Wednesday 4 March 2020

What is the Ideal Long Term Investment Strategy for a 21 year old?


[–]AutoModerator[M] 1 point  
You may find these links helpful:
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
[–]molten_dragon 1 point  
What are you investing for? Retirement or something else?
[–]leapgoose[S] 2 points  
I want to build a retirement fund early on to reap as much compound interest as possible. But, I would also like the option to withdraw from this account 20 years down the line if need be for a down payment on a mortgage for my family or if I want to invest in a real estate property. I also plan to create some medium / short range savings accounts as well.
[–]EvertonFury19 1 point  
  1. Yes, smart to invest in index funds. Up to you what funds those are but you're better off for long-term investments in passive index funds.
  2. Yes, set up Roth IRA and put as much as you can and/or a traditional IRA
  3. Dividend Appreciation ETF is a way to diversify but for a 20-30+ year window, you can go for more aggressive ETFs.
[–]leapgoose[S] 1 point  
Can you recommend some more aggressive ETFs to look into please? and maybe any quick tips you have on analyzing different ETFs? Thanks!!
[–]EvertonFury19 1 point  
Take a look at the rest of Vanguard's ETF. You might want one of the ETFs that tracks the S&P 500 (VTI is much broader but compare VTI to S&P500 performance)
Of course there's no guarantee that any will do better so go with the ETFs that you feel most comfortable and knowledgeable.
[–]leapgoose[S] 1 point  
I see that there is a marginal difference in performance over the last 10 years and a marginal difference in fees -- correct me if I am wrong. I went with VTI for more exposure.
[–]EvertonFury19 1 point  
don't worry about the fees, vanguard is as close to zero as you're going to get compared to most ETFs.
VTI will give you more exposure in the US stock market but everyone compares to the S&P 500 and if you had picked VTI over S&P 500 exclusively would have missed on better returns over the past few years.
[–]penguinise [score hidden]  
My question for you guys is, would it just be smarted to invest $5,000 into VTI and VIG each instead of also having some focused individual stock picking?
It would be smartest to just put all $10,000 into VTI since it is by far the most broadly diversified among those options.
If you desperately need to scratch a stock-picking itch, $4,000 into single names in your position is probably the best time to do it, but what you'll learn sooner or later is that it's quite risky and more importantly in the long run you're not going to beat VTI.
Furthermore, should I setup my Roth IRA (since I haven't yet) first and then include these investments within my Roth IRA? Or should I just put them in any ordinary taxable investment account?
You should contribute the maximum each year to your Roth IRA before doing any taxable-account investing. Worst comes to worst you can always withdraw your original contributions from the Roth IRA without penalty - this is a really bad thing to do, but still much better than never contributing in the first place. Putting money in a Roth IRA is roughly equivalent to a ~17% one-time boost at your age from the taxes you will never pay on the growth.




What To Avoid Investing In When You’re 20-40

If you are investing, or have invested while you were in your twenties or even earlier, that is an excellent first step. However, if you have invested in the wrong things, you have missed out on excellent opportunities for your money to grow. In this post I will explain what to avoid investing in when you are just starting out your adult life.


My Investment

Regretfully, I am giving you this information from personal experience, not from “book-smarts.” In other words, I made this investment mistake and I am telling you this so you don’t have to make the same mistake. I invested money into these types of investments over ten years ago. I had purchased thousands of dollars of these investments. Eventually, I had cashed in many of them but have kept $200 to try to accrue higher interest.

Altogether the investments have accrued around $80 over more than 10 years. This may sound like a decent investment. Keep in mind that I have brought up that a 7% interest rate would double your investments over ten years. I commonly use this number because the lifetime return of investment of the S&P 500 is just less than 10%, and the inflation rate is just less than 3%. With only about 40% return over 10 years, that would mean I have an interest rate of around than 2.6%. Keep in mind, with an inflation rate of less than 3% my investment was not beating inflation. It was not even breaking even. This investment was a set of series I US savings bond.


Savings Bonds Are Overrated

Savings bonds are a form of investment where the government issues these bonds for a set amount that investors loan to them. The savings bonds can receive interest for up to 30 years, but can be redeemed before maturation. They usually make great gifts and savings, but not great investments.

Many people see savings bonds as safe investments. They are, but they are what you should avoid investing in when you are young. They have too small of a return to invest in the long term, although you can cash out your savings bonds before 30 years, the interest they accrue is too small to make up for the lack of risk.


Where Bonds Are Acceptable

Just because individual savings bonds do not make very good investments does not mean they cannot find a place in finance. Savings bonds still make great gifts, especially to young children. Children could see the value of saving and investing from these alone. Savings bonds are safe and have some return so a child would be excited to see money grow, and would want to learn how to make it grow more. Sure, the investment may not beat inflation, but what ten year old knows or cares about inflation? They will just see it as money growing. Furthermore, bond funds are useful in balanced funds to control risk, and to diversify investments. More importantly, bonds should be utilized when you are close to retirement.


Where To Invest Instead

If you are in your 20s – 40s, you should at least be considering investing in funds that are mostly invested in equities (at least 60% equities). You should avoid investing in bonds too much. Your portfolio will lean more towards growth so your money can work harder for you than the other way around. Your investments may be more prone to losses. However, unless you are planning on retiring early, you could expect your portfolio to recover within 10 years and grow further.

If you need money saved within the short term, it may be better to save your money. Savings are almost completely liquid and at least your money will be collecting a little interest instead of dust. Furthermore, there are high interest savings accounts with comparable interest to savings bonds.


Final Thoughts

Investing in bonds may not be the best financial strategy when you are young. But they make better investments than most things. Most people could spend their money as it comes or “invest” in black jack. However, if you want to forge your wealth, you need to give your wealth a little more heat. Investing in equities, real estate, or other high return of investment assets will do more for you in the long run than bonds. Besides, if you are just starting to invest in your 20s – 40s, you will be surprised at how quickly you will have to change gears to preserve your wealth.


BYPAPA FOXTROT


Author:Papa Foxtrot
Most of my life I was careful with money and learned where I should invest it. I was very lucky to have parents who taught me financial literacy when I was young. Unfortunately, I am very lucky because many people lack the financial literacy I know. The purpose of Forge Your Wealth is to teach people who are just starting out in life how to obtain their wealth or anyone who just realized they may need to learn more to handle their finances. I currently have a PhD in biochemistry, just started a job in industry (will not disclose where exactly for personal and professional reasons) and am currently married to the love of my life. I am one of the lucky few people in America who graduated with no student debts, my wife was not. Over the series of a little over 3 years we paid for our wedding with no debt and paid off her federal student loans.
View all posts by Papa Foxtrot

https://forgeyourwealth.com/2020/03/03/what-to-avoid-investing-in-when-youre-20-40/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-to-avoid-investing-in-when-youre-20-40&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-to-avoid-investing-in-when-youre-20-40


https://www.feedspot.com/#all/all

Top 25 Malaysia Investment Blogs And Websites For Malaysian Investors in 2020

Top 25 Malaysia Investment Blogs And Websites For Malaysian Investors in 2020

                                               Last Updated Mar 1, 2020
Bullbear Stock Investing Notes



About Blog Keep INVESTING Simple and Safe (KISS)Investment Philosophy, Strategy and various Valuation Methods. The same forces that bring risk into investing in the stock market also make possible the large gains many investors enjoy. It's true that the fluctuations in the market make for losses as well as gains but if you have a proven strategy and stick with it over the long term you will be a winner! 

Frequency 1 post / month
Since Aug 2008 
Also in Singapore Investment Blogs 
Blog myinvestingnotes.blogspot.comView Latest Posts
Get Email Contact







Comment:

In terms of the number of years blogging, this site ranks 4th among the 25 blogs mentioned above.   

I am amazed by how fast times fly, however, it has been rewarding and enjoyable; especially when one is passionate in this.

Very good discussion on Refinancing mortgage


[–]sunnymeek 11 points  
With their age and lack of income, I'd be looking at selling and downsizing to a smaller place that they can afford. Possibly in a cheaper neighborhood. With their equity they can buy a much cheaper place outright and be in a much better position going forward.
[–]soobak4u[S] 1 point  
I am paying the mortgage on their behalf at the moment. I'm on the deed and eventually I'll take over the mortgage as well.
[–]Gravity-Rides 3 points  
Honestly, if the house is worth ~900k as is and livable, I probably wouldn't cash out equity to finance home improvements. It sounds like you would be better off getting a lower rate and taking advantage of improved cash flow, though that comes with fees and resetting the term. If the current mortgage is variable rate, that is bad news and I would probably try to get a fixed rate regardless.
With the improved cash flow, just use that money saved every month to finance any improvements the property needs.
[–]soobak4u[S] 1 point  
The cash flow is the biggest draw but oh man having to go through it another 30 years hurts.
In terms of cash out vs not, it's only a 100 dollar difference per month. Is it not worth it then?
Thanks!
[–]Gravity-Rides 1 point  
IDK. What do their incomes / budgets and retirements look like? On the surface, sure, it's only an extra $100 per month. But it is an extra $39k that will need to be paid back with interest. It might make sense if the plan is to sell the house and downsize in a few years / months if they can recover that cost.
[–]sunnymeek 1 point  
You should definitely be looking to refinance. 4-4.25 seems high from what others have been saying they can get, so shop around some more.
As far as the best loan to do, it really depends. How old are you parents? Are they still working? Will they be able to make payments for 20-30 more years, or are you taking this over? How much can you afford?
If it's in really bad shape, 35k probably won't really fix it. But maybe having an extra $1500 a month can start making a dent in the maintenance.
[–]soobak4u[S] 1 point  
Hi thanks for the response. I did edit my post to mention why the rates are what it is but it's because my parents have no money and a not so excellent credit score.
They're going to hit their 60s and yes I'd take over in a few years. The kitchen and bathrooms are the biggest issues. They're workable but definitely need repairs. I wasn't thinking of a total overhaul but just to fix it so it'll be good for another 5-10 years hopefully?
Thanks!
[–]FlyingPhotog 1 point  
Just locked in a refi on a $465,000 balance at 3.625% with almost all the costs covered by lender credits.




Warren Buffett Explains Why Book Value Is No Longer Relevant



The Oracle of Omaha on why cash flows are more important than book value
March 03, 2020


For decades, value investors have used book value per share as a tool to assess a stock's value potential.

This approach began with Benjamin Graham. Widely considered to be the father of value investing, Graham taught his students that any stocks trading below book value were attractive investments because the companies offered a wide margin of safety and low level of risk. To this day, many value investors rely on book value as a shortcut for calculating value.



Buffett on book value

Warren Buffett (Trades, Portfolio) is perhaps Graham's best-known student. For years, Buffett used book value, among other measures, to asses a business's net worth. He also used book value growth as a yardstick for calculating Berkshire Hathaway's (NYSE:BRK.A) (NYSE:BRK.B) value creation.

However, as far back as 2000, the Oracle of Omaha started to move away from book value. He explained why at the 2000 annual meeting of Berkshire shareholders. Responding to a shareholder who asked him for his thoughts on using book value to track changes in intrinsic value, Buffett replied:

"The very best businesses, the really wonderful businesses, require no book value. They — and we are — we want to buy businesses, really, that will deliver more and more cash and not need to retain cash, which is what builds up book value over time...

In our case, when we started with Berkshire, intrinsic value was below book value. Our company was not worth book value in early 1965. You could not have sold the assets for that price that they were carried on the books, you could not have — no one could make a calculation, in terms of future cash flows that would indicate that those assets were worth their carrying value. Now it is true that our businesses are worth a great deal more than book value. And that's occurred gradually over time. So obviously, there are a number of years when our intrinsic value grew greater than our book value to get where we are today...

Whether it's The Washington Post or Coca-Cola or Gillette. It's a factor we ignore. We do look at what a company is able to earn on invested assets and what it can earn on incremental invested assets. But the book value, we do not give a thought to."

It is no secret that value as an investing style has underperformed growth over the past decade. There's no obvious explanation as to why this is the case, but one of the explanations could be that the definition of value is out of date. Buffett's comments from the 2000 annual meeting seem to support this conclusion.



No longer a good measure

Book value was an excellent proxy for value when companies relied on large asset bases to produce profits. As the economy has shifted away from asset-intensive businesses and more towards knowledge-intensive companies, book value has become less and less relevant.

What's more, as Buffett explained in 2000, book value does not necessarily represent intrinsic value. Just because a stock is trading below its book value does not necessarily mean it is worth said book value.

The same is true of companies trading at a premium to book. The intrinsic value of that business could be significantly higher than book value as book value does not tend to reflect intangible assets.

Investing is an art, not a science, and valuing businesses is not a straightforward process. Investors cannot rely on a simple metric or shortcut to assess value. Many factors contribute to intrinsic value and intrinsic value growth, and using book value as a proxy for intrinsic value is an outdated method. Even in Graham's time, it wasn't always correct.


https://www.gurufocus.com/news/1063604/warren-buffett-explains-why-book-value-is-no-longer-relevant


Learning From Peter Lynch: How to Survive a Market Correction

In the 1988 Barron's Roundtable, the guru gave some invaluable advice to investors
March 02, 2020

Peter Lynch’s track record at Fidelity Magellan shot him to fame, and to this day, many investors look up to him for advice on equity market investing. Over three decades, he has given many invaluable insights into markets and how they work.

Throughout his tenure at Fidelity, Lynch emphasized the importance of keeping the decision-making process simple. In his book "One Up On Wall Street," the guru revealed that he stumbled upon most of his best investment ideas at the mall when he was least expecting to shop for stocks.

As easy as this investment philosophy might sound, replicating Lynch’s performance can prove to be an impossible task. While there are many stock-picking lessons to learn from him, it seems especially appropriate in the current market correction to analyze how he survived significant market downturns during the period he led the fund, and the techniques he used to do so.



The 1987 market crash

On Oct. 22, 1987, the Dow fell by 508 points, or 23%. This day is now commonly known as Black Monday. This correction is the largest one-day drop in history and needless to say, there was fear and panic among both retail and institutional investors at that time. Peter Lynch was invited to the Barron’s Roundtable in 1988 while the market was still reeling from the massive losses the prior year. Some of the answers he gave the panelists are very relevant today and might help investors approach investing the right way.


Focus on company fundamentals, not on macroeconomic developments

When it comes to investing, it’s important to realize that there are a few variables that are out of the control of an investor. Global macroeconomic developments fall into this category, but investors spend both time and money on trying to be better forecasters of the next recession or the prospects for securing a better trade deal with the United Kingdom.

In 1998, Peter Lynch told Barron’s panelists:

“There’s always something to worry about. But it’s garbage to worry about these things. Philip Morris’s earnings went up about six-fold. in the last 10 years; the stock went up about six-fold. Merck’s earnings are up five-fold in the last 10 years; the stock is up four-fold. I don’t own any of these stocks; I can brag about them.”

He also listed a few stocks, including Avon Products, whose share price had declined drastically following a period of lower-than-expected earnings.

According to Lynch, the real focus of an investor should be on picking winning companies. Company fundamentals will rule over any other external factors in determining the value of an equity security in the long term. Understanding this important relationship could help generate alpha returns.

Today, the travel sector is getting hammered in the market as there’s a widespread fear of reduced travel and leisure activities on a global scale. This is true, but it’s very likely that leading companies in this sector, including Carnival Corporation (NYSE:CCL), will deliver stellar returns in the future. Carnival has very strong competitive advantages over its peers, including an economic moat, which will help it generate solid financial performance in the future, even though 2020 will be tough.

This applies to airline stocks as well. The falling stock prices do not reflect the economic reality that the demand for their services will pick up in the next decade along with the increasing disposable income in many countries across the world. According to Reuters data, business-related travel will also grow exponentially in the next five years, which is another driver of growth for the industry. Contrarian investors might want to research beaten stocks, which is the right decision according to Lynch.

A recession is coming, but there’s nothing to worry about

There’s no doubt that the U.S. economy will eventually reach a peak and report negative growth. This is called the business cycle effect, and there’s no outsmarting this. For centuries, the global economy has behaved this exact same way.



Source: Intelligent Economist

When Lynch was asked whether America was headed toward a recession in 1988, he said:

“Sure, but why should we worry about it? We had the worst recession since the Depression in 1982-’83. We had 14% unemployment, 15% inflation, and a 20% prime rate. But I never got a phone call a year before, saying we were going to have that. The stock market has a 100% record, in the last 50 years, of predicting upturns in the economy. It’s never been wrong. It’s less than 50-50 on a downturn. There will be a recession. But whether it’s going to in ’88 or ’89, I don’t know. Might be ’94. This theory that we have to have a recession every now and then — I’ve looked in the Constitution, stayed up late and read the Bill of Rights, and nowhere is it written that every fifth year we have a recession. People say, “Oh, it’s now so many months, plus a full moon, plus the election, and the Olympics, and therefore we have to have a recession.” It’s so crazy! You can have a good economy for three, four, five years”

He couldn’t have been any clearer about how fruitless it is to worry about the next crash. Nobody has ever been able to do this with any degree of certainty. However, it’s a given that markets will reward companies that are doing well. Whenever economic growth has been positive, broad markets have performed well, which is more than enough reason to trust that this will happen the next time as well. Things looked very gloomy in 2008, when fear was dictating investors’ decision-making processes. What followed was a decade-long bull run that is still intact.

Today, there’s no certainty of when the next recession is going to occur, or whether markets can continue to deliver acceptable returns in the next year. But, it’s a given that the U.S. economy will recover from a downturn regardless of how hard the fall is. With that in mind, investors should follow Lynch and continue their search for attractive investment opportunities.



Winning is almost certain in the long term when the strategy is correct

Many legendary investors, including Warren Buffett (Trades, Portfolio), have stressed the importance of thinking about the long term and not paying close attention to short term market fluctuations. When asked about the right way to approach markets, Lynch said:

“First, if you’re going to need money within 12 months to pay for a wedding or put a down payment on a house, the stock market is not the place to be. You can flip a coin over where the market is headed over the next year. I have no idea whether the next 1,000 points for the Dow or Nasdaq will be in positive or negative territory. But if you’re in the market for the long haul – 5, 10, or 20 years – then time is on your side and you should stick to your long-term investment plan. I would argue that the next 10,000 and 20,000 points for the market will be up. That’s been the long-term trend. The bottom line is to have a responsible plan for your investments and know what you own and why you own it. There’s too much at stake not to.”

This is invaluable advice for investors. The media, analysts and economists are talking about the impact of the new coronavirus and are in a never-ending race to predict how many points the Dow will drop before staging a comeback. This, however, will most likely end up being a futile task. Not a single analyst even remotely predicted that a virus would break out in the first half of 2020 and that economic growth would be challenged as a result. There was simply no way to do this, and the same is true for attempting to decipher the true economic impact of COVID-19. However, a few years down the line, it will be proven once again that corporate earnings have dictated the performance of markets, not the virus in and of itself.



Takeaway

The one thing that is in the control of an investor is his or her decision-making process. If there’s any liquidity, the best course of action is to invest such funds in the market. Selling when markets crash is not a wise thing to do, as empirical evidence suggests.

Peter Lynch emerged victorious in 1988 because he did not dispose of any of his holdings in 1987, even though markets crashed. Rather, he bought stocks, which went against the grain. Today, the markets are at a tipping point, and investors need to act as boldly as Lynch did to keep any hopes of generating positive returns in 2020.


https://www.gurufocus.com/news/1061797/learning-from-peter-lynch-how-to-survive-a-market-correction

About the author:

Dilantha De Silva
I am an investment professional with 5-years of experience in financial markets. I specialize in U.S. equities and incorporate a top-down approach to identify developing macro-level trends and the companies that would benefit from such trends. I am a strong believer that the best investment opportunities could be found in under-covered equities.

I currently work with leading financial publications including Refinitiv, Seeking Alpha, ValueWalk, GuruFocus, and TradeGrill to produce investment-related content.

I'm a CFA level 2 candidate and an Associate Member of the Chartered Institute for Securities and Investment (CISI, UK). During my free time, I enjoy reading.