Wei.. in ancient times, average age to kick the bucket was 30-40 leh, so much for LOOOOOOONG term investments eh?
These days, as long as we have the re$ource$ and a$$et$, can start family even at 50 lar (for guys).
Our biological clock keeps running and running if we take care of our health lar

Educate & liberate investors?
as opposed to typical Sales agents liberating investors' $?
Bro - sometimes hard lor. Some folks just insist on "i want as much as possible, as fast as possible". These types, i think should intro to PCSF-heboh or any other "mutual funds 20%+pa sure wan" agents

---

Added on August 25, 2012, 12:39 pmah crap - i tertekan CTRL-gawdknowswhat and all my typing gone.
fish!

Summary (too damned lazy to retype in detail):
I'll split the "group"
eg.
XIRR() for 1st rounds then stopped
another grouped transaction rows for another XIRR() for my new start/new methodology

FYI - i assume U are tracking per transaction right?
Thus, say for PFEPRF which i use 2 methods to invest - TwinVest (Programmatic) & Trend(Opportunistic),
i'd have 2 different groupings of records/rows for PFEPRF and 2 XIRR()

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Aug 25 2012, 12:39 PM

Hi DewVP.
Er.. needn't Mr. Mr. lar. Makes me feel ancient (thanks to Pink's posting about 30s = not young liao)

Just to clarify - i didn't use my crystal balls (i've none!) yar - the 1700 and 1300 scenario was what my broker shared with me (according to his company's analysts).

Your Qs, generally i'd say.. i've no idea but based on general fear/greed:
1. IF KLCI plunges, MOST share prices drop.
Note - after a small dip with the rest in 2008, NESTLE climbed even higher while the rest kept falling (if my foggy memory serves me right)

2. Usually, when prices of shares fall, my take on the average Joe's reaction:
a. Hit 10%.. Nah, will rebound wan.. paper loss only
b. Hit 20%.. Ok lar.. correction only..
c. Hit 30%.. err..
d. Hit 40%.. dagnabit.. bl**dy market phui - getting rid of these and never going to touch (sold near the bottom)
Put $ in FD, Gov bonds and bond funds better (and there by chasing the bond/bond fund prices)

Bonds Vs Equities are usually inversely related, though NOT perfectly inversely related (thus your guess is as good as mine),
unlike bond prices Vs banks' (central bank OPR) interest rates

3. Bonds and bond funds prices usually do well when there's uncertainty in the stock market.
Simple concept:
a. IF the "safe" and insured FD gets U 3%pa, will U take out from FD to put in bonds or bond funds if U can get 5%pa to 6%pa?
People usually answers yes - worth the risk for the rewards.
Thus, if FD rates goes down, ppl move $ out to bonds/bond funds or equities, and vice-versa

b. IF a stock, say AMWAY, can get U a net dividend yield of 5%pa at current price + possible capital appreciation VS bond/bond funds' 5%pa to 6%pa, would U take $ out of your bonds/bond funds & buy some AMWAY stocks? Note that AMWAY stocks can fluctuate - that's the additional risk taken.
No?
What if AMWAY's DY% is 9%pa at current market price (ie. after falling more)? Getting interested right?
Reverse the situation and U also get how the stock markets' uncertainty or wild swings can affect bond prices (ppl chaising up bond prices by buying)


4. if KLCI drop, they say should switch from bond to equity?
er.. who? Traders? Investors? Based on what Entry / Exit rules?
I think it depends heavily on one's own investing or trading plans.
Eg.
For me
a. say KLCI climbs up and up and i have VERY abnormal profits from stocks, i'd be holding too much % in Stocks and i'd sell some and buy bonds (rebalancing) or properties
b. say only LPI climbed up and up for 3 years then falters and falls 10% from the top - i'd cut loss/take profit as my other trigger to sell is a Trailing Stop Loss.


Please note that all the above is just my personal logic and perspective yar, not textbook nor gospel truths.
Just a thought

Konbanwa.

Hey Pinky - i was getting semi-excited last evening with the 1.x% drop in KLCI unfortunately all ECB broke loose (the piggy bank to buy bonds) later the same day
Similar with the Shanghai IDX fall fall fall UP!

Boing!
Looks like still gotta wait it out more.. i hate being a vulture "waiting for things to die", i feel like killing something NOW!


This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Sep 7 2012, 07:24 PM

exactly my worries.
Thus, my better half (Ms Excel) keeps me more "balanced" heheh

KLCI? hah - Shanghai baby, Shanghai IDX. Dang thing still 200+ over my 1st entry target
KLCI already have my targeted "EXIT" (take profit) if it continues dropping to a point.

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Sep 11 2012, 12:02 PM

hehehe I bought 2 entries PIX base on Trend in 2011 Dec & 2012 Jan, thus waiting to exit

Pink & gang - QE3 unleashed!!
<face palm> i shd have bought more of CIMBC25 (on Mon/Tue)

eh? China mana ada peak ar? CIMBC25 = ETF on 25 China stocks
Bought when i couldn't tahan & needed to scratch a wee bit on Mon/Tue - just used 1/3 of $ put aside for China ETF to scratch a bit

Bonds? hehe - holding a wee bit too much Fixed Income kinda assets, thus "can't touch that" <hammer time>

Heheh - ALSO should have bought more gold last month

Same start here bro
a. Small consistent investing - cost effective via mutual funds

b. Bigger investing - when combined with sis & mum, can go do direct stocks, REITs, properties OR when my savings & EPF hits a certain number, coz like Gark mentioned, there is an "economic order quantity" (EOQ in old LCCI English) to make each transaction worth the cost %.
Just as an idea for U, for me currently:
KLSE stocks effective minimum lowest cost % = RM4K+/- per transaction
VS
SGX's SGD8.6K (eek) per transaction

SSE climbing up again (lunch time today)
Arrgh.. dagnabit get down (and boogie)

heheh - i AM invested already.. just have extras built-up / reallocate (a couple of lump sums) after liquidating an asset

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Sep 27 2012, 01:48 PM

er.. it's once in 3 months can withdraw from EPF A/C1
and the "minimum amount in account 1" is easily hit lar (and i'm an average income earner)
+
If U think such are limitations and letting EPF take care of everything, it's fine & dandy
However, IF the BULK of your retirement $ is handled by ONE body/person... not worried meh? Especially with all the shenanigans happening

Just a thought - no right or wrong yar

EPF withdrawals for investments go back to EPF IF U SELL. U can always SWITCH right?

True, EPF "cannot" make a loss with minimum 2.x%pa dividend (i forget the minute details).
However, 2 things bother me (it may be just me - i'm a bit of a control freak ):
1. In the long run (EPF is LOOOOOONG run mar - cant touch a/c1 until we retire or quit the country),
EPF's average 5%pa+/-
VS. a so-so equity fund 8%pa... hm.. i prefer the later please.
Add to the fact that i can "sai lang" with my accumulated EPF $ held in bond funds when (NOT if.. it's just a matter of when ) equity market goes to hell.

2. Less % of my retirement $ is directly involved some "funny" loans to the politicians/Gov
Coz in PM + Amera/HLeB mar UNLESS EPF force everyone to sell and put back $ lar. IF that happens.. game over man, game over. MY will be the next Zimbabwe.

Hey - no "cash flow impact" investing
Good way to "excercise" / "train" one's mutual fund investing BEFORE going gungho with cash.

Just a thought - no right or wrong yar

er.. cash dividends?
Never took such option wor and logically, if available as an option, it will go back into our EPF A/C1
As for my Amera/HLeB - cash dividends goes into my "cash a/c" which i use for buying KLSE stocks, not back to EPF

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Oct 16 2012, 09:40 PM

heheh - no U can't (withdraw cash into your pocket).
Though i found something interesting which U may find useful for your Asset Allocation
PM me if U are curious - i don't think it's right to put it in public though it's OBVIOUS to investors in KLSE. Just in case lar.

Sorry ar mods - serong / off-tangent from "normal" mutual funds a wee bit.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/dollar-cost-...Y3Rpb25z;_ylv=3

Is Dollar-Cost Averaging Overrated?
Snippets:
The result: The lump-sum method delivered higher returns compared with the 12-month dollar-cost averaging method about 66% of the time regardless of whether an all-equities, all-bond, or 60% equity/40% bond allocation was used.

The authors note that the longer the dollar-cost averaging time frame, the greater the chance of the lump-sum method outperforming.

It's also worth noting that while lump-sum investing consistently outperformed dollar-cost averaging, the average rate of outperformance was relatively modest. Using a 60/40 equity-bond allocation in U.S. markets and dollar-cost averaging over a period of 12 months, the authors found that after 10 years the initial $1 million investment would have grown to $2,450,264 on average using the lump-sum method versus $2,395,824 using dollar-cost averaging, a difference of about $54,000 or 2.3%.

So the Vanguard study proves it's always best to invest in a lump sum if possible, right? Not so fast. As the authors concede, during market declines, the dollar-cost averaging method often performs better because it helps mitigate the effects of falling share prices, whereas the lump-sum method puts all the capital at risk in the market at once.

----------
IMHO (your mileage may vary):
a. it's all about risk (exposure of capital) to rewards.
b. in a so-so average market, dollar averaging, value averaging or a combo is good for controlling exposure (other than an over-arching Asset Allocation lar)
c. in an already down market (end 2008 / early 2009), lump sums would do statistically better coz lelong sale...
but (there's always one) don't lar "sai lang 100% cash in", may be in lump sums of 2 or 3 tranches. Heck, after falling 40% - 50%, wild value lelong prices BUT who says market can't fall another 20% or more from there? Those who says no, take a look at 1997-1998, double dips in KLSE

Just sharing some thoughts, no perfectly right/wrong yar

Below are just pure opinions yar, not gospel truths.
hehhe - depends on WHICH market
MY - i think it's like near/on the top of a roller coaster's "hill".. be AWARE getting in now
SG - so-so
Shanghai - looks slight recovery started a couple of weeks ago. at 21xx VS 2008/2009 norms of 19xx and lowest 18xx, i bought 1 tranche in already earlier
US - very worried about Jan's "fiscal cliff". Looks similar to MY currently

Bro - from my reading and logic, US' Gov spending craze is POWERING private businesses' profits.
When fiscal cliff comes & IF they actually cut spending... koyak man their market's businesses' profits
IMHO lar

---

Added on October 25, 2012, 11:34 amhehe - U've got an elephant's memory. CIMBC25 ETF to be specific

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Oct 25 2012, 11:34 AM

http://www.thereformedbroker.com/2012/10/2...-dumb-bastards/
33 Times, You Poor Dumb Bastards

Joshua M Brown October 26th, 2012
I'm going to say this here and now for posterity and I hope you bookmark it:

There's going to be such a brutal bond investor slaughter at some point over the next decade that the streets of Boston's mutual fund district will run red with blood, the skies will be shot through with the lightning and thunder of unexpected capital losses and those who manage to survive will envy the dead.

Now a slaughter in bonds will not look like an equity market crash, the volatility characteristics are different and bonds eventually mature. But in some ways it will feel much worse than a stock crash because the money parked in bonds is thought of as low or no-risk.

The fixed income guys know what's going to happen, too. Why do you think the Bond Kings at PIMCO and DoubleLine are pushing into equity funds? They're getting three-year track records under their belts for when the big switch comes.

And it will come.

You know how I know this? Because you lunatics are plowing money into fixed income at all-time low interest rates during the parabolic final phase of a 30-year bond market rally. You are going limit-up long into one of the most obvious blow-off tops in the history of investing. And you're doing this with almost guaranteed inflation ahead of us and only the prospects of negative real rates of return on your T-bills.

And you're doing this because you are mistakenly worried about a possible 20% drawdown in equities at some undetermined future point in time. Many of you are worried about this even despite the fact that you've got 15, 20, 25 years left til retirement and the actual use of your invested capital.

Would you like to know the amount of 20-year rolling periods over the entirety of the 1926-2010 period during which US stocks declined in value? OK, sure - the answer is zero. There have not been any 20-year rolling periods - start counting during any month and year you'd like - in the last 85 years in which stocks have not gone higher.

These are the facts, we use 1926 as our start point because prior to that the data is less reliable and comparable. It's not a thousand years worth of data but as Nick Murray says, the period encompasses every type of economic condition - from depression to recession to stagflation to expansion). This variation, economically speaking, validates the sample size.

Far too many investors are waltzing around as though they're somehow "safe" because of these massive bond allocations they're nurturing. They are walking beneath a dangling piano hoisted 10 stories above their heads, its shadow barely noticed in the noon-day sun.

Let me show you something - this comes from Fidelity and it is the statistical equivalent of buffalo herd charging across the prairie toward an unseen cliff:

The below-average real returns for equities during the past 12 years, in combination with the near- uninterrupted 30-year rally for bonds, has led to a recent shift in investor preferences. Since December 2007, investors have poured more than $1.1 trillion into bond mutual funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs)—more than 33 times the amount allocated to equity funds and ETFs (see Exhibit 1, below). Many institutions also have reduced long equity allocations.



Josh here - To be clear, this will ultimately revert and it will be very unpleasant for the herd. I don't know when, but as a student of market psychology and history I know that it will. I also know that it will catch many by surprise, be denied for a long time and will ultimately teach some harsh lessons about inflation, its effect on bond prices and the longer-term triumph of equities as the protector of purchasing power.

I don't hate bonds, they are an integral part of our low-vol portfolio models. But to be doing bonds instead of stocks looks suicidal to me in the context of a long-range retirement portfolio.

Remember I said it. Now if only I could nail the timing, I'd be set for life.