Fecho do Estreito de Ormuz ameaça atirar crude acima dos 100 dólares

[Midas]

Max, podes dar uma olhadela no site do Deutsche Bank, que é um player importante em ETFs europeus, db X-trackers ETFs.

Pretendo investir em 2 ETFs (ações globais e obrigações globais) que capitalizem os dividendos, de replicação direta, para rebalancear 1 vez ao ano.

O objetivo da meu investimento é escolher 2 ETFs, obrigações/ações, 50/50, para rebalancear anualmente, e mantê-los tipo PPR.

Max, fazes bem em definir as tuas escolhas. Mais uma ajuda, queres ETFs em EUR e/ou USD, com Hedge (cobertura cambial) ou sem?

[Max_Filas]

Em ETFs de obrigações, neste fórum, costumam adiantar-se estes em Euros:

db x-trackers II EM Liquid EuroBond ETF
db x-trackers II Global Sov EUR Hedged
db x-trackers iBoxx GlbInfLnk TR Idx Hdg

Penso que os links estão na primeira página do Tópico "Fundos de Investimento de Baixo Risco".

Boas.

Todos estes são de replicação indireta (Investment Methodology - Indirect Replication (Swap)). Eu ando a tentar escolher ETFs de replicação direta, porque li num forum que nos devemos (nós os novatos) manter afastados dos de replicação indireta.

O objetivo da meu investimento é escolher 2 ETFs, obrigações/ações, 50/50, para rebalancear anualmente, e mantê-los tipo PPR. Se me disserem que não há problemas em ter ETFs de replicação indireta, posso considerar investir neste tipo de ETF, mas não foi essa a ideia com que fiquei quando li o tópico.

Abrç

[ghorez]

Como a oferta é reduzida/pouco líquida na Europa em ETF Cap. "dividendos" Globais Obrigações, podes sempre tentar uma alternativa do género:
50% "Acções" - ETF
50% "Obrigações/dívida" - Dep.Prazo/Conta Poupança

[Afonso80]

Em ETFs de obrigações, neste fórum, costumam adiantar-se estes em Euros:

db x-trackers II EM Liquid EuroBond ETF
db x-trackers II Global Sov EUR Hedged
db x-trackers iBoxx GlbInfLnk TR Idx Hdg

Penso que os links estão na primeira página do Tópico "Fundos de Investimento de Baixo Risco".

[Max_Filas]

Obrigado aos dois, pela sugestão e pela dica do google finance.

Agora estou a fazer o mesmo mas para o de Obrigações (obrigações globais que capitalizem dividendos, de replicação direta, para rebalancear 1 vez ao ano). Estes ainda parecem mais complicados (corporate bond, govenment bond, high yeld, inflation protected, inflation linked, treasury bond, tips, ...). Se puderem sugerir alguns, agradeço.

Abraço

[ruicarlov]

Sobre o tipo de replicação não sei falar, mas a nível de dividendos, só os 2 primeiros é que capitalizam. Todos os outros distribuem. Em caso de dúvida, vai-se ao Google finance com o ticker do ETF e vê-se se ele tem algum dividend yield. Se tiver, paga dividendos. Caso contrário, capitaliza.

[ghorez]

iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (SSAC)
http://lu.ishares.com/en/rc/products/SSAC

iShares MSCI World UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWDA)
http://lu.ishares.com/en/rc/products/IWDA

SPDR MSCI ACWI ETF (EUR) | SPYY
http://www.morningstar.de/de/etf/snapsh ... 0P0000TKW6

Dessas opções eu iria para o "iShares MSCI World UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWDA)" .. por ser o mais líquido. Mas o ACWI são mais diversificados - inclui mercados emergentes.

E provavelmente iria através da Gobulling PRO (Banco Carregosa), pois como o IWDA é comercializado na bolsa EuroNext Amsterdam, pela Gobulling ficar-me-ia em 5 EUR custo transacção. Custódia de títulos desde que através da Gobulling PRO são 0 (zero) euros.

[Texano Bill]

É, os 'Inc' distribuem dividendos enquanto os 'Acc' acumulam-nos, daí os Acc serem melhores pois são mais eficientes fiscalmente e poupam-vos em comissões se quiserem reinvestir os dividendos. Para vários ETFs com o mesmo subjacente convém escolherem os que tem a taxa de custos mais baixa e maior liquidez. Também convém ter em atenção a bolsa em que são cotados devido aos diferentes preços para colocarem ordens de compra e venda, e julgo eu que certas praças como a francesa ainda têm taxas adicionais sobre as transacções. Atenção que os ETF cotados em Euros com subjacentes cotados em dólares (como o SP500, xauusd), não quer dizer que vos façam cobertura cambial, para isso têm de ser 'hedged'.

[Max_Filas]

Regra geral, se é ETF americano, distribui dividendos. Se é europeu, capitaliza dividendos. Vanguard em particular distribui sempre (excepto se tiverem algum coisa em matérias-primas).

Então podemos concluir que os resultados da pesquisa de ETFs, feita no banco best, filtrada por "Acc", não é de confiar?

Nas pesquisas que fiz encontrei estes que penso, corresponderem ao que pretendo (capitalizar dividendos, replicação direta). Podem-me confirmar se estou correto e qual o mais aconselhado para investir?

iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (SSAC)
http://lu.ishares.com/en/rc/products/SSAC

iShares MSCI World UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWDA)
http://lu.ishares.com/en/rc/products/IWDA

SPDR MSCI ACWI ETF (EUR) | SPYY
http://www.morningstar.de/de/etf/snapsh ... 0P0000TKW6

iShares MSCI ACWI Index Fund (USD) | ACWI
http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/etf/sna ... encyId=USD

iShares S&P Global 100 Index Fund (USD) | IOO
http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/etf/sna ... encyId=USD

SPDR Global Dow ETF (USD) | DGT
http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/etf/sna ... encyId=USD

[ruicarlov]

Regra geral, se é ETF americano, distribui dividendos. Se é europeu, capitaliza dividendos. Vanguard em particular distribui sempre (excepto se tiverem algum coisa em matérias-primas).

[Specialx]

Ambos distribuem dividendos....

[Max_Filas]

Ok.

Pois, então assim é difícil, principalmente para quem dá os primeiros passos com ETFs. Parece que a informação é diferente nos 2 links.

No site do banco best, em pesquisa avançada, filtrei os resultados por "Acc", e lá estão estes ETFs...e realmente não faz referência a distribuição de dividendos, enquanto se fizer pesquisa filtrada por "Inc", nesses sim, fazem referência à distribuição de dividendos (https://lt.morningstar.com/irjmy4wp6w/s ... 0P00002D8A).

Em que ficámos? Algém me pode esclarecer esta dúvida, por favor?

Pretendo investir em 2 ETFs (ações globais e obrigações globais) que capitalizem os dividendos, de replicação direta, para rebalancear 1 vez ao ano. Agradeço as vossas sugestões para encontrar alguns ETFs com estas características.

Cumpts

[ghorez]

http://blogs.wsj.com/experts/2013/09/19/beware-of-financial-advisers-who-wont-talk-about-fees/

What are key warning signs that should make you consider switching financial advisers?

RICK FERRI:
Key #1: It’s time to consider switching when you can’t figure out how much you’re paying in fees and expenses, and your adviser avoids the issue. Investment costs are important. You should know exactly what you’re paying and to whom. This includes the adviser fees, commissions, mutual-fund fees and any administrative costs.

Key #2: It’s time to consider switching when you can’t figure out how your portfolio has been performing or how this return compares to appropriate market indexes. Top advisers disclose their performance to clients for better or worse, and they create clear and concise reports that compare returns to appropriate benchmarks. These reports show net-net, meaning they include the adviser’s management fee in addition to all other costs.

Key #3: It’s time to consider switching when you ask your adviser about low-cost index funds and they scoff at the idea. The benefits of using low-cost index funds are well documented, and every learned adviser knows the facts (see A Case for Index Fund Portfolios). I’m not suggesting that all advisers should use index funds, but they should acknowledge that index funds are tough to beat and that there is no sure way to pick winning active fund managers.

Rick Ferri is founder of Portfolio Solutions LLC and the author of books on low-cost index fund and ETF investing. His blog is RickFerri.com.

[ghorez]

Antes de mais obrigado ghorez pelas respostas.

Futuramente deves fazer as perguntas aqui - sem nunca meter dados pessoais - assim pode ser que haja mais pessoas para te ajudar. E as respostas até poderão servir para outros se orientarem!

Quanto aos ETF que mencionas, são todos domiciliados nos US e direccionados para americanos.. Que eu saiba esses 2 são de distribuição de dividendos/cupões.

[Max_Filas]

Antes de mais obrigado ghorez pelas respostas.

Uma coisa que ainda não entendi bem, quando pesquiso por ETFs que capitalizam dividendos. Por exemplo:

ETF VTI - Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF

Este ETF capitaliza ou não dividendos? Quando pesquiso no Banco Best, este ETF aparece na listagem dos que capitalizam:

https://lt.morningstar.com/irjmy4wp6w/s ... encyId=USD

Mas se faço uma pesquisa no google, por exemplo:

http://etfdb.com/etf/VTI/

Já diz que distribui dividendos.

Alguém me pode explicar o porquê de aparentemente, aparecem informações diferentes para o mesmo ETF?

Outro exemplo. AGG - iShares Core Total U.S. Bond Market ETF

http://etfdb.com/etf/AGG/fundamentals/

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/etf/sna ... 0P00002DBL

Obrigado

[LTCM]

Here was the New Normal argument, as advanced by PIMCO and Bill Gross. The main prediction of the New Normal was economic: The U.S. economy would not roar out of the 2008-09 recession, as is expected during recoveries, but would instead trudge along at only a modest pace. That analysis was spot-on and has earned PIMCO much-deserved credit.

The secondary prediction of the New Normal concerned investments: That stocks would have a lower rate of return in the future, and that stock investors would not automatically succeed by buying on dips. That analysis has been wrong--very wrong. Stocks have had a spectacularly high return since Gross wrote those words, and buying on the few dips has been profitable indeed. In short, 1) the New Normal thesis never directly said that buy-and-hold is dead, and 2) even if it did, nobody should overhaul an investment approach based on the stock-market predictions of a bond economist.

[LTCM]

It's hard for me to discourage anyone from investing in stocks because I enjoy it so much. I find it fascinating to
learn about companies and industries and observe the ferocious spectacle of capitalism at work. To me, watching
Scott McNealy and Bill Gates and Larry Ellison go head-to-head is the best spectator sport going.

But I don't think picking stocks is going to be as easy going forward as it's been for the past few years, and I fear
that many people are in over their heads and aren't even aware of it. As Warren Buffett once said, "You can't tell
who's swimming naked until the tide goes out." Who knows? Maybe I'm swimming naked too.

I understand why people don't invest in index funds -- it's natural to want to do better than average. But the refusal
to accept average performance causes most people to suffer below-average results, after all costs are
considered.

I encourage you to invest in individual stocks, but only if you're willing to take the time and effort to do
so properly.

Whitney Tilson - Managing Partner of Tilson Capital Partners, LLC

[PSI53]

Acordou depois de longo inverno, reflete-se no espelho e um Touro lhe reflete...deita-se e iberna.
Cá está mais um longo periodo do uso da energia acumulada. Quem sabe, na proxima estação, pois nesta,
é pura especulação.

[LTCM]

[LTCM]

In recent weeks, T. Rowe Price took the unusual step of banning 1,300 American Airlines employees from trading among its funds in their 401(k) retirement plans. Why? Because they were engaging in what T. Rowe Price described as “collective” trading. As a group, these fund investors were making the same trades simultaneously. Fund managers hate collective trading because it can leave them scrambling to buy or sell, often at great expense, to cover the moves.

So what did T. Rowe Price see as collective trading? How about following recommendations from an investment newsletter, EZTracker, to exit “T. Rowe Price funds in American’s 401(k) plan six times since mid-2010 after a holding period of less than a year.” These recommendations “triggered a rush of buys and sells in the days following the end-of-month release of the newsletter,” the company said.

Stop for a minute and think about that last part. Over the course of three years, this particular newsletter recommended exiting funds six times after holding them for less than a year. In terms of fees alone that’s a lot of activity. It’s also hard to see these recommendations as anything other than market timing, and following them as a group got people banned from trading. I doubt this was the outcome that any of these investors had in mind when they subscribed to EZTracker.

Now, I know that it seems like an extreme example. After all, there must be newsletters that don’t get their subscribers banned. However, this story highlights what can happen if investors think they know what the markets will do next. And that’s the underlying risk of relying on investment newsletters. They create a false sense of certainty.

At its core, subscribing to an investment newsletter is an expression of hope that someone somewhere knows more than we do. On some level, we’re hoping that, like an expert or a guru, a newsletter will predict what the markets will do next. It’s no different than tuning into financial broadcasts or studying the latest financial publications. We’re looking for answers because we’re human.

Once we understand that it’s our first instinct to reduce uncertainty as much as possible, it becomes a little easier to ask questions. It becomes easier to ask if it’s really in our best interest to trust predictions regarding something that’s inherently unpredictable. And it becomes easier to ask if this behavior really helps us be better investors or just makes us think we’re better investors. So take a deep breath, accept your human shortcomings, and realize that no one knows exactly what the markets will do next. And that’s O.K.

[Pata-Hari]

"Hidden fund costs are hurting investors": este é fantástico, a maior parte dos investidores não tem a menor noção da importancia dos custos.

[ruicarlov]

Andei a ler algumas coisas no ETFtrends e fiquei com curiosidade em relação às preferred stocks. Qual é a vossa opinião de utilizar esta classe de activos em assel allocation. Pelo que percebi, são sensíveis às subidas das taxas de juro como as bonds, mas não parece existir uma correlação demasiado próxima com bonds ou ações comuns, pelo que pensei que pudesse ser mais um veículo para diversificação. Algumas opiniões que li apontavam as preferred stock como interessantes no longo prazo, o que é o objectivo do investimento passivo em fundos de índice. Que acham?

[LTCM]

Para quem se interesse por estas coisas o Wall Street Journal começou uma boa série (de acordo com o primeiro artigo), são cinco partes, sobre a crise de 2008.

[LTCM]

Hidden fund costs are hurting investors

By Pauline Skypala

The easiest way to make money is to take it from other people: that is what the financial services industry does, and for proof of its efficacy look no further than the results last week of UK fund platform provider Hargreaves Lansdown. It reported a 28 per cent rise in pre-tax profits over the year to the end of June, and an impressive profit margin of 65.8 per cent.

The company’s two founders are now billionaires, and shareholders have done well too, with the shares up more than 400 per cent over five years. They have prospered by sharing in the growth of customers’ assets.

HL looks after £36.4bn and makes its money primarily from the cut it takes of the annual management fees of the funds available via its website. That is 75 basis points for funds levying the average fee of 1.5 per cent a year, of which it gives back up to 25-30bp to customers as a “loyalty bonus”.

The company’s customers are largely self-directed investors; they are not getting advice. And although 50-75bps seems a lot to pay for administration, there are few complaints. That is partly because HL does not disclose its share of the loot (its website states there is no charge for its platform services, unless you are buying an index tracker or exchange traded fund), but also because it is cheaper than buying direct from a fund group.

This brilliant business model is on notice. From next April HL and other UK platform operators will no longer be allowed to receive ‘rebates’ from fund managers and will have to charge an explicit fee for their services. Some have already moved to that model. Peter Hargreaves, HL co-founder, is worried about customer reaction to that. He should be. If customers see they are paying 75 bps for investment management (assuming fund managers reduce their fees by the amount they previously handed over to HL and others), they may balk at paying a similar amount for portfolio administration.

Does any of this matter much? Why obsess over a few basis points? Because controlling costs is crucial to investment returns, and those basis points add up to a significant sum over the years. A low cost fund is bound to return more than a high cost one, unless the latter is run by a manager able to add enough value to outweigh the additional cost.

There are such managers, but there is plenty of evidence they are few and far between, and hard to identify in advance.

Research in 2010 by Morningstar, a provider of fund data and analysis, found that expense ratios of funds were “the most dependable predictor of performance”. In every time period and data point tested, low cost funds beat high cost funds.

The debate has moved on since then to consider the hidden costs of investing as well as the explicit annual management charge on funds.

In a paper to be published in the Financial Analysts Journal, John Bogle, founder of the Vanguard mutual fund group, estimates the all-in costs paid by investors in actively managed US funds (including portfolio turnover expenses, sales loads and fees to investment advisers) come to 2.25 per cent.

Compounding these costs over an investment lifetime of 50 years means an initial investment of $10,000 would grow to around $100,000 (based on a 7 per cent return before costs, 4.75 per cent net), he says. Whereas, “at a cost of 0.06 per cent (easily obtainable in a low cost all-market index fund), the return would be 6.94 per cent and the final value about $286,000”.

Low cost funds are generally passive index trackers, so the debate about costs is usually couched in terms of whether active investment management is worth paying for. Investors appear increasingly convinced it is not, judging by the growing flows into ETFs and other index trackers in recent years.

This is more of a US phenomenon than a European or Asian one, largely because of the “Vanguard” effect. The US-based group, the world’s fourth-largest asset manager, invented index trackers and has long acted as a strong competitive force in the US industry. It levies an average expense ratio on its funds of 0.19 per cent, compared with a US industry average of 1.11 per cent.

The manager has brought its model to Europe, but its progress has been hampered by the financial advisers, banks and fund platforms that act as the middlemen between investors and fund managers. They demand half or more of the annual fund fee as compensation for selling funds, where they are still allowed to do so. ETF and index fund providers often will not pay up so their funds do not get sold.

The tables are stacked against individual investors when it comes to minimising investment costs. Shame we do not all have access to a scheme like the US Thrift Savings Plan, a pension plan for federal employees. Annual expense ratios for the (passive) funds available under the plan have varied since 2007 between 1.5 and 2.7 basis points. Sounds about right.

[PSI53]

Execelente material LTCM
e
aproveito para deixar o link

https://www.edx.org/course-list/allscho ... allcourses

organização de cursos on-line do projecto da "tia" do FMI

e também pode ser util este da coursera

https://www.coursera.org/#course/assetpricing