information above.

... no need to re-balance when it is 100% in equities.

I think there is too much talk in this thread on 'asset allocation'. Is it asset allocation meaning allocation on various sectors and/or countries, or is it bond/equity ratio?

In the former, there is a school of thoughts that one should let it be ie. no rebalancing since you don't pull money out of a better growth sector to another lesser growth sector.

In the later, yes since you are maintaining the bond/equity ratio which is a conservative/aggressive risk ratio.
And the trimming is from equity to bond/money market funds... and not from equity to equity (and its reason is same as above.)

And when it is a long term investment ... why not 100% in equities? Unless of course you want to trade... putting some into bond/money market for some switching in the next several months.

But if we can forecast that within the next several months or within a year, that there will be a market crash or pullback, why not pull out all and put 100% in bond/money market fund now? Which we don't do, not because a market crash/pullback is not unexpected, but because the investment is a long term investment.

If the long term investment is for retirement, and retirement is 15/20 years away, why the lesser than 100% in equities? Because you don't have complete faith in some of the funds you are holding? But that's the reason why asset allocation among various market sectors... and doing some thinking/analysis/research on what funds to have before purchasing them...

very insightful...but I made a quick assumption....
let say....using your example for discussion about the 80:20 thing
invested with RM 100 000 at 80:20 (RM 80 000 : RM 20 000)
4 Fund houses ( assuming not all FH has the EQ fund that I liked (regions/global exposure/performance, etc) and also to have a diversification among FHs)
therefore each about RM 20 000 EQ and RM 5000 FI per Fund house
if EQ made 10% = RM 2000 profit....will shift out to bond
why limit one self to only that fund house when the Sales charges of RM 2000 @ 2% = RM 40 ?

uuumph....even if invested RM 80 000 EQ and RM 20 000 Bond with 1 FH...
if EQ profit is 10% = RM 8000...if switch this RM 8000 to other FH at 2%SC ...the SC is RM 160

why would I be tie down to only 1 FH and having 1 FH (enhances my RM 100 000 risks) for RM 160?

that is only if invested with RM 100 000

hopefully my calculation is correct ....

if really want to "save*"...try UTs not.......the RM 100 000 AUM at 2% Mgmt + Misc fees is about RM 2000 per annum "rain or shine" even though we don't get to "see" it ....
(* like reducing leakages, making invested monies more efficient in making monies, etc)

This post has been edited by T231H: Mar 15 2015, 08:14 PM

Attached thumbnail(s)

morning..

16 days to go..

try this article...maybe suitable?
Investing in a Rising Interest Rate Environment
click on the pdf version for more charts and data
http://www.affinhwangam.com/fund-managers-...nt#.VQZbEdKUfQQ

??! Fat bonus coming in?

Doesn't matter already I already exit all my portfolio just purchased a property lolz... Weakness in property market and some good pre gst deals on the table.

But I will still be looking at market weakness in July 2015 to rejoin the UT market.

tipsy yo?

This post has been edited by yck1987: Mar 16 2015, 03:51 PM

3 Reasons Not To Neglect Bonds!

https://secure.fundsupermart.com/main/article/--10177

It's all about the US interest rate hike. Just ltook at Q4 2014, one hint that US fed might raise interest rates... It global sell off happened.it took us months to recover, got worse becoz of oil prices.

Imagine what if US fed decide to raise interest rate for real? I think it will be a massacre. my funds have been performing but slightly below expectation.

India's economy is doing better than its peers, with recent policy reforms and improved business confidence set to boost growth to 7.5 percent in the fiscal year that starts on April 1, IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said

She welcomed the government's latest budget as "a step in the right direction" towards mid-term fiscal consolidation while praising plans for higher infrastructure spending.

A pact between the government and the Reserve Bank of India to formalise inflation targeting "should provide a robust institutional foundation for maintaining price stability", said Lagarde.

Gomen Say Thanks !!!

let me pour some cold water on that... indeed India is a market to watch But...

India well prepared to face any interest rate hike by US: Lagarde
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/econom...icle6998540.ece

India could face a selloff if US federal reserve increases interest rates
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articl..._campaign=cppst

Am watching Manulife's India Equity Fund as well.