FSM and PM, totally different level...
Like ASx thread and FSM.

bro - er..
high current IRR may not prove one's methodology is logically sound as a process leh
it may be pure luck.

it is the repeatable process & logical nature of a process (to it's "working environment") that can prove to be good logically & risk/rewarding.

heck, i'm sure of few of us have pre-2008 mutual funds held till now, giving >15% IRR
ask us to repeat performance on selecting such... sure dunno how/why wan bwhahaah
thus, doesn't mean high IRR = good, logical & repeatable/consistent

---
Other than the above,
some people "talk" with not-too-logical cause-effect, such as as those that think buying PURELY based on low NAVs = better win rate.
VS
NAVs are by default, mathematical values derived from the fund's held
(cash + stocks/bonds + other stuff like derivatives)
LESS
(calculated management & other fees/costs)
LESS
Distribution

Thus, if one were to argue just by buying low NAV, akin to buying a stock, instead of "holistic view".. susah to discuss logically lor

Even the "distributions" Vs "dividends" argument is not too logical coz:
1. PRICE of stock: market forces directly decides price of a stock before & after/ex dividends
VS
2. NAV: purely mathematical - it is the composite value of all stuff held,
INCLUDING DIVIDENDs from stocks & Interests from cash/debt vehicles held,
thus even if NAV goes down right after distribution point.. it's purely maths, not the buying/selling of the mutual fund.

Thus properly comparable meh - method for stocks vs method for mutual funds?
sigh..

sorry ar, not sighing about U, just some folks that insist "general truths" can be applied "literally"/specifically to mutual funds - eg. buy low/sell high.

Just thinking out loud - no absolute right/wrong

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Oct 6 2016, 11:48 AM

The sifu whom you have mentioned did a good job in giving guidances on investment. It is very resourceful and beneficial to most of the forumers here.

The investment objective is profit maximisation, and there is no single way to do it, there are always heterogenity in investment approaches to achieve that objective.

I like the "Sponge Metaphor" that you use in Learning. As Confucius sayings: 知之为知之，不知为不知，是知也。
Just be humble and you would learn more.

IRR of 7.7% in a span of around 3 years old portfolio = OK lar. In line with some of the more conservative type balanced fund. Guy3288, I recalled you are a young person. If it is true, that is, my memory serves me right, you should bump up your IRR by including more equity fund. Show me again your total port and let me look at it again.

Xuzen

India, India, oh my lovely India

Avangelice sure very happy. Best timing the market DCA top up EV4R!

Xuzen

This post has been edited by xuzen: Oct 6 2016, 12:00 PM

Boss, I think he's almost 100% EQ on FSM. He is also vested in ASx fixed priced funds

Me la, my FI allocation is > my age

You need to live till 100 years old to have a full FI allocation.
Today I have learnt new thing, an equation:-

For moderate investor:-

FI allocation = 100 - Equity allocation (age), so if you are 40 years old, then equity allocation should be 40%, FI 60%.

The equation got problem , if like that means grow older will put more into equities rather than fixed income... Should be the other way round

Risk Tolerance by Time frame
An often seen cliché is that of what we'll refer to as "age-based" risk tolerance. It is conventional wisdom that a younger investor has a long-term time horizon in terms of the need for investments and can take more risk. Following this logic, an older individual has a short investment horizon, especially once that individual is retired, and would have low risk tolerance. While this may be true in general, there are certainly a number of other considerations that come into play.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/07...k_tolerance.asp

For me, no hard and fast rule in investing.

Investing should be stress free and fun! Life is short.

If you make money, good for you lor. What is IRR? What is ROI? What low NAV or high NAV?

Yes, a very good idea.
Know when to go in must also know when to come out too....

I think ROI is return of investment. Not sure bout the rest

thanks for replying...
i think Vanguard does not mean to seek answers to those questions....literally...

this Vanguard is well versed in those things....

Yup, I agree on the first part.
Of course, ppl will say high will go higher.
But what I will do is to take a break, especially with so many uncertainties lying in the near future (US presidential election, Fed rate hike, Deutsche Bank.....)
No need to rush, save some bullets and shoot when the clues are clearer.

* Sifu dun be angry lah....just my personal thinking. Regular DCA is a good method, just that I want to took some gamble

Start counting from the day you realized you were on the wrong path.

Where do you keep your "reserve" ? Do you keep them in the banks, or you keep them as fixed income funds and switch over from time to time ?

This post has been edited by puchongite: Oct 6 2016, 02:36 PM

hhehe

IMHO, if want all "those stress", do direct stocks or derivatives more worthwhile for the time & effort
"trading" mutual funds.. a bit waste of effort & time lor since it's generally opaque (ie fund holding what at specific point in time).

This statement revealed your lack of ability to think.
call your self "physician" some more.......malu lah.

if your brain is working/logical, you should know hypocrisy is not a sensible word to use there,
as I did not tell others not to something that i did (it) myself.
I do market timing, i tell others, yes go ahead and do it.

if you have a bone to pick with me, poke at the right spot dont just tickle me.



you may be a good boot licker in buttering up your sifus.
but if you dont know how to use your brain, and simply shoot from your hips,
you may be shooting at your sifus rather than at me.

Go read what you say in red.

Who champions in throwing insults?
Who back it up with calculations?
Who is proven mathematically correct? your sifu??





i have shown my portfolio already. dont want to aggravate that butthurt Avangelice more.



I fully agree with you there.
Why must have hard and fast rule?

As long as you can make money.
But IRR* can tell you how good is good.
ROI no use la, if time no taken in it.

Yes then can forget about low NAV and high NAV
when you already have high IRR!




*At least 3 years period, the longer the more indicative it is.

If like that my IRR >10% lor

Buat apa nak tipu sendiri? Past failure is part of your history, self-denial won't do u much benefit.

That is why I have both IRR and rolling 12-months returns to keep track my investment performance.

This post has been edited by Pink Spider: Oct 6 2016, 02:40 PM