This is not a real index fund.
Index fund purpose is to mimick exactly what index has moved.
A real index fund should not be outperform or underperform from the what index has shown too much.
KLCI was 1300 and now is 1500, this is a fact.




Read the above quote from your posted link
54% from 94 to 2011, this is a good return?
37% from 93 to 2011, 18 years, good return?
FD is beating this performance.

I had said before, I have no doubt there are good funds that can yield good return.
But to say UT must earn good profit over the long term, is not a right statement to start with. Although some funds are consistently deliver the good, nobody dare to say it is a must even fund managers themselves.

My intention is that do not spread the statement or word, good return is 100% or a must in UT
and mainly refer to this statement only.



Seem like people are not understanding.
I never said UT cannot earn you good money.
I just said UT is not 100% must earn you good money even over the long term even economy is trending up nor I said FD is better than which UT either.

---

Added on May 7, 2011, 12:16 amI had no doubt about Public equity performance in general, but on other hand there are pocket of poor performance as well.
They are not new fund, but has been running for 4-5 years

I no mean to discourage or encourage people to invest in UT.
I know how UT can earn good money, I made decent gain in UT as well, but putting a right mindset and expectation on investment is very important as well.

This post has been edited by cherroy: May 7 2011, 12:27 AM

It is ill advised.

When you bought 1000 unit, it remains 1000 unit.

Just fund is charging 1.5% management fee on the fund NAV annually, but your 1000 unit remain 1000 unit.
This has nothing to do with top up or not.
There is no requirement or must to top up.
Also there is no such thing of sure earning money in UT nor it must be sure better than FD, nor it must be recover or not if market failed etc.

Index fund is an equity fund.
Index fund purpose is to mimick the performance of index, aka buying index linked stocks.

---

Added on June 5, 2011, 11:09 amYes, theorectically.

If bond yield is 3%
while FD is 3%, it makes no sense to invest in bond.

So bond price must go down so that it has higher yield that FD.

But some bonds are start with higher yield in the first place, so if interest rate rise is not significant, bond price may just stagnant.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 5 2011, 11:09 AM

Money market is not for anyone to "invest".

Money market fund mostly suit to corporate to place some temporarily significant pile of cash.

Bond fund is bond fund
Money market fund is money market fund.
2 totally different.

A bit different.

Unit trust - invested in equities, bond, and reit also.

Reit - own the property through pool of money, and hire property manager to manage the property to collect rent.

---

Added on December 9, 2011, 3:24 pmThere is no safe investment, may be except FD.


This post has been edited by cherroy: Dec 9 2011, 03:24 PM

I only know, DDI, DCA 100% works and good for the agent and fund house.
Automatically income earner every month/year, without a sweat nor word.
No offence.

DDI, DCA, whatever, works if fund is finally generating profit over the long term.
But not every fund must generate profit, there are funds making a loss.
In this scenario, whatever DDI, DCA, potential make one sink into deeper hole.

DDI, DCA has nothing to do with risk management, it doesn't reduce your risk in equities, nor spread the risk (because you are investing the same fund)
It just try to eliminate timing factor only, or spread the timing factor only.

There is no foolproof strategy, the most important criteria is about choosing the right fund which is performing.
Not DDI or DCA or whatever.

My personal view,
Balanced fund is rip off in term of service charge.

Balanced fund normal consist of 50:50, or 60:40 between bond and equities.
While balanced fund has service charge of 5% as same as equities fund. While bond fund service charge is range from 1%-1.5%.

If you invested 10k in balanced fund, Rm500 gone.
If you split it yourself and invested 5K in equities and 5K bond fund respectively, RM 250 + RM50 = RM300 gone.
While you can have the same effect of the balanced fund portfolio, of 50:50 bond:equities.

Generally, balanced fund is not going to perform better than equities generally due to bond portion that drag the performance, if market doing good time, why pay more or same with equities fund for a balanced fund.

This is bullsh*t already, no offense.

Nobody has the crystal ball to know whether the fund can make profit or loss even after 14 years, let alone to say 70% or what %.

May be?
it may be after 14 years you left with 70k,
it may be 270k
it may be 1 million
it may be 50k left

Nobody knows, and no clue or whatever it may happen or not.

Past performance doesn't indicate nor guarantee how future will be.

Fund manager doesn't guarantee nor say may be how much they will make, they never said in the prospectus.

The only thing is assure is they will charge 1.5% management fee every year, and entry service charge of 5% on equities (generally most charge, some can be different, at this rate until being revised or whatever reason)

Another bullshi*t.
How can you make money, when the fund price is RM1 now, and become Rm0.50 10 years later.

More unit at low price can earn?
Every unit you bought come from your hard earned money, not the unit give birth more unit.

The only guarantee part from what you did aka RM500 every month, is your friend get a portion of 5% x Rm500.

Yes, there is no limit on it.

There is no guarantee or certain, the longer you wait, the price will become higher.
You can wait another 10 years, the price can still Rm0.50 or less than RM1.00.
On other hand, it can become Rm2.00 as well.

Longer time /= price must go up.

Even after you 14 years, the price become Rm1.10 from RM1.00, you are actually making a "loss", due to loss of opportunity aka if you put Rm1.00 in FD at 3%, or even 2%, you RM1.00 already become more than RM1.30.

40% of income into one fund?

I cannot comment on this, it is individual choice then.
I just want to say, there are many many more investment option out there.

A 38% loss after 4-5 years still very convince the fund will perform well?
Another 5 year to back to parity?

May be you have the crystal ball, then good luck.

I know a fund the loss 60-70% as well since after inception around 2008, interested as well?

I won't refrain from using the word "discount".
It may give wrong impression for some.
It is not "discount" like in supermarket sales.

It just means the fund invested into something, and after deducted the annual management yearly, now the fund total worth is 40% less compared from the start.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jan 11 2012, 10:19 PM

DDI is just mean every month or every period of time, you automatically invest some money into a fund.
Whenever you invested money in a fund, they charge you entry service charge and on top of annual management fee which is standard, disregard you are investing in lump sum, or DDI.

There is no such thing of professional help you to manage your money.

You invested into ABC equities fund, the fund manager will use your money to invest in stock market. They cannot invested into bond fund or whatever else, disregard how bad the equities will be or how well bond fund will perform.
They are obliged to invest in equities if it is an equities fund, while they can only decide the portion to invest in equities, and what kind of equities.

Please have the right mindset, fund manager is not going to manage your money, they only manage the fund according to the fund objective.
When you put money into a China fund, they have to use your money to buy China stock related, and not Malaysia stock or US stock.

If you are not familiar with UT/fund, you can start with small sum at first, then keep the rest of money for future.

DDI can be bad if you are not knowing what you are doing.
DDI can be bad if the fund is not performing.

There is needless for one must adopt DDI to invest into a fund.

Agents surely promote hard on DDI, because it means more and constant commission from it.

---

Added on January 12, 2012, 11:00 amThere is one fund that loss 60% over 4 years time frame, if doing DDI on this fund, it sinks you into deeper hole only.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jan 12 2012, 11:00 AM

Election has nothing to do or alter the fund performance.
It is bullsh*t statement to say election is coming better invest in China. No related at all.

If you don't know how China stock market is performing or issue of China stocks, please google it.
And ask those people invested in China related fund experience as well.

Money is not easy to come by, but easy to lose, so always ensure knowing what you invested before committing.

Sorry can't agree the statement DDI will help.
It works on certain circumstances.

I can answer, but I am not god.
DDI in not performing fund - greater loss incurred.

DDI only help provided the fund is performing afterwards.

Then time to buy...