It is a bit dangerous for them to do those kind of projection and a bit ignorance with the economy environment. You need to take into the account of economy growth situation and broader picture about interest rate etc.
It just shows the analyst and research try to twist here the there to make the projection magnificient. Just because this year gain 30% then make projection next 3 years 30%, sound a bit childish. Why not take the period of 1997-2007 performance, why not take 2000-2007 average. Just taking the best number out of it? which is not neutral or fair comparison.

Over long term, stock market performance average was around 15-20% which is considered quite good already.

Stock market isn't go up 30% every year surely. It is not a straight line up one. Bare in mind. Economy booming, slower growth, stagflatin, recession happened in between the economy cycle.

Don't get me wrong here, I am not saying those product is bad nor good. But just have some word on unfairness projection.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 27 2007, 10:23 AM

Reit is definitely another good alternative for those want higher yield than FD but don't want exposure too much risk. Yup, locally it is restricted only a few choice, but at least a start better than none. Late is not an good excuse why it is not doing well. We need to compete and fast react to market need, otherwise surely lose behind.

The reason why reit market is not performing as well:

1. Too high withholding tax (15% for local, 20% for foreigners) compared to regional market (Singapore, 0% for local, 10% for foreigners)
2. Rules are not relaxed enough like foreigner can't hold more than 50%, leverage % to add in new properties etc.
3. some interest conflict when large shareholder treat reit as disposal of properties to retailers while the biggest tenant is themselves.
4. Size is too small to attract foreign interest.

1 & 3 (especially 3) is the biggest obstacle current for Reit market to flourish, otherwise it is a good alternative investment tool which its risk/return criteria some sort sit in between FD and stock market.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 27 2007, 07:20 PM

Reit tax is called withholding tax not income tax as in normal dividend payout.

Yup, Dreamer is right, if local reit is more than 7-8% then only it will outshine the yield of some good stocks. There are a few reit currently that are carrying 7.5% yield but the problem is the tax, 7.5 x 0.85 = 6.3% only, almost same with stock yield already.T
That's why I said it is the main problem of local reit. If tax free like Singapore, probably will attract some investors into it and reit market will have better chance of booming. Currently, the sector is submitting propasal to gov to reduce or remove the tax, whether gov agree or not, only when the budget will know.

There are some reit problems that I posted in the Reit thread

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 29 2007, 04:17 PM

It is ex-dividend.

Reit can't spare from the slump if stock market really plunge, may be the degree of drop would be less, only bond will be benefitting from the market plunge (normally) Reit is more sensitive to interest rate environment even if stock market is good if interest rate is going up still reit will have hard time but normally when interest rate goes up significantly, generally stock market performance won't be so good either although periodically got some exception due to indifferent economy situation.

Actually if look back carefully, stock market (same with equities fund since we are talking at fund section) is having good time for the last 3-4 years since about 2003 aka the bull run has last that long, consider magnificent already by historical standard. May be if can go higher if world economy still rosy ahead but if the bull stall, it is no surprise at all. Just the late comers in the market don't enjoy much of the profit in between. Still lot of long term investors and old timers are making hefty profit even market drop more than 20%.

For KLSE
1991-1993 super bull run
1994-1995 mini bear/correction
1996-1997 mini bull
1997-1998 super bear
1998-2000 almost stagnant or recovery (can't say bull run, recovery is more suit)
2000-2002 stagnant to a bit lower
2003-2007 bull (early stage not so significant only 2006 onwards is more significant)
2007 ????

This post has been edited by cherroy: Aug 5 2007, 04:57 PM

It is a property reit type of fund, already got several others similar global/regional fund launched about 1-2 years ago and others already making significant gain when property boom in US, I also had one but sold off already (gain about 30%) at about 1Q this year. But recently drop quite significantly (more than 10+%) in 2 months time due to property slump in US.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Aug 8 2007, 07:44 PM

About new fund will drop less, this is totally bullshit, how much the fund increase or drop is depended on their portfolio, not new or old.

Rm1.00, RM0.50, Rm0.25 or Rm10, it makes no difference. Calculate back with %, it is the same, just psychological different.

To be more precise, Fed didn't cut the Fed fund rate aka interest rate as people familar with, it is still 5.25%, the friday movement is cut the 'discount window' interest rate 0.50% where Fed specifically lend money to the investment banks/banks to help them with liquidity issue (from 6.25% to 5.75%).

The turbuluence come from the valuation on those mortgages securities, until now, banks value it as 'mark to the market' which is priced before subprime crisis happening, now with subprime woes, this should be lower down, but banks didn't lower their valuation on it on their books.
Just like you buy a stock Rm1.00 but after you bought it didn't trade afterwards, so in your book value you still treat it as Rm1.00, but actually market has drop, just the stock didn't trade so the closing price of Rm1.00 remains, doesn't mean it is value at Rm1.00. So this create uncertaincy in the market for investors.

There are plenty of scam out there, mostly pyramid scheme and HYIP that claim to be earning 1-2% daily.

Better check before investing into some fund and always go to the well known investment house like Public Mutual, OSK-UOB, Hwang, AMinvest etc or through banks also a good option. Don't invest into some investment house that nobody knows about it and check with the SC if want to invest in some unknown company, see whether it is legitimate or not.

If mutual fund fee did go below 3% then it is good option for those unfamilar with stock market to invest with. Now, only you invest significantly like more than 50k or 100k then only can get this rate.

Which investment house and branches? one month only replying? market already can go very far.
We should avoid doing business with inefficient people, it might mean lots of money in stake in financial market.

Balanced fund is the least worth among all. if really want 'balanced' then better split the initial money into 2 then one invest in equity one in bond to achieve the 'balanced'. In this way your service charge (5-6.5%) is much lower.

No offence, not making sense.

The distribution or dividends given (for stock) is from profit which already earned previously over the financial year or half year, not the money suddenly being made before distribution, aka the fund NAV will creep up slowly over time before the distribution if the fund is making money, buying prior before distribution date won't make any instant gain from it as after it is being 'ex', it will deduct out the fund NAV or stock price.

Total asset value = numbers of various shares in portfolio x respective share closing price + cash + (any options or others asset of the fund)

However, fund has no transparency in revealing their portfolio aka they generally don't reveal how much exactly they got in their portfolio which I don't like this part of UT industry in Malaysia besides the high front end load (service charge).

This post has been edited by cherroy: Sep 3 2007, 11:37 PM

I agree daily is too frequent and time and resources consuming but at least quarterly will do. But current they don't.

Just to remind folks out there and not to mislead by the above statement totally, the 6-8% is not guaranteed, it depends on the volatility of the currency rate.
I had gone through its prospectus, it clearly still can have zero return rate if the volatililty of the Euro/USD doesn't exceed its hurdle rate and its targer rate.
Basically this fund is unique, the Euro/USD rate up or down is not matter, the fund will make money through volatility by its option, if the volatility is high aka as mentioned 6 average best - 6 average worst (in term of % and on each monthly), while if the time dispersion rate > target rate (around 3.75 max, will only deteremine after the fund bought the option in the market) then it gives extra 5% return rate
So the total return rate of the fund = 5% + time dispersion rate - hurdle rate

if the time dispersion rate below its hurdle rate then you get zero return.

Don't get me wrong here, I am not saying the fund is good or bad, just to share some inside and details of the fund. Just the word of 'will' should be changed to 'may'.

cannot use past performance to judge future performance. The fund can earn so much because last year until this mid year, worldwide stock market is having good bull run, that's why even capital guaranteed fund also can achieve that high return due to a portion of the guaranteed fund is tied to call option, equities or derivatives product that make singificant gain.
If purely equity fund some even achieved more than 50% gain which is quite norm for the last year performance.

But to be realistic, do you think we will have another bull run ahead that will run the market higher more than 50% like last year, if so then the your expectation is fair, if not then lower return rate is expected but if market turns south then might as well zero return rate for those capital guaranteed fund and losses for equities fund.

Not promoting any fund here nor discourage people to buy fund.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Sep 6 2007, 09:20 AM

It cannot be said which one is better, as future performance, market trend, economy situation still is everybody guess.

But historically over long term, most dividend fund performance is better than balanced fund because balanced fund portfolio consists of bonds which normally move in oppposite direction with equities so drag on the performance of the fund when stock market is good. But bonds perform well when economy situation is not good (when economy situation is bad, interest rate is expected to go down, by then stock market generally doing poorly in the early recession period) At that time, balanced fund will outpace the equities fund in this period.
Also balanced fund is less volatile than equities because bonds volatility in nature is lesser than equites so does it risk.

Personally don't like balanced fund at all, because it consist of 2 portfoio (bonds and equities) which normally (90% of the time) move in the direction against each others, when bonds up, equites down while when equities is having bull run, bonds price drop.
Also, balanced fund has higher front end load or service charge compared to you bought separately aka one bond fund and one equities fund. Personally, if really want a 'balanced' portfolio, better buy separately as you have total control of the flexibility to adjust the portion of the bond and equities depended on market and economy situation.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Sep 13 2007, 04:11 PM

The 15% is the potential return, if the market condition is favourable and meet the condition of the structured product then it will give 15% pa return rate. If not might be 0% as well.

There are plenty of structured product nowadays, just some are not published as normally structured product minimum investment amount is RM250K, the lesser i had seen is Rm100k, none of it less than Rm100k as far as I know.

Looking at it (The RHB structrured as mentioned), it should be some sort like dual currency structured product. For dual currency structured (as I haven't know the RHB product yet), you pick one of the currency let say NZ, so the structured product will set the spot rate and strike rate for it. Spot rate is the currency rate under trading let say now is RM2.58 (NZ) and strike rate set is Rm2.57. So when the structured product matured, if at that day the spot rate>strike rate (higher than RM2.57), then you get the 15% p.a. but if lower then you get zero return and your Rm250k being converted to NZ at RM2.57.

It is very dangerous/risky to give cash as you have no proof it is from yours as the agents can run away with it. No offence to anyone, although I think most of the agents/bankers are trustfulness but always becareful when dealing with money.

A cheque issued to your name is much proper way to do. A responsible bankers or agents also generally not willing to accept cash also, they will advise you to write a cheque.

I think what he/she tries to say is that:
PM is good, no doubt about that, but it doesn't mean all the funds under them is top performance in their category, some others investment house also got good top performance fund as well, so it doesn't mean when want to invest in UT, it must be or must choose PM, can as well others fund like OSK-UOB, CIMB, Hwang etc which some of their funds are as good, especially in global fund, PM or PB series funds are lagging others.

Don't get me wrong, PM or PB series funds are good in general term, just one always can broaden their view and options when want to invest in UT.