In lieu of missing Ponzi two corr - coeff input, I used RHB - AIF as a proxy since both of them have high correlation, Algozen™ ver four simulated and none of the port has RHB - AIF in it. This, I may conclude that if I were to put in Ponzi two UTF into the mix instead of RHB - AIF, the result will probably be the same with Ponzi two UTF as well.

Xuzen

Next Algozen™ ver four readings shall take place early Jan 2018. I do not want to rebalance too many times. I think it does not add value if rebalance too frequently. Twice a year should be good enough, unless something major event happens or in finance parlance "black swan" event occurs.

Algozen™ ver three went for one an a half year without making any major changes until idyllrain came up with her / his teaching on how to obtain MYR denominated correlation matrix table.

Xuzen

To me the Morningstar pdf report's only usable part is the correlation matrix. The rest mumbo - jumbo part, I just ignore....

Let me give you a simile; if you look at a pretty girl, you generally look at the general feature and thinks she looks pretty. But if you look too closely, and start noticing too detail like all her hair, skin pigmentation, discoloration, wrinkle, white hair, mole, etc... then it becomes unattractive. Similarly, that pdf file contain too much information and too detail, making the whole thing become unattractive.

Xuzen

What happenned? What happened? What is it about timing?

" Awesomeness doen't need timing "

This post has been edited by xuzen: Jun 6 2017, 06:04 PM

Go to stock market thread and tok - kok there.

Go to stock - market thread and blow water there...

Don't look at NAV, NAV can be manipulated by the Fund Manager using various method such as unit split, distribution, bonus split etc etc... it is very artificial.

To look at return, look at its CAGR or annualized rate of return on investment (ROI).

Xuzen

This post has been edited by xuzen: Jun 8 2017, 11:00 AM

To further add to those who view MYR in the negative light;

I am echoing / parroting what my Licensed Financial Planner, LFP told me earlier this year. He attended his finance firm's quarterly briefing and his company Chief Investment Officer, CIO told the attendees that MYR weakness is not due to oil price low (it is a contributory factor) but not the ultimate factor because O&G constitute only a small percentage of export for Malaysia nowadays.

He attributed the MYR weakness to:

I) Market perception especially the due to the unending tiga suku AmDeeBee saga. The key word here is " perception ".

II) The unresolved ballooning of external debt to fx reserve. This is not a perception problem , but a real issue.

Item ( II ) is a bigger contributor to the weakening of MYR than depressed oil price.

Xuzen

p/s To further expand on item ( II). Let us say you have RM 1,000.00 in your pocket but you already owe Ah Long RM 2,000.00. Let us say you need to borrow another RM 1,000.00 to fund your lifestyle. Will the Ah Long loan you the money at the old interest rate or at higher interest rate. Now the Ah Long will view you with a different risk rating liao wor....

Because of this risk, your credit worthiness takes a tumble and hence people will not want to take your risk. Your currency which is peg to your worthiness hence takes a tumble.

The above is a very lay-man way of explaining external debt to fx reserve.

LOL! Snort guffaw giggles cough Ramjade cough...

The answer you're gonna get here will mostly be personal opinion which is neither wrong nor right. But they are not objective nor rationale.

Will you go and ask a carpenter which do you prefer? A hammer or a screw - driver?

To a carpenter , he prefers a hammer when he needs to work with a nail and a screw - driver when he needs to work with a screw. To complete a project he will definitely need to nail and screw.

Likewise, a holistic financial package will need to utilize FD, UT etc. Don't look at FD or UT as a preference. Look at them as tools found in the tool box of a holistic financial planning exercise.

Xuzen

LOL LOL LOL


This post has been edited by xuzen: Jun 12 2017, 11:39 AM

Yar lor... simply simply play UTF wan. Go and listen to that don't know who Algozen™ ver four etc etc ....

Dia siapa? Warren buffet meh?

Xuzen

I think that Algozen feller either works at FSM

or

FSM and Algozen™ ver four are looking at the same set of data and hence it is very plausible to come to a similar conclusion.

I think the latter is very plausible....

Xuzen

The most obvious answer is corr-coeff figure. RHB - EMB offers greater diversification (i.e., smaller corr-coeff va;lue) to the overall port compare to RHB AIF.

Xuzen

Somebody sounded a false alarm on TA - GTF. Saying drop 20%, but in actual fact is a unit split, which in effect does absolute NO SH1T to your total investment. However, the NAV aka fund price would drop with a loud thud.

This brings me to revisit the topic of tracking a fund performance using NAV as though they are tracking share price. NAV can be manipulated or " adjusted " upon the whim and fancy of the fund manager and you have absolutely no say in that department. And this " adjustment " happens often. That is why I recap that tracking NAV is an exercise in futility.

Xuzen



p/s TA - GTF in my port is still awesome and handsome like him:


This post has been edited by xuzen: Jun 14 2017, 12:50 PM

D1U ! D1U ! D1U !

All these unit splits ( TA - GTF ) and distribution ( Esther bond UTF ) really mess up my pweetty pweetty port. Previouly all were nice and green , today login the port is now covered with splatter of red here and there...

Have to manually calculate to bring in back to normalcy. Darn Sien wan!

D1U !

Xuzen

This post has been edited by xuzen: Jun 15 2017, 11:39 AM

Hari ini dalam sejarah:

For those who have just jumped on the Unit Trust Fund bandwagon and think that Public Mutual charging 5.5% sales charge is expensive, many years ago, before the existence of fin-tech startup like FSM or Phillips or Areca, 5.5% is considered cheap. OSK (now called RHB Asset management) used to charge up to 6.5% for their Equity Trust Fund.

Back then there are actually people who pays 6.5% sales charge to enter into Unit trust fund and on top of the already 1.5% annual management fee.

Xuzen

This post has been edited by xuzen: Jun 15 2017, 02:40 PM

Compared to now it is a rip-off, but back then there were no competition and I think Pub-Mutual was their natural competition and Pub-Mut won the war because they offered something better at a cheaper price. (5.5% vs 6.5%).

Now, FSM / Phillip is winning the war against Pub-Mut.

If Pub-Mut wants to survive, they need to offer a DIY no agent option at 2% or equivalent. They already have a very good online platform in the form of PMO. It is just they are too slow to adapt to modern competition.

Also, they need to fire their current bunch of loser Fund Manager. They SUXS!

Xuzen

As of today, 17th of June 2017, my TA - GTF has dropped around 3.00 - 3.50% (rough estimate) unit split already factored in.

My activity for this month, which is also my first transaction post Algozen™ ver four:

1) Buy RM 500.00 into TA - GTF

2) Buy RM 1,000.00 into KGF

3) Buy RM 500.00 into Selina Reits.

Xuzen

p/s did you notice that when TA - GTF dropped, Selina Reits went up? Another beauty of diversification.

This post has been edited by xuzen: Jun 17 2017, 11:46 AM

Lu ada apa port?