Can you verify it?
I never reinvest on my invested fund, all either getting cheque or bank into account for the distribution.

About the reinvest price, this is my relative telling me one.

Thanks for the clarification, KingRichard, lifeless-creature.

Opps, sorry, should be KingRichard and lifeless_creature.(the other forumer)

Becareful of this word, it should be 'projected' based on historical performance but doesn't mean future will be the same (might be better or migh be lower or even without) especially newbie in investment can be misled with this wording.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 20 2007, 01:13 PM

Only god know. Just market has run up quite significantly and quite fast, my purchased fund(already sold one) had gain more than 25% since last year end so decided to take the profit off the table so that my profit is realised/protected any downward correction will spare from it. Since I sold the fund, the fund has dropped more than 5% afterwards (global fund). If you track back my posts, you will know I had sold previous.

The market does not mean will collapse or what since it is unpredictable but with market not longer at 'cheap' stage, currently is in ''fair' value stage, it is no harm done to lock in some profit. If market goes higher, let it be, you already gain signficantly, while if market turns south, then you have extra opportunities then.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 22 2007, 12:52 PM

One thing I learned from my 15+ years experience that only know when to buy what to buy is not enough, you also need to know when to exit or reduce your exposure or protect your gain when necessary.

Stock market doesn't always bull run every year due to cyclical nature of the economy. sometimes it drift lower, sometimes just stagnant throughout, sometimes bull run crazy (like 1991-1993, 1996-1997 and 2006-2007)

The most important is that you have fund when market is low.

100%, can, take times, may be 7-15 years, with good fund.

For 3 years chart or statistic, currently, it will give you quite impressive return rate record but if you track back more than 5 years + then the average will lower down because from 2004-2007, stock market (worldwide) is on the bull run stage so the lastest 3 years surely will give you quite good return.

But if you get the 3 years chart from 2000-2003, it will be very low, some may register almost 0% return rate, some poor one even record -ve return rate.

So it is not about after 3 years UT can give you handsome return rate, which a lot of people has mis-perception on it also a lot of agents talk like this especially at current situation, using past 3 years performance of UT to persuade people to buy UT.

But rather it is largely depends on market and economy situation. But for sure, historically, UT and stock market (with good quality stock) give more than 10% average return rate over long term (talking about decades on long term, not a few year)

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 24 2007, 05:41 PM

That's about it. Unless you are brave enough to 'bang' on one stock only which is very very risky. Not worth the risk sometimes, what if 'bang' into stock like Transmile then. , sure fainted.

So diversification is essential although sometimes it drag down the return because of certain component in your portfolio.

PS: Gov positive annoucement will only boost short term trend of the stock market eventually you needs robust economy growth and improvement in company earning to drive the market to a sustainable level. Annoucement alone is not enough.

Magazine and newspaper got published the all the fund performance monthly or weekly, look out for it.
For those aggressive fund, surely perform very well in recent time due to bullishness of the market. The number 1 for 1 year period is Johor state fund followed by the CMS fund as mentioend gaining 150% for 1 year (after forumer has asked so check the newspaper published recently).
But this Johor state fund has lose more than 50% previous 2-3 year only recent Johor state related stock being 'goreng' due to the Iskandar development project then the fund recoup the losses. That's why for 1 year period then you see the 150% gain (but if you check back more than 3 years then no so impressive then since it made signficant losses previously.

Yes, it should be done this way. Economy cycle is the most influential factor in stock market. That's why you see market tumble when inflation data is out of control or economy run into recession.

Past performance only used as reference on creditibility of a fund manager. It is not about whether the fund make money or not but rather if a fund manager always outperform others then it is worth to look at.

Yup, % wise not high to meet those good agent.

I am quite annoy on those agents telling people to sell their profitable fund (just because got profit sometimes a little bit few% not because market is high or whatsoever but rather to fund for buying newly launched fund.
A poor advice.

Unless the fund is more than few ten of billions then might move/support the market a little bit otherwise with a few hundred millions won't have much effect on the market or minimal effect.
Market force is much larger than anything else, you can't fight the market alone even you have billions of fund.

Normally, local fund size including global fund most ranging a few hundred millions only.

New or old fund doesn't make any much different on the performance. It depends on their portfolio performance.

Bond yield is fixed but bond price isn't so you still can lose money in investing bond. Becareful about it. Investing in bond still need right timing to achieve good yield otherwise if getting bond yield of 5% then lose 2% in the capital depreciation due to decreasing bond price then doesn't seem so wise.

Just like previously week, a lot of gov bond price decreasing because of high interest rate expectation.

Generally the better time in investing in bond when interest rate is peak and forseeable future it will be lower down.

No address, no contact number, company name or whatsoever, more like HYIP rather than legitimate investment product.

There are some fund making 50-100% for the last year (1 year performance). Check the list of the top performance fund which is published weekly or monthly in some magazine as well as newspapers.

There is no surpise if some fund manage to do 50% last year until now, thanks to the bull run that continue until now. But bare in mind, not all fund, only some, most funds do average return rate as the market do, around 20-35% for last year.

No doubt, PB mutual is a good UT company, instead it is the top performing local fund house. But just based on your BF making 50% gain on one fund then say PB mutual is a good UT company is a bit pre-mature without much research on the market.

It depends which fund you are investing and market condition. Some better than the orther due to different strategy/nature of the fund as well as the fund managers.
Also not every year equities market can have bull run like last year, bare in mind, goes up and down in between. But long term average of 15-20% annually is considered very good already as history tell us.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 20 2007, 03:00 PM

That's the one of the problem of UT industry in Malaysia. Lack of professional personel to explain to customers instead they are just hope you quickly buy the UT from them and forget everthign else.

A lot people still don't understand how UT works, still a lot of uncle, aunties even some youngster nowadays treat it just like another FD option that can yield better return and when they saw and heard the historical of the fund performance let say 15% then when they invest they just assume they will getting 15% in the future also.
I had seen and heard a lot of people talking in this way.

The limitation on investing in global fund then just mean indirectly push for more local fund to setup or increase fund size to meet the demand then with more people invest in local UT, then it means more support/buying from the local fund in the stock market, indirectly they(EPF) will also be benefitted from it since EPF is one of the largest shareholders in KLSE.

When one invested in a fund, the fund managers need to put the money in work aka invest in stock market (for equities fund), disregard of the market level. Yes, they (fund managers) can opt to invest less if market is high but they can't totally not buying even market is sky high if received fund from the UT holders. So by articially forcing EPF withdrawal into local fund then mean at least more buying into the KLSE since EPF alone can push the market too far without other participants.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 23 2007, 02:53 PM

Yup, almost all capital guaranteed product use this kind of ratio to achieve so called 'guaranteed'.

Actually, the 'guaranteed' is just a word that sometimes look magic to some, but if you dig further how they works, it is not rocket science at all, just a simple ratio asset balancing to achieve it.

But remember in those 'guaranteed' product, due to smaller amount (normally 10-20%) is exposure to the equities side so total return is not high either since only the small portion (10-20%) is used to 'work'(investing).

Not exactly, they didn't need to do much after it lauched.

Take this way, you have Rm100. For a 3 years plan, you put RM90 into 3 years FD (3.7%) then the remaining Rm10 to buy stock said ABC stock. After 3 years, your FD become Rm100 (capital guaranteed)

So your total return after 3 years = Rm100 + ABC stock.

So basically they don't need to work hard to achieve it.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 26 2007, 05:03 PM