No, 2007 also did peak (for 6 months chart) at the beginning of the year before had a mini-crash on Feb, just KLCI did recover back to make a new high in the year end. But the market sentiment and overall picture currently (with KLCI new high) is not the same as the beginning of the 2007 year. The bullishness is not the same although KLCI manages to make new high, a lot of stocks had been off their best significantly.

Inflation surely will be sky-rocketing in near future. For local there is no pure O&G sector, as there is none of oil company are listed in KLSE. Those O&G company listed in KLSE are those supporting equiptment/construction/work O&G company, there is oil producing company. Too bad, Petronas never want to be listed in KLSE, otherwise it is a good option.
If really want to play a pure O&G sector, one needs go for global fund (resources type)

PetroGas is just a division that selling natural gases product
PetDag is a division that selling petrol or running petrol station one.

That one we would like to have is the Petronas (the parent company) that are drilling crude oil one.

See the differences, which one is more profitable?

All global and regional fund are not allowed by them after recent changes.

Yup, those supporting O&G are also will be benefitting, just would like to have the top or upper line one as those upper stream will have steady stream of income through oil drilling (or any term you call it) while those supporting it only relied on the contracts awarded by them which is somehow can be cyclical in nature and volatile.
But having said that, as long as oil price is high, those supporting industry will also have a good time ahead.

There are some newer global funds called climate or climate change which have been launched by 2 to 3 funds house which primary invest in company stocks that are doing or producing environmental friendly product. Don't know about their prospect. Just to let you know, not meant to recommend it. Judge your own.

Your arguement is totally flawed as said by Grengo01

Don't be fooled by the number of unit. A unit trust of 0.25 with 4,000 units while the other with 1.00 with 1,000 unit is the same. No matter they issue or IPO with 0.25 or 1.00, makes no different at all. Just may be make you feel good about 'more units' or price is low (0.25), but in actual fact it makes no different.
It is the % if gain that matter. If both fund performance are the same 0.25 goes up to 0.27 the 1.00 will also goes up to 1.08.
A 1.00 fund doesn't mean it had no room to go. Normally, you won't or seldom see fund to have 2.00 or 3.00 because they like to split/bonus it whenever they make significant gain or fund price appreciate quite a lot which make the unit price become around 1.00.

Sadly to say, a lot of people fall into this kind of 'trap'. (not actually trap, somehow it is marketing trick)
There is also the reason why there are a lot of funds currently issued at Rm0.25 or Rm0.50 rather than Rm1.00 (most in old day time). They DID attract more investors than those RM1.00 although in actually fact it is the same due to the 'feel more or cheap' factor as mentioned.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jan 4 2008, 03:40 PM

Yup, Trustee had nothing to do with it. As long as fund managers don't cross the line or violate the objective of the funds, trustee will let it be.

Recently, although China related stocks index is high, there are plenty of stocks that are way off their previos peak. Its bullishness currently become a bit more sectorial, not overall.
It somehow like KLSE and KLCI case, KLCI might be hitting 1500, but there are plenty of stocks in KLSE that still way below the price when 1200 level.

If not mistaken, India market is quite similar to China market, they are not totally close nor totally open free market like Singapore, Korea or the rest of the world, there are some restrictions so in this kind of market, US and global equities effect has lesser impact, they tend to move on their own theme, just like China, DJ can plunge 300 points but they can move in opposite direction.

This question might be too subjective or vague.

Every UT has different portfolio, strategy, different sector play/ theme in nature.
One can be magnificient in one year, also can be the worst in another year compared to others if market condition is not favourable.

Even I tell you xxx fund is a top performer last year with zz% return rate, it can be making a loss this year also.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jan 17 2008, 03:16 PM

It can be -10% -20%, -35%, it also can be +15% or +30% or +50% which is depended on market environment at particular of time period.

You can't expect any fixed or rough return rate, it is all depended on market condition and fund portfolio.

It depends, zero coupon is issued at discount price, so you need to look how much potential yield when maturity.
Interest rate is vary from time to time. The primary risk of bond funds is default rate. When got default in bonds in the bond fund portfolio then bond funds will struggle.

Mostly local global UT are feeder fund type, they take the money to invest in some other countries UT, they don't invest directly themselves. Just like HwangDBS Global Property fund is actually invest in Singapore DBS Global Property Securities Fund (GPSF).

They are some exceptional global fund that are invest themselves but not many.

No, feeder fund manager doing nothing. All investment are done by the targetted feeder fund.

It is just like individual invest in UT, just the individual role change to a UT fund (local global fund).
Sometimes it is called fund of fund. Sound funny sometimes, right?

Buying Genting, Pbbank or YTL won't able to access all over the world. Although Genting, Pbbank does have investment in UK, HK, UK respectively, large chunk of revenue still generated through locally. If really want to access equities all over the world investment, better through UT or ETF like Dreamer said.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jan 25 2008, 02:33 PM

Becareful to read those tiny and little word in the policy.

I had Endowment insurance also, it is not guaranteed but projected.

I am not sure what kind/type you are taking up, so can't comment on your part but remember insurance company needs to make money to pay tou the interest/return, they won't make a losing business after all. If they can't generate 7% or more return on their capital, there is no way they can pay the policy holders at 7%.

Just my 2 cents.

Cheers.

No, you are not right because the re-purchased price (NAV value) is not controllable by fund managers or fund houses, it is dictated of the value of the fund portfolio aka their underlying stocks or bonds value in the market. If market goes down and its portfolio stocks goes down then the fund NAV goes down. This is not a pyramid or money game bare in mind. You can split out market with fund as fund invest money in the market.

You don't redeem your unit, yes, you won't realise your loss, just paper loss, not realised, but a loss still a loss, just you opt for long term and don't care about short term paper loss. It is more like Ostrich behaviour, hiding your head in the ground, don't want to see the truth.
Don't get me wrong on this, short term loss or any loss in investment is unavoidable as one never will buy the lowest, but if one choose the right investment, over long run, mostly make money one.

If invest in wrong time aka at market peak time like Nasdaq during 2000, when Nasdaq composite is 5,000+, if one invest in Nasdaq related fund then after 8 years time, your fund become 50% of the origin invested value only, although in future may be it will go beyond 5,000 again and your fund state to make a profit but who's know when, another 5 years, 10 years. By then those opt for FD one rather than invest in UT already see their money double while one invests in Nasdaq composite related fund only see their money breakeven. In this case, even after 10 years you make profit from it after Nasdaq manage to climb back to make some gain but your gain is significant lesser than if put in FD then it is already considered a 'loss' or more accurate word 'opportunities loss'.

So a little bit getting right on timing will help a lot, don't need to buy at the lowest or sell at highest, just avoiding to but when market seems to high or expensive will be good enough already. Different funds have different strategy, some do perform quite well, some also did poorly as well. Can't say all, it depends on nature of the fund as well as the fund house and managers managing it.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Feb 19 2008, 04:34 PM

Generally, it is true when market is on the way up but not always true.

Just like, if enter wrong timing, like some properties fund last year or some China related funds, they are making loss of more tha 20-30% since last year end. Not to say recoup the serive charge, it is challenging for the fund to just breakeven in near term.
So it is much depends on market condition, can't use last few year performance (market bull run) to judge how future will be or as the standard comparison. Market won't have bull run every year one, in between there are difficulty period or bearish time, just over the long run (decades long), market mostly is always up one, but not a must. Typically example would be Nikkei 225 after about 15-20 years since its last boom, it has not recovered until now.

Just my 2 cents

Invest in UT, you don't look for it, you look for the daily and long term increment in the fund NAV.
Any distribution/dividend are giving out are deducting from funds NAV, which is as same as unit split.

But, US is considered Western already. Far-East generally refere to Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China, and Pacific Rim countries. (West of Pacific until the GMT line)