đánh liêng_thể loại/loại hình cờ bạc_cá cược bóng đá hợp pháp https://www.google.com/https:/c02 Book and Weblog - Authored by Garth Turner Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:24:17 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.0.3 The unwinding https://www.google.com/https:/c02/2019/01/27/the-unwinding/ https:/c02/2019/01/27/the-unwinding/#comments Sun, 27 Jan 2019 21:26:24 +0000 /c02/?p=14959

Financial markets have done well lately, proving those who sold last month may have taken losses for nothing. Looks like there*s more to come. Simple reason. Trump.

He just had a tough week. Trump pandered to Rocket Man Kim but now there*s evidence North Korea lied about blowing up its missile sites. Satellites just found a new one. So much for his high-stakes deal-making, as it looks like the president was played.

And after more than a month of mayhem, the shutdown in Washington ended in absolute failure for the White House. Trump shed credibility, the economy lost momentum and Congress didn*t cough up a single cent for that ridiculous wall. He played the bully card, gambled with hundreds of thousands of federal workers, air safety and public respect, and lost. For nothing. Then on Friday his long-time political mentor and buddy Roger Stone was indicted. One more Trump insider headed for trial, courts or turning into a rat.

The Mueller investigation has momentum, as do the Democrats who control the House of Representatives for the next two years. After less than a month, they have tasted Trump blood and seen his fallibility. The field of candidates for the 2020 presidential election will be vast, crowded and energized. Being who he is, Trump will respond by mocking them all, becoming more extreme as 2019 rolls by.

But what does this have to do with your portfolio?


Since being elected Trump has consistently used the stock market as a proxy for his presidency and its &accomplishments.* For most of 2018 equities were at record highs, before the big swoon in Q4. That hurt. Mueller and the shutdown made it worse. Then China*s growth slowed 每 thanks to Trump*s trade war 每 and the Fed raised rates yet again. Stocks shed a quick 20%. The national mood turned sour.

Face it. Trump*s in a heap of trouble and is unlikely to recover, once Mueller reports. If he runs in 2020, he*ll lose, especially if a guy like Michael Bloomberg stands as an indy and splits the vote, or Mitt Romney gores the party by challenging his nomination. If Trump knows he can*t win, he probably won*t run, but either way he*ll be desperate for an economic legacy. Robust growth, record-low jobless rate, low taxes, high profits and soaring stocks.

This is one of the reasons 2019 will likely be a far different year than the last one. Look for a trade deal to be inked with China, for example. Better relations between the two biggest economies in the world could ignite markets. Plus, Trump is highly unlikely to shut down government again, despite his threats, in order to get his wall. That tactic won*t work any better the second time, so he*ll go for an emergency declaration instead. Interest rates will rise this year, but less aggressively than in 2018. Corporate profits are on track for an increase of more than 8%. The Trump-Xi deal will fuel expectations of better global growth and help push commodities higher. Look for oil to spurt.

All this is positive for portfolios. So will be the end of the Trump era itself, however that plays out. Two years after cheering him as an agent of growth, inflation and earnings, the sitting president has become the market*s pariah. Attacking the Fed was the final straw in December. Wall Street would rather have monetary policy it can count on than a president it can*t.

As stated, things have changed a lot, fast. Valuations of many assets have improved in the past month, but are still sitting lower than they were last summer. This is called &a sale.* For example, if you thought Apple was a great company at $230 a share, then it*s probably better at $150. (Of course buying individual securities augments risk, while investing through diversified ETFs reduces it 每 but you get the point.)

Trump was fun while he lasted. It wasn*t long. Markets now see how the unwinding may take place. He was an interlude, not a trend. There*ll be no reverting to 19th Century economic policies of walls and barriers. Nationalism may be exciting and charismatic, pure nectar for those longing for times past, but in this world it*s a failed concept.

Yep. Globalists, 1. Trump, 0. So stay invested.

https:/c02/2019/01/27/the-unwinding/feed/ 86
Finding your niche https://www.google.com/https:/c02/2019/01/26/finding-your-niche/ https:/c02/2019/01/26/finding-your-niche/#comments Sat, 26 Jan 2019 20:24:46 +0000 /c02/?p=14952
DOUG?By Guest Blogger Doug Rowat

As the explosive growth of the ETF industry continues, we*ve seen a predictable development: greater and greater ETF specialization. As The New York Times put it recently, the ETF industry is carving up the stock market ※into ever thinner slices for investors eager to find other next big things.§

These niche, &thin slice* ETFs are typically focused on the technology sector (robotics, cybersecurity or artificial intelligence, for example), but this is becoming less so. In Canada, for instance, specialized ETFs focused on the marijuana industry are, of course, currently all the rage. There are now four weed ETFs listed in Canada versus none less than two years ago. The largest, by far, being the Horizons Marijuana Life Sciences ETF (HMMJ).

But HMMJ embodies one of the key dangers of niche ETFs: concentration risk. The top four holdings of HMMJ total a 44% weight, for example. Not exactly broad diversification and, not surprisingly, HMMJ has five times the volatility of the broader Canadian equity market, which is itself risky. It begs the question: if you*re comfortable with this level of risk, why not simply buy the four stocks and save yourself the 0.75% MER?

But not all investors make themselves aware of the risk, thinking instead that the ETF structure itself assures diversification. But specialized, theme-based ETFs are not only expensive but rival single stocks in terms of volatility. Interested in junior gold mining? The top five holdings of the VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) account for almost a 30% weight and the ETF charges 0.54%. Think the skies will soon be filled with drones? The ETFMG Drone Economy Strategy ETF (IFLY) charges 0.75% and you*d better learn all you can about Aerovironment because this company alone has a 12% weight. Believe consumers will abandon Amazon.com and head back to the shopping malls? The Pacer Benchmark Retail Real Estate ETF (RTL) charges 0.60% and just TWO holdings combine for a massive 30% concentration. And the list goes on.

So, just as only holding a few stocks is a dangerous portfolio strategy, so too is only holding a few niche ETFs. SocGen recently highlighted that one in four stocks lose 50% or more during recessions (see chart). If you have only a few specialized ETFs in your portfolio, which typically focus on risky, emerging industries and have heavy weightings to only a few names, you*ll likely experience similar volatility. HMMJ and IFLY, for example, dropped 24% and 19%, respectively, last year and we*re not even in a recessionary environment. ETFs generally provide great diversification, but for theme-based ETFs, this isn*t the case.

Recessions happen and concentrated investment portfolios can be devastated.

Source: SacGen

There*s also the opposite problem with niche ETFs: are they, in fact, targeting the right market areas? In other words, are they providing ENOUGH concentration? We had Coincapital knock on our door a few months ago plugging their blockchain ETF, Coincapital STOXX Blockchain Patents Innovation Index Fund (LDGR). Coincapital uses ※a proprietary artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to identify companies for the fund.§ I*ve lost track of how often I*ve heard the term ※proprietary§ in sales pitches over the 20 years that I*ve been in the investment industry. Such language immediately gives me pause. When something*s proprietary, transparency becomes difficult and attempts at clarification inevitably result in Catch-22 dilemmas. ※Proprietary§ sales pitches usually end up something like this: it*s the best investment technology because nobody else has it, but we can*t fully explain it because then everybody would have it.

However, our main difficulty with LDGR was simply that we had little confidence that it was offering direct exposure to blockchain technologies. Consider the ETF*s top holdings (below). Is the ETF investing in the niche blockchain space or will its performance be dominated by the much, much broader market forces affecting the US and Canadian financial and retailing sectors?

Decide for yourself:

Coincapital STOXX Blockchain Patents Innovation Index Fund top holdings

Source: Bloomberg

Overall, it*s not that these specialized ETFs are engaging in false advertising〞after all, I discovered all this information because of what they disclose publicly〞but problems occur when investors don*t take the time to research exactly what it is that they*re buying.

In other words, if you*re thinking of purchasing a niche ETF, pop the latch and check under the hood.


Finally, I*ve written many times on this blog that rising interest rates don*t negatively impact Canadian real estate investment trusts (REITs). Here*s an example (https:/c02/?s=no+vacancy). Yet, what should come blasting across my smartphone to start 2019? Another misleading headline regarding REITs and interest rates:

The Globe & Mail gets it wrong. REITs do great in rising rate environments

Source: The Globe and Mail

Strong REIT performance during periods of rising interest rates shouldn*t be a ※surprise§; REITs perform well in these environments. And last year was proof of that. There were four rate increases from the US Federal Reserve and three from the Bank of Canada, but Canadian REITs advanced 4.9% in 2018 (including dividends) versus the MSCI World Index (global equities) which fell 8.2% on the same basis. And, as a long-term investment, REITs have returned 10.2% annually over the past 15 years.

Just add &em to your portfolio already.

Doug Rowat, FCSI? is Portfolio Manager with Turner Investments and Senior Vice President, Private Client Group, Raymond James Ltd.


https:/c02/2019/01/26/finding-your-niche/feed/ 44
All stress, all the time https://www.google.com/https:/c02/2019/01/25/all-stress-all-the-time/ https:/c02/2019/01/25/all-stress-all-the-time/#comments Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:21:28 +0000 /c02/?p=14948

When the feds imposed the mortgage stress test, realtors and housing bulls scoffed. Yet more tinkering, they cried. Won*t matter!

Well, it did. In 2018 prices dropped nationally for the first time in memory. Sales have cratered in most cities, and the sales mix has altered drastically. Cheap properties have been pushed higher by increased demand while detached houses are suffering. Overall credit has been nicked by about 20% and tens of thousands of would-be first-time buyers are buyers no longer. In short, the result has been dramatic.

For example, in east-end Toronto where Dan toils as an agent, the pace of deals has crumbled. ※Wow, it’s correcting , crashing, or slow because of all the snow?§ he says. ※Oh wait, no snow!§ That*s right. Just frozen realtors.

The tale of the sales in East-end Toronto

Source: Royal LePage, Toronto Real Estate Board. Click to enlarge.

Well, it*s apparently about to get worse. Flooding through the industry on Friday was word Ottawa wants to push the stress test 每 which now applies only to bank mortgages 每 everywhere. That would include sub-prime brokers, private lenders, MICs (mortgage insurance corporations) and eventually provincially-regulated credit unions.

The reasons are obvious. Before the stress test came in, only 5% of loans were being made by private lenders who are not regulated by the feds. Now that market share has doubled. Borrowers who were rejected by the banks and couldn*t pass the test have increasingly ended up in the clutches of those who will lend money at rates of anywhere between 10% and 20% (as opposed to conventional 3.5% five-year fixed-rate mortgages). If you*ve ever seen ads for private mortgage companies willing to pay investors 6-8% annual returns, this is exactly what they are funding. High-cost loans to high-risk people, secured by residential real estate.

The fear is a deterioration in mortgage quality as risk is transferred from the banks to the alt-lenders. If the real estate market turns (and it seems to be) these lenders lack the capital reserves or the insurance to prevent collapse. The alt guys also typically lend out more money relative to a property*s value, accentuating that risk. The feds fear if things start going south, this could turn a correction into a crisis. Price declines would explode.

So the Department of Finance, the regulators and CMHC have been discussing how to make the stress test universal. Private lenders would then be forced to prove clients could pay their exorbitant rate plus another 2%, or no loan.

The impact of this, according to the mortgage industry, would be dire. In fact, says broker and blogger Rob McLister, it could deny funding to 250,000 to 350,000 families. It would be traumatic for those who own real estate, must restructure debt, can*t pass the banks* stress test and need private money.

※One thing is clear, however. Stress testing borrowers at private lending rates, which routinely exceed 6-8%, would drastically slow such lending.

That, in turn, would result in:

  • Slowing housing demand (not necessarily a bad thing) particularly in private-heavy regions like Toronto and Vancouver
  • More rental demand, further fuelling fast-rising rental rates
  • A spike in housing supply from homeowners forced to liquidate because they can no longer consolidate their debts
  • A surge in high-interest unsecured debt
  • A drastic slowing or end of RRSP-funded private lending
  • Rising insolvencies.”

To pull this off, federal legislation would have to change, bringing private lenders under the regulator*s umbrella. Or, Ottawa could work with the provinces who oversee both MICs and credit unions, to see the stress test is adopted. Already some major CUs are operating under this assumption.

So, there ya go. More confusion.

One day Bill Morneau says Ottawa will make it easier for moisters to buy houses. The next day comes change to deny funding to even more people. Government sucks. Government blows. What a shock.

https:/c02/2019/01/25/all-stress-all-the-time/feed/ 77
Not fake https://www.google.com/https:/c02/2019/01/24/not-fake/ https:/c02/2019/01/24/not-fake/#comments Thu, 24 Jan 2019 21:36:40 +0000 /c02/?p=14946

Earlier this week a poll claimed 46% of Canadians are less than $200 from financial insolvency at the end of each month. Some critics scoffed. Fake news, they said. One cell bill from oblivion? Absurd.

But there was more. The Ipsos survey results included this: a third of respondents said they routinely cannot pay monthly bills and 45% stated they*ll have to take on more debt to pay family expenses. This came around the same time as a new federal government study showed households are paying nothing on $100 billion in home equity loans. In addition, the Canadian Payroll Association claims 40% of people are overwhelmed by their debts and 47% would have a cow if they missed one paycheque.

In fact, a steady stream of similar reports, polls, surveys and studies have been published in the last three years. Personal and family debt during this time has reached an historic high. As reported here a few days ago, between July and November families added more than $17 billion in new mortgage debt, bringing the total to $1.54 trillion 每 or $1,540,000,000,000. The average mortgage debt, HELOC debt, car loan debt and student debt have all increased in the last few years. And (to restate an important fact) income gains are trailing inflation (1.4% vs 2%).

Is this all fake news? If not, why are no leaders, politicians, bank CEOs or chief economists talking about it? After all, it sounds like a disaster in the making. If families are so stretched, how can they possibly survive the next inevitable economic downturn?

The answer (if it*s remotely true): they can*t. In fact the next mess may be inevitable exactly because of what people have done to themselves.

You will recall we handled? the GFC of 2008-9 in a different way than the US. There the federal government spend a few trillion bailing out institutions and over-leveraged homeowners. In Canada the government dropped mortgage rates to insane levels, and stood back. Hormones and house lust did the rest. As rates plunged, buying surged, house prices escalated wildly and family debt flew off the chart. But all that spending saved the GDP.

Now here we are, on the far side of the mountain. We blew the wad. Big houses. Big debt. The savings rate sitting lower than a dachshund*s package. Half of us say if interest rates edge up any more (they will) financial trouble will follow. And that*s not even with the job losses a recession would inevitably herald. Meanwhile central banks have been struggling to break our worse-than-crack dependency on cheap loans.

Among those worried about this is TD*s chief economist. Beata Caranci said it a few months ago: ※Past 2020 it*s really going to hit the fan. At that point you have high level of indebtedness combined with income stress happening simultaneously. So we are definitely not out of the woods.§ So, the next rough patch will not be solved by consumers, the way the last one way. Instead it will be ※a household-led recession.§

That means, pickled in debt, struggling to make the monthlies and, yeah, two hundred bucks from the cliff*s edge, families no longer have the capacity to rescue the economy. As for the Bank of Canada, it*s been a tough slog to raise rates four times when the Fed has increased on nine occasions. So in the next downturn, interest rates can only retrace a relatively short distance. That big bag of stimulus central bankers had to sprinkle over everything in 2009 isn*t there.

By the way, 2020 is the year of the next presidential election. There may be no good outcome for that event.

Most at risk are those in debt. Job loss and economic downturn are your enemies. The best course of action in 2019 is to change your life. If that means dumping the mortgage along with the house, so be it. Trash the HELOC. And, for the love of Allah, stop borrowing.

Also be careful when investing. Rebalance to take profits and de-risk. Embrace a balanced approach so you have fixed-income assets to offset inevitable equity volatility. Be wary of weed and FAANGs. Use some of the tactics laid out on this blog in recent weeks to drop your tax profile. After all, it*s not what you make, but what you keep. It*s also time to up your cash a little. Unless you have millions already, stay invested. Never exit an asset class since you have no idea what*s coming. Yes, ignore the noise.

About the picture:

Weeks ago we had bóng đá trực tuyến here. One picture was of Sonnyboy and James Dougall, in his final months. Mr. Dougall has now passed.

His daughter writes: ※Thank you so very much for your kind and comforting words regarding the death of my beautiful father. We were privileged to have looked after him for his last 5 years. The bond between Dad and I was/is so eternally strong. The loss is indescribable, and Jack and I and Sonnyboy are shocked and surprised by the physical toll that grief brings. Sonny is still depressed and constantly gazing at the front door. I am enclosing a couple of pictures. Sonnyboy looking after his grandpa in his last days. What would we do without dogs?? My thought for the day: with love comes pain.§

https:/c02/2019/01/24/not-fake/feed/ 126
The campaign https://www.google.com/https:/c02/2019/01/23/the-campaign/ https:/c02/2019/01/23/the-campaign/#comments Wed, 23 Jan 2019 21:58:14 +0000 /c02/?p=14942

Elections are exciting, especially when you*re in one. Scary, too. In my life I have won and lost. You can pretty much sum up the entire candidate experience in one night. When you win, the hall is packed that evening with supporters and brand new friends. When you lose, it*s almost empty. People love to buy high and sell low.

The first time I lost was in 1993 when the Progressive Conservative party, which I had run to be leader of, was decimated. Flamed. Annihilated, thanks to Reform Party vote-splitting. Despite being a cabinet minister, my election night crowd was sparse, sad and as depressing as the church hall that held it. Media outnumbered the party faithful 每 all hungry to get the story of a government and a national party being destroyed in a single night.

My parents, both in their eighties, maintained a brave face. Then my father, slipping as he was into the foggy hole of Alzheimer*s, started to cry. In an instant he had TV cameras and lenses in his face. I couldn*t take it. I struck a guy from CTV. And so the night ended. Badly.

Well, for the 43rd time Canadians will vote for Parliament and a prime minister on the third Monday in October. As we approach, polls show Cons and Libs about even, the NDP in collapse and the Mad Max party an unknown outlier. The math favours Trudeau, since a wipeout by Jagmeet will send lefties to the Liberals while any support Bernier gets will come out of young Scheer*s hide. But nine months is a long time. Anything can happen.

The first salvo will be the federal budget in a few weeks. That will be followed by a new &middle class* plan full of shiny promises from the governing party. The opposition guys will point to record spending, wall-to-wall deficits, higher debt and interest rates plus general fiscal mayhem. The T2 gang will point to a 40-year low in the jobless rate, a reasonable economy and standing tough against Trump.

Despite the posturing, the middle class has been taking it in the ear. Wage growth is less than inflation, household debt is extreme, the oil patch is a mess and those surveys referenced here this week show family finances are in shockingly bad shape. The big reason is clear 每 average families can*t afford average homes and are ripping themselves apart trying. So it*s fair to assume real estate will be a pivotal part of the upcoming campaign.

Finance guy Bill Morneau said as much this week.

The feds will soon, he announced, unveil ways ※to make home buying more affordable to millennials.§ Of course it was a moister wave that helped push T2 over the top in 2015, but since then real estate’s only become less affordable 每 in large part due to the government*s own actions. Now that the Mills are utterly house horny and in full nesting mode, expect this to be a central issue in the October campaign.

What does that mean?

Forget political promises to build &affordable housing* across the country, as the NDP are making. Never have such plans been enacted. Never have they had any impact on overall prices. And never have they been useful to middle class income-earners. It*s a ruse.

Instead, look for the T2 gang to embrace some of the proposals hinted at here. Like a cap for the stress test. Currently borrowers have to prove they can carry loans at the higher of 5.34% or the rate their bank is offering plus 2%. The Bank of Canada may be raising rates once or twice prior to the election, so capping this 每 at, say 5% – is being seriously studied.

The other biggie is a return to 30-year amortizations. Right now CMHC will offer insurance only on terms of up to 25 years, so if you want a mortgage from a major lender that*s what you must accept. Longer ams spread out repayment and lower monthly payments. Yeah, they also mean you end up paying back a big pot of added interest, but nobody cares about that.

The Libs could also increase the limit on the Home Buyer*s Plan, which lets people raid their RRSPs for real estate downpayments, then gives 15 years to repay the stolen amount or have it added to taxable income. The current limit is $25,000 ($50,000 for a couple) and the funds need to have been in an RRSP for at least 90 days before being removed and spent. Some people in the Lib caucus want the amount doubled and the time period shortened.

Meanwhile realtors have been lobbying Ottawa to increase the HBTC 每 the Home Buyers Tax Credit. This lets buyers write off up to $5,000 in closing costs against their taxable income, and generally saves about $750. Piffle, say the realtors. Jack it up to provide some realistic relief 每 a tax savings of $2,500. Plus, CREA has also been lobbying the feds to focus help on those moisters most in need 每 poor hipsters in the GTA and YVR.

We’ll see what happens. Any of the above will not make houses cost less, of course. The ultimate effect will be just the opposite. Political ineptitude has been at the very heart of our real estate bubble, and we may soon witness one level of government (the feds) boosting the market while another (BC) tries to destroy it.

In the end, as I have learned, it comes down to votes cast by people who gave it all six minutes of thought.

https:/c02/2019/01/23/the-campaign/feed/ 152