Did I understand this wrongly?

This post has been edited by AIYH: Dec 30 2016, 06:42 PM

I didn't see it

Where is it?

This post has been edited by AIYH: Dec 30 2016, 06:18 PM


Attached thumbnail(s)

But they are essentially the same (no SC) and invest the same way

The only difference is the 0.25% management charge

This PRS funds actually feed from the mother fund (AMASIA PACIFIC REITS - CLASS B (MYR))

After some thought, get what you mean

Still switch or not it depends on how you understand the fundamentals and which give better future potential

If the original fund can't perform further or inferior compared to its peer (if you switched), then original stay put might not be the best option

Ultimately, it still depends on further analysis and monitoring before deciding whether making the switch is worthwhile

ps for the short circuit

You need to compare the funds by sector and region to see which fund house/platform provide better potential and return

This you need to ask AmInvestment

This post has been edited by AIYH: Dec 30 2016, 07:15 PM

For PRS (at least in FSM) I can recommend 3 equity funds (simply because conservative type doesn't worth it, better put EPF lol)

a) Kenanga OnePRS Growth Fund

This is pure Malaysia fund invested in diversed sectors, feed into Kenanga Growth Fund, but due to Malaysia situation, you may want to consider skipping this if you do not want anymore Malaysia exposure

b) CIMB-PRINCIPAL PRS PLUS ASIA PACIFIC EX JAPAN EQUITY - CLASS C

This is an Asia ex Japan fund invested in diversed sectors, feed into CIMB-PRINCIPAL ASIA PACIFIC DYNAMIC INCOME FUND - MYR, this is not a bad fund, considering that Asia ex Japan region is going to boom in the coming 2 years

c) AMPRS - ASIA PACIFIC REITS - CLASS D

This is an Asia inc Japan fund invested in REITS, feed into AMASIA PACIFIC REITS - CLASS B (MYR), aside from potential boom in Asia ex Japan region, if you think property will be the future boom too, this is not a bad fund

See below for 2 years performance (AmPRS one is less than 3 years since launch), and 3 years performance, along with affin hwang prs growth fund as a comparison

You may suggest others and discuss here if you find better choice

This post has been edited by AIYH: Dec 30 2016, 07:48 PM


Attached thumbnail(s)

You mean after age 40, they will forcefully convert all your unit from growth to moderate or conservative in similar trends?

I thought PRS you either follow their age portfolio or your own choice of fund and stick with it?

Happy new year

Enter like the format below

Open square bracket with @ with forummer name with close square bracket

forummer name

It matters.

Because the underlying asset is in foreign currency denomination, meaning foreign exchange risk.

The boost is mainly due to weakening MYR, that leads to the performance boost.

If the MYR strengthen, the performance will soar down.

That is the thing you need to take note.

Even though the underlying asset may not perform well, currency depreciation may boast the performance and vice versa.

One way to check is to compared it against other currency class of the fund (e.g. USD class)

This post has been edited by AIYH: Jan 2 2017, 05:28 PM

One way to assess is to compare the fund with its peer within the same league, for example affin hwang select bond fund is a fixed income fund invest in diverse sectors within asia ex japan region, compared some funds in the same league

Also, if you have some financial knowledge, you can also read their fund fact sheet or annual report to see what they invest into, and with some financial news, along with the performance peer comparison, you can understand why such such fund is performing or declining as a lot of factors comes into play to determine a fund's worthy

(0) fund house is the party that managed the fund (i.e. Affin hwang select bond fund is managed by Affin hwang)
(1) Annual management charge is the charges charged by the fund house for mannaging the fund
(2) Trustee fee is the charges that charged for trustee institution to protect the fund money
(3) Switching Fee is the charges charged by fund house if you decide to switch between funds
(4) Annual expense ratio is the ratio that shows how much is the expense cost as compared to the fund value (overall value, not part of the individual charges)

(1) & (2) are according to the fund and was reflected in the daily NAV value, so regardless of the platform or agents (citibank, maybank, fsm, eUT etc....), these are the implicit charges in the fund you invest

(3) only incurred when you switch to different funds.

Platform fee is the charges charged by FSM for fixed income funds. (this is different to sales charge)

The difference between citibank or bank agents or fund house agents and FSM is that the bank agents charged at normal sales charge (usually) due to human processing need

Whereas FSM, the platform is online, you can deal your investment there, so the sales charge are usually low or 0% (for fixed income fund)

p/s: the expense part is also one of the criteria you can assess when choosing a fund (i.e. if several funds perform similarly, lower expense cost signify efficient investment fund) (at least thats what i think )

If you mean by mutuak funds sold through bank agents or online platform, the published daily NAV values are net of those charges, meaning the performance are net off charges, what was displayed is the return you will get, no need of manual calculation.

However, i guess your question about projected annual return refer to insurance policy term as most of the time they use the projected term , that I am not so sure, you need to read their sales illustration fine print

A responsible agent (at least I think) should provide you the published information about the fund to the investors to let them know their informed decision

For example, FSM page on Affin hwang select bond fund, at the bottom part, you will see the prospectus, fund fact sheet and annual report for investors to read and understand what they are investing and the charges inccured

Take some time to read the FSM FAQ:

09. CHARGES, CALCULATIONS, INCOME DISTRIBUTION

Q: WHAT KIND OF CHARGES DO I HAVE TO PAY?

A: There are 2 types of charges. One is the sales charge and the other is the annual expense of the fund.
The normal sales charge for most equity funds are around 7%. However, at Fundsupermart, the advantage is that most equity funds are sold at around 2% sales charge. The sales charge is applied at purchase.

The annual expense of the fund is what is charged to the fund. This includes the fund manager's annual management fee, and other administrative fees that are incurred in the running of the fund. You do not really need to fork out additional money to pay for the annual management charge to the fund manager. They will actually deduct it from the Net Asset Value of the fund daily, and the published price will take into account of the pro-rated annual management charge.

Don't worry, in fact the TS was glad you introduced these new terms and knowledge to him as TS is just a 90s brat

He is very grateful about what the forummers here share here bringing different perspective for the TS to begin his investment journey, a fruitful 2016 for him

p/s: Just gotta hope other casual/silence forummers or the mods wont get annoyed by this

This post has been edited by AIYH: Jan 2 2017, 10:04 PM

I guess you are confused

Lets rearrange a bit

Affin Hwang Select Bond Fund is a Mutual funds/unit trust that you purchased through citibank which act as an agent and your RM is the human agent that serves you like other UT agents, and you used citionline as the platform to view your unit trust investment same like FSM

So like buying from other UT agents (the conventional method), you are paying an upfront sales charge upon investing via them. This is the same with FSM, is just that FSM sales charge is lower compared to via citibank

All the so called management expense and trustee fees are incurred daily and already reflected in the NAV of the fund, so doesnt matter u buy from bank agent or FSM, is the fund itself that charged it, not the intermediaries

If you understand what mutual funds/unit trusts are and if you read through your GE policy, you will see that the projected returns are not guaranteed (otherwise there wont be best case and worse case scenario )

The "Lion's income fund" is where part of your premium portion goes to, a unit trust investment, which you then pay sales charge and the other indirect expense like what a normal UT investment look like, to sustain your policy.

Unfortunately, Great Eastern did not publish it funds details like PHS, Prospectus, Annual eport and fund fact sheet, unlike allianz and ammetlife, at least they provide some info about their funds

You can browse through iportfolio.com.my to review its performance and compare it with other funds, i.e. libra asnita bond fund, affin hwang select bond fund and rhb emerging bond fund

Give you an example of the 3 years performance chart generated from iportfolio, you can utilize it from there

To annualized the 3 year performance,

Great Eastern LION Fixed Income = 5.11% p.a.
Libra AsnitaBond = 5.19% p.a.
Affin Hwang Select Bond MYR = 7.47% p.a.
RHB Emerging Markets Bond = 12.70% p.a.

This post has been edited by AIYH: Jan 2 2017, 10:56 PM


Attached thumbnail(s)

The charges in red are charged by the fund house, no matter you buy from citibank or other banks or oFSM or other online platform, they were included in the NAV

Please refer to the fund's PHS, prospectus, annual report and fund fact sheet

This post has been edited by AIYH: Jan 3 2017, 06:10 PM

You can say that the platform fee from FSM is their ongoing management fee for fixed income fund 0% SC (equity they dont incur platform fee, only SC)

For fixed income fund, Bank and agent normally charged upfront fee full 2% without ongoing fee (exclude promotional period), whereas FSM dont charge upfront SC, but do charge ongoing platform fee of 0.05% per quarter

Other charges will be the same as it follows the fund, not the agent

New year ma

The latest NAV you could get is 30/12/2016, of course 2017 YTD would be blank

Asia as a whole (may not be applicable to the 4 asian tiger) are consider emerging market due to their political and economic situation.

Japan, on the other hand, share the same status with US and Europe as developed market.

As such, they exihibit different market behavior and sentiment, not really comparable to analyze the whole Asia as one:)

I will suggest to sell all the above except TA europe equity

Meaning he reached his target allocation

FSM dont charge extra still hold true