Big pix answer - it depends (asset allocation, time line needing that $, etc.)

Short answer (ignoring all else except time-line of needing the $):
No time-line of needing that $?
ie looooong time away, say 20+ to 30+ years? (add balls of steel if that $100K is the only savings)
sai lang - lump sum in
Reason: Statistically, in the long run - equities goes up. Thus why bother pecking in bit by bit

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: May 24 2015, 06:32 PM

The quality of the question attracts the answers' quality..

BCTeh - will any human know "when something's price is at the lowest"?
Thus, how to answer your Q properly / value add, since it's a "loaded Q"?

IF your agent keep saying this is not the right way, what is "the better way" your agent suggested?
note - there is usually no absolutes (right/wrong) in life & investing, other than death & taxes

Ok, good - some info / thoughts forthcoming.

I hope U don't mind me asking Qs to probe your thoughts - it will be self-evident why i'm asking the Qs eventually

My Q to U, on your game plan, is then:
AFTER U cashing-out
1. IF the markets keeps being range-bound for 1yr, 3yrs, 5yrs:
ie does NOT fall or go up any more than +/-6%
What will your response / actions be?

2. IF the markets keeps going up bit by bit for 1yr, 3yrs, 5yrs:
ie sneaking up bit by bit +/- 6%pa
What will your response / actions be?

3. IF the market "totally crashed" - when is "totally crashed"?
what is "totally crashed"?
what amount will U go in with?
what will U buy?
what if it keeps going down after 3 to 6 months? eg 1997 crashed to 600-700, paused & recovered a bit, then 1998 all the way down to 200+ points

Please note - economy <> financial markets.
There can be a disconnect
AND er.. some folks (traders & investors) do think that financial markets are AHEAD of real economy by a few months, not the other way round.
Of course, there are others that says it's economy leading the market.
i have no idea which is truer
Thus, i have my own game plans for "normal" + "opportunistic", structured in a big-picture asset allocation parameter.

eh - don't "feed" the trolls la
they thrive on reactions to their trolling leh
U wouldn't argue with a baka/idiot who espouses such garbage on the street right?

Wait till his sarcatainment hears about ETF.. <screams FSM also charges too high>

bro - on the distribution (it's called distribution, NOT dividend, for a reason), it doesn't matter

T231H is stating the obvious and this mis-assumption on UT distribution is common - it is literally of no impact other than diluting units. Total total - one will still hold the have value on the VERY INSTANCE before and after

eg.
1:00pm NAV $1 / unit before distribution, held 1000 units,
value held = $1*1000 units = $1,000
VS
1:01pm $0.10 distribution per unit, thus i get $100 and reinvested at NAV $0.90, that's 111.111111111 (infini)
NAV become $0.90,
now i'm holding $0.90 *(1000 ori +111.11111infini) = $1,000 value STILL HELD

pardon my rounding/infi 1s

Of course if U insist that people should invest with the focus on distribution (no, there is no dividends per say given by UTs), then no harm/foul - that's your reality Those who know the maths/logic will just silently smile

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: May 9 2016, 08:46 PM

Yup, agree with U if they take the lowest VS highest NAV for the year buta, instead of time-based or average.

Just clearing the air on the distribution - it is moot for checking fund performance.
Thus, why bother?

er.. WRONG
DISTRIBUTION, not dividend.
The right word and differences between them also dunno, wanna people to contact U pulak...
Supersound should sooooo contact U

it's a "fun" past time

this one no fun though - right on the onset, already shot self in foot liao.
no "play", no "giving longer rope to..", etc. sigh.

er.. logic check:
1. Is it easier & higher probability to achieve break-even or profits if cost is controlled/lowered?

2. If good returns, say a rolling 10 year-period, is not the final pick, then pick what?
Volatility cannot be ascertained FOR SURE or do U or "we" in your case, have a working crystal ball?
Even "Asset Allocation" and the FFecifient frontier theory kaboomed during 2008 (all down at one time) - gold, shares, bonds, properties - thus, how ar?

3. DCA, Lump Sum, VCA - which is the best and for what ar? why ar?

just thinking outloud - do share / discuss if there are good possibilities, not marketing fluff pls

got agents' service ma <tongue firmly in cheek>

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Aug 29 2016, 04:47 PM

heheh - what a way to put it.. city bus variety of people
i concur - some of these folks give UTCs a bad name in terms of knowledge, logic and even basic maths/Excel. There are good ones though VERY far and few inbetween (like number of human habitable planets in the galaxy Vs non-habitables )

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Sep 13 2016, 03:00 PM

er.. UTC, for Unit Trusts, i think there's no DIVIDEND "pay out", just DISTRIBUTION "pay out". Very different "animals" leh those 2.

then again, i may be wrong (still learning)

he still want to continue digging hole - layman = dividend
i'm a layman, i'm not in the industry
stop lying & confusing us la - ye who spakes with forked tongue

even when buying / switching as a Mutual Gold + "at agent's cost",
IMHO, FSM's offerings have better cost AND options

As for your first example - er.. why compare direct stocks to mutual funds/unit trust la
don't confuse the matter or.. is there a reason to confuse the matter?

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Oct 14 2016, 09:53 AM

ok, aside from "value add" from agents (most who barely know what i'm talking about - only perhaps 2 in 15 can), er.. fund manager ada face to face meh? Public Mutuals' wor...

those fellows servicing normal customers = agents and unless one is UHNW (Ultra High Net Worth) individual
sigh.. i envy U UNHWs

BTW - U do know awards are aplenty nowadays right?
means nothing much to a real investor - perhaps for wannabes it is worth something la.
"good returns" is what i want & if my costs are lower, my probability of profits is higher ya? all else being equal/semi-equal

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Dec 28 2016, 12:39 PM

FSM allowed me to "move" my + my sis' cash investments from Pub Mut to FSM's stable of funds - exactly by showing proof of redemption value then buying into FSM's with 0% service charges (equities --> equities, fixed income --> fixed income). Got it all in writing / email before execution - execution & tracking was the fastest part

Just sharing

1. Get agreement OK from FSM (just email them with details, they'll respond how to)

2. Redeem - online Public Mutual --> print to PDF, email FSM

3. Do FSM investment --> Print to PDF --> email FSM for the negation of service charges

not just commission - "career benefits" too or "assets under mgt", get average x.xx%pa in monthly payout
painful to cut that off, even if one is one's own best customer

U comparing:
Your consultant "friend" - $150K/mth from sales commissions, overriding commissions, assets in management commissions, etc
VS
DIY-funds?

U do know U are comparing business/work
Vs
passive investment returns?

If U do - what's the point you're trying to share ar?
That PM is bleeding their investors to pay agents like your "friend"?


This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Dec 31 2016, 11:51 AM