Last week, the Internal Money Service raised the annual contribution limits for IRAs, 401(k)s and similar retirement plans in 2012. That means now may be a good chance to build your holdings of cash to spend in retirement.
Maximum contributions to a 401(k) or similar program is $17,000 in 2012, up from $16,500 this year, while additional "catch-up" contributions for people over 50 will stay $5,500. Yearly contributions to traditional as well as Roth IRAs is limited to $6,000, the same as this year. Changes in contribution rates for retirement plans mean that many people should rethink their nest eggs.
Higher limits are good if you're an aggressive saver, but would definitely we really would like to use an IRA to 401(k) for money? Don't many investors emphasize stocks and bonds in tax-favored retirement accounts?
Yes, many investors use these accounts for tax breaks on investment gains, as well as there aren't many gains with cash savings. Additionally, there's generally a 10% penalty for taking revenue out of these retirement accounts before age 59.5, so they're not a good place for an emergency fund to routine bills.
While all that's true, money has other uses that can make it a sensible way for a portion of your long-term retirement savings. Money is definitely not subject to the big price drops that can hit stocks as well as bonds, and so it can help even out the bumps, making your portfolio's performance more stable.
It can also pay to have a money reserve for jumping on opportunities, like buying stocks whenever prices are down. Money is a good choice for brand new contributions when stocks as well as bonds look too risky, especially in accounts that provide immediate tax deductions on contributions.
As well as, naturally, as retirement nears it's good to have enough money to fund spending needs for a year to 2, and so we will not have to market stocks or perhaps bonds during a downturn. It can pay to build that gradually, to avoid having to liquidate large stock or perhaps bond holdings if costs are down when you retire.
Finally, interest earnings on cash in an IRA to 401(k) are sheltered from income tax. This isn't a big consideration right now because interest rates are thus low, but it could matter when yields return to regular. Because there are yearly limits on retirement program contributions, it can pay to build the tax-favored cash reserves over time.
Interest in a 401(k) or traditional IRA is taxed as income, the same rate you'd face in a taxable account. But in a taxable account the tax is due the year the interest is earned, whilst in those retirement accounts tax is postponed until the cash is withdrawn, which leaves more in the account to compound. There is no tax on interest earned in a Roth IRA or Roth 401(k), because all withdrawals are tax free.
The new contribution as well as income limits are certainly not exactly earth-shaking, but every little bit helps.
And, as the new year approaches, it is a good time to reassess savings plans. Many employers, for example, send notices in the fall reminding workers they can change their 401(k) contributions for the coming year. It's a convenient time to rethink the allocation to stocks, bonds as well as money.
View the original article here
Monday, December 12, 2011
Saturday, December 10, 2011
10X Income Touted for Retirement Savings
Whenever it comes to retirement planning, a familiar (and frequently daunting) question is how a lot you should save.
As part of during National Save for Retirement Week, Lincoln Financial Group(LNC) is hosting an hourlong open forum Thursday, Oct. 20, at 12:30 p.m. ET on retirement saving on its Facebook site. Its retirement plan specialists will answer questions in real time, as well as savings targets are likely to be among the hot topics. People should aim to retire with a savings baseline of at least 10 times their yearly income, according to Lincoln Financial Group.
Anna Gauthier, strategic communications director at Lincoln Financial, will come armed to the talk with its recent Retirement Power study, a consider the savings profiles as well as behaviors of over 4,000 respondents, including in-depth analysis of a subgroup of 1,179 retirees.
According to research by Hearts & Wallets, a firm that analyzes retirement marketplace trends for the financial services industry that is cited in the study, just 11% of leading-edge baby boomers (ages 53-64) have saved at least $500,000, even though just 30% of the same group expected to have any kind of income at all from a traditional defined-benefit pension program. It also found that 50% of respondents consider retirement planning -- including how a great deal to save -- to be "difficult" to "very difficult."
Making use of the study, Lincoln is suggesting that people should aim to have a savings baseline of at least 10 times their yearly income at retirement. In greater detail, the assets-to-income metric it suggests should be calculated by dividing the sum of your current investable assets (minus nonmortgage debt) by their current yearly pretax income.
View the original article here
As part of during National Save for Retirement Week, Lincoln Financial Group(LNC) is hosting an hourlong open forum Thursday, Oct. 20, at 12:30 p.m. ET on retirement saving on its Facebook site. Its retirement plan specialists will answer questions in real time, as well as savings targets are likely to be among the hot topics. People should aim to retire with a savings baseline of at least 10 times their yearly income, according to Lincoln Financial Group.
Anna Gauthier, strategic communications director at Lincoln Financial, will come armed to the talk with its recent Retirement Power study, a consider the savings profiles as well as behaviors of over 4,000 respondents, including in-depth analysis of a subgroup of 1,179 retirees.
According to research by Hearts & Wallets, a firm that analyzes retirement marketplace trends for the financial services industry that is cited in the study, just 11% of leading-edge baby boomers (ages 53-64) have saved at least $500,000, even though just 30% of the same group expected to have any kind of income at all from a traditional defined-benefit pension program. It also found that 50% of respondents consider retirement planning -- including how a great deal to save -- to be "difficult" to "very difficult."
Making use of the study, Lincoln is suggesting that people should aim to have a savings baseline of at least 10 times their yearly income at retirement. In greater detail, the assets-to-income metric it suggests should be calculated by dividing the sum of your current investable assets (minus nonmortgage debt) by their current yearly pretax income.
View the original article here
ETFs for Smoothing Out Marketplace Volatility
Precisely why do we invest? Exactly what really is your own objective?
For many individual investors, whether or not they invest on their own to hire someone, the real objective is simply having enough cash when they need it -- in most cases this means retirement.
If you need to retire then chances are your accumulated savings will go toward supplementing the benefit you will get from Social Security and you'll either have enough saved to offer the lifestyle you desire or we won't.
For those that can reorient their thinking to the extended term as well as to their real objective, a entire new way of investing opens up by making use of the low-volatility ETFs that have recently been created.
The big idea is the fact that these funds go up less than regular market-cap-weighted money during bull phases and go down less during bear phases, thus smoothing out the ride on the method to a similar long-term result.
The advantage to this smoother ride is a smaller likelihood of panic selling at a low mainly because these funds tend to act as advertised: They go down less whenever the marketplace goes down.
The last few months have offered a good litmus test for just what to expect from these types of funds.
Because its inception this past Will, the PowerShares S&P 500 Low Volatility Portfolio(SPLV) is down 1.25% vs. an 8.27% decline for the S&P 500.
SPLV owns the 100 stocks in the S&P 500 with the lowest realized volatility over the last 12 months. Certainly not amazingly, the fund is heaviest in the utilities sector at 32% and the consumer staples sector at 22%. None of the other sectors exceed more than 10% of the fund.
The fund is not riskless, however. Utility stocks tend to be vulnerable to increasing rates as bonds become more attractive relative to high-yielding utilities.
The Federal Reserve will great lengths to keep interest rates low by stating that it won't increase them till at least 2013 as well as by recently commencing "Surgery Twist," in which the central bank sells short-dated debt and buys longer-dated debt. But with rates close to all-time lows it makes sense to be on the lookout for a meaningful turn higher.
View the original article here
For many individual investors, whether or not they invest on their own to hire someone, the real objective is simply having enough cash when they need it -- in most cases this means retirement.
If you need to retire then chances are your accumulated savings will go toward supplementing the benefit you will get from Social Security and you'll either have enough saved to offer the lifestyle you desire or we won't.
For those that can reorient their thinking to the extended term as well as to their real objective, a entire new way of investing opens up by making use of the low-volatility ETFs that have recently been created.
The big idea is the fact that these funds go up less than regular market-cap-weighted money during bull phases and go down less during bear phases, thus smoothing out the ride on the method to a similar long-term result.
The advantage to this smoother ride is a smaller likelihood of panic selling at a low mainly because these funds tend to act as advertised: They go down less whenever the marketplace goes down.
The last few months have offered a good litmus test for just what to expect from these types of funds.
Because its inception this past Will, the PowerShares S&P 500 Low Volatility Portfolio(SPLV) is down 1.25% vs. an 8.27% decline for the S&P 500.
SPLV owns the 100 stocks in the S&P 500 with the lowest realized volatility over the last 12 months. Certainly not amazingly, the fund is heaviest in the utilities sector at 32% and the consumer staples sector at 22%. None of the other sectors exceed more than 10% of the fund.
The fund is not riskless, however. Utility stocks tend to be vulnerable to increasing rates as bonds become more attractive relative to high-yielding utilities.
The Federal Reserve will great lengths to keep interest rates low by stating that it won't increase them till at least 2013 as well as by recently commencing "Surgery Twist," in which the central bank sells short-dated debt and buys longer-dated debt. But with rates close to all-time lows it makes sense to be on the lookout for a meaningful turn higher.
View the original article here
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Is it Easier for Singles to Save For Retirement?
When it comes to retirement planning, who has it better, singles to married couples?
The answer -- singles, according to many Americans -- can be based more on perception than reality. Singles can find it harder to save for retirement than the traditional wisdom suggests. Singles are actually significantly less prepared for and confident about retiring, a study says.
A recent survey by Schwab(SCHW) looked at the attitudes as well as behaviors of singles as well as married people around retirement. It found that many singles (69%) as well as a majority of married couples (53%) think being single is an advantage when it comes to retirement planning.
This attitude isn't backed up by the facts, warns Carrie Schwab-Pomerantz, Charles Schwab senior vice president. The same study found that singles are actually significantly less prepared and less confident than married individuals in their retirement readiness -- 85% of married Americans have already began to save, compared with only 67% of singles.
Those stats can get even worse given a weak economy as well as rampant unemployment that has left many Americans in their 20s underpaid as well as frequently moving back in with their parents.
There is also a growing population of singles. Census figures show there are record numbers of singles in America -- nearly 100 million last year, or one-third of the population.
The study also found that 58% of married Americans say it would be easier to decide whenever to retire without a spouse to consider; 62% of those couples say choosing where to retire would be easier if they had been single.
The details of when and exactly where to retire, however, are less problematic than being prepared for that stage of life.
Despite the perception that "single people have it created," they have the very big hurdle of having only you income.
View the original article here
The answer -- singles, according to many Americans -- can be based more on perception than reality. Singles can find it harder to save for retirement than the traditional wisdom suggests. Singles are actually significantly less prepared for and confident about retiring, a study says.
A recent survey by Schwab(SCHW) looked at the attitudes as well as behaviors of singles as well as married people around retirement. It found that many singles (69%) as well as a majority of married couples (53%) think being single is an advantage when it comes to retirement planning.
This attitude isn't backed up by the facts, warns Carrie Schwab-Pomerantz, Charles Schwab senior vice president. The same study found that singles are actually significantly less prepared and less confident than married individuals in their retirement readiness -- 85% of married Americans have already began to save, compared with only 67% of singles.
Those stats can get even worse given a weak economy as well as rampant unemployment that has left many Americans in their 20s underpaid as well as frequently moving back in with their parents.
There is also a growing population of singles. Census figures show there are record numbers of singles in America -- nearly 100 million last year, or one-third of the population.
The study also found that 58% of married Americans say it would be easier to decide whenever to retire without a spouse to consider; 62% of those couples say choosing where to retire would be easier if they had been single.
The details of when and exactly where to retire, however, are less problematic than being prepared for that stage of life.
Despite the perception that "single people have it created," they have the very big hurdle of having only you income.
View the original article here
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
High Spenders Want a Reality Check
Many high earners feel a false sense of security regarding retiring due to the fact they earn a good living with high disposable income and live well.
Let's make an assumption that being a "high earner" is all relative as well as largely determined by what part of nation we live in. Whether we are a high earner in Brand new York City with web after-tax of $1 million or $250,000 in a low-cost area is immaterial; the point is the fact that pre-retirees should take a look at their personal balance sheet to ascertain the sustainability of their lifestyle during retirement -- especially for those who have lived at or perhaps above their means for their entire lives. Everything's fine until you get that final paycheck as well as face the next 30 many years of retirement.
Take for example a 60-year-old with web earnings of $250,000 per year. Assume this individual spends all of those after-tax earnings or money flow every year.
If this person has saved $1 million for retirement, it is very simple math that $250,000 per year is definitely not a sustainable retirement invest. Doing a very quick, back-of-the envelope calculation yields a projected sustainable invest of $80,568 per year. (I assumed a 30-year retirement as well as 7% portfolio return and assumed all funds have been exhausted by the end of year 30. This ignores inflation, market volatility, timing of marketplace returns, Social Security as well as income taxes but does highlight the spending disconnect.)
High earners in their 50s and 60s want to lay the groundwork to bridge their current spending habits to what is sustainable during retirement. The first step is to get serious about creating an accurate income. Next they should see their spending levels through the lens of their retirement savings. If the savings represent a mere 1 to 2 times your spending levels, you've got some serious work to do! If your solution is "Oh I'll just keep working," there are two important things to remember: older workers cost more, so they are on the firing line in a downsizing; and your own health may not allow it.
Older high earners can stay in denial regarding the situation till they retire due to the fact they have the income to support their lifestyle. When they get that final paycheck, reality will soon set in. Don't allow yourself be caught off guard.
View the original article here
Let's make an assumption that being a "high earner" is all relative as well as largely determined by what part of nation we live in. Whether we are a high earner in Brand new York City with web after-tax of $1 million or $250,000 in a low-cost area is immaterial; the point is the fact that pre-retirees should take a look at their personal balance sheet to ascertain the sustainability of their lifestyle during retirement -- especially for those who have lived at or perhaps above their means for their entire lives. Everything's fine until you get that final paycheck as well as face the next 30 many years of retirement.
Take for example a 60-year-old with web earnings of $250,000 per year. Assume this individual spends all of those after-tax earnings or money flow every year.
If this person has saved $1 million for retirement, it is very simple math that $250,000 per year is definitely not a sustainable retirement invest. Doing a very quick, back-of-the envelope calculation yields a projected sustainable invest of $80,568 per year. (I assumed a 30-year retirement as well as 7% portfolio return and assumed all funds have been exhausted by the end of year 30. This ignores inflation, market volatility, timing of marketplace returns, Social Security as well as income taxes but does highlight the spending disconnect.)
High earners in their 50s and 60s want to lay the groundwork to bridge their current spending habits to what is sustainable during retirement. The first step is to get serious about creating an accurate income. Next they should see their spending levels through the lens of their retirement savings. If the savings represent a mere 1 to 2 times your spending levels, you've got some serious work to do! If your solution is "Oh I'll just keep working," there are two important things to remember: older workers cost more, so they are on the firing line in a downsizing; and your own health may not allow it.
Older high earners can stay in denial regarding the situation till they retire due to the fact they have the income to support their lifestyle. When they get that final paycheck, reality will soon set in. Don't allow yourself be caught off guard.
View the original article here
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Tech ETFs Look to Holiday Season
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- Google(GOOG) managed to kick off the technology earnings season earlier this month on a high note. Unfortunately, any momentum stemming from its report seems to have dissipated in the following weeks.
Following the strong results from the search giant, companies including Apple(AAPL), Netflix(NFLX) and most recently, Amazon.com(AMZN) have each stepped up to the plate and whiffed.
Netflix was a particularly big disappointment. The company, which has suffered a number of gaffes in recent months, managed to beat analyst estimates. However, news of a dismal drawdown in subscribers sent investors fleeing. By the end of Tuesday's trading, shares of NFLX were off over 34%.
Given the weak earnings showings from these tech favorites, investors may be wary of taking steps into this sector. Shunning technology, however, is not the best strategy going forward. This is especially true now that the holiday season is nearly upon us.
To say that technology has become an important element of this season would be a gross understatement. While hotly sought-after gadgets like Amazon's Kindle Fire and the iPhone 4S will likely be at the top of many wish lists, the mere act of shopping has become increasingly technology focused over the years.
Whereas droves of consumers once trudged to their local shopping centers to fight crowds and wait in long lines in order to purchase gifts for their friends and family, they increasingly are opting to get their holiday shopping done from the comfort of their home sofas and office chairs. Last year, sales on "Cyber Monday" broke through the $1 billion mark for the first time. Perhaps more importantly, however, was the fact that the sales numbers seen on this tech-focused shopping day handedly beat out those on Black Friday.
The trend shows no sign of slowing, either. On the contrary, in a press release issued on Monday, the National Retail Federation found that consumers expect to get 36% of their holiday shopping done online this year. This is up from 32.7% in the previous year.
Shipping goliath FedEx(FDX) provided further evidence of the growing presence of online shopping this week when it announced that it expects to see record volume during this year's season. Looking to Dec. 12 -- the day considered to be the company's busiest -- FedEx forecasts that it will handle 17 million packages. This marks a 10% increase from the year previous. Businessweek notes that the increasing presence of e-commerce has been instrumental in propelling the company's holiday shipments higher over the past few years.
Although fellow shipping industry leader United Parcel Services(UPS) has yet to release its own holiday season forecasts, the prospects already appears promising. The Wall Street Journal reported that chairman Scott Davis mentioned to shareholders that holiday shipping will outpace last year's numbers.
A fund like the First Trust Dow Jones Internet Index Fund(FDN) can provide investors with exposure to a number of the most popular technology-related holiday destinations. The fund is designed to target a wide pool of names from across the Internet sector, including Google, Priceline.com(PCLN) and Salesforce(CRM). Online consumer destinations like Amazon and eBay(EBAY) make respectable showings as well, accounting for a combined 14% of FDN's portfolio.
In the near term, paltry earnings performances from top tech names may lead FDN down a rocky path. However, with the retail-friendly holiday shopping season kicking into high gear, this is one product I would encourage investors to keep a close watch on.
Written by Don Dion in Williamstown, Mass.
>To order reprints of this article, click here: Reprints
Monday, December 5, 2011
Top 10 Health Care ETFs
Our goal in this profile is to help investors wade through the many competing ETF offerings available. Using our lengthy experience as an ETF publication, and almost 40 years in the investment business, we can help choose those ETFs that thing as well as will or perhaps may certainly not be repetitive. The result is a more manageable list of issues from which to view as well as make selections.
There is currently an growing list of 24 ETFs oriented to the health care sector with more on the method. The following analysis features a fair representation of ETFs available. We believe from these investors may choose an appropriate ETF to satisfy the best index-based offerings people and financial advisors may utilize.
We are not ranking these ETFs favoring you over another so don't let the listing order mislead you. Although we will use many of these in ETF Digest portfolios it's not our intention to recommend one over an additional.
ETFs are based on indexes tied to well-known index providers including Russell, S&P, Barclays, MSCI, Dow Jones as well as so forth. Also included are many so-called "enhanced" indexes that attempt to achieve better performance through more active management of the index.
Where competitive issues exist and/or repetitive issues available at a fee cost saving we mention those as other choices. Brand new issues are coming to marketplace consistently (especially globally) as well as occasionally these issues should become more seasoned before they will be included at least in our listings.
For traders as well as investors wishing to hedge, leveraged and inverse issues are available to use from ProShares and Direxion as well as exactly where available these are noted.
XLV (SPDR Healthcare Sector ETF) follows the Health Care Select Sector Index. The fund was launched in December 1998. The expense ratio is .20%. Assets under Management (AUM) equal over $3.4 billion as well as average daily trading volume are over 15M shares. As of late October 2011 the dividend is $.66 creating the current yield 2.02% with YTD performance over 6.60%.
An alternative choice can include IYH (iShares Dow Jones U.S. Medical ETF) follows the index of the same name. The expense ratio is higher at .48%. The constituents are similar to XLV whilst the YTD return as of July 2011 is 5.43%.
Both ProShares as well as Direxion Shares maintain leveraged extended as well as brief ETFs for hedging or perhaps speculation needs.
Data as of October 2011
XLV Top Ten Holdings & Weightings Johnson & Johnson (JNJ): 13.97%Pfizer Inc (PFE): 11.04%Merck & Co Inc (MRK): 8.06%Abbott Laboratories (ABT): 5.40%Bristol-Myers Squibb Business (BMY): 4.31%Amgen Inc (AMGN): 4.06%UnitedHealth Group Inc (UNH): 4.00%Eli Lilly as well as Company (LLY): 3.01%Medtronic, Inc. (MDT): 2.82%Baxter International Inc. (BAX): 2.59%
View the original article here
Sunday, December 4, 2011
ETF Options Galore for Commodities
Sweeping macroeconomic turmoil and looming marketplace doubts have created a treacherous environment for commodity investors over the past few months.
Whilst the risk of an upheaval remains present, as we have seen in latest days, the fog can be lifting on hard assets.
At the start of the week, commercial giant Caterpillar(CAT) injected a welcomed dose of confidence into commodities. The firm noted that its mining branch had been a major contributor to its analyst-beating quarterly earnings numbers.
In addition, hunting ahead CAT appeared confident that demand for mined resources will stay strong. Iin the middle of the summer, the company expanded its reach into the mining industry, spending over $8 billion to acquire Bucyrus International, an equipment firm.
Investment experts are optimistic regarding hard assets too. On Monday, Bloomberg reported that the number of bullish bets on commodities from the hedge fund industry had increased to levels last seen in August. According to the report, waning concerns regarding a double-dip recession combined with improving sentiment towards emerging markets are helping to restore these investors' appetites for energy and agricultural products.
In the past I have pointed to futures-backed money like the PowerShares Commodity Fund(DBC) as an attractive how to gain exposure to commodities.
While long-only products such as DBC are attractive during periods of strength, I additionally directed investor attention towards the WisdomTree Managed Futures Fund(WDTI) during the opening half of the month. This pseudo active ETF casts a web over a broad collection of commodity- and currency-tracking futures contracts, taking long as well as short positions. This strategy allows the fund to navigate any kind of market environment.
These money have proven to be effective for resource-hungry investors in the past. However, definitely not all people are comfortable with the idea of targeting their favorite commodities using futures contracts. Those wary of these instruments can would like to consider taking aim at hard assets using an equity-backed ETF.
The growth of the ETF industry has led to the creation of a vast collection of funds designed to provide investors with exposure to single commodity-related industries. For example, investors can use products such as the Marketplace Vectors Agribusiness ETF(MOO), Market Vectors Coal ETF(KOL) or the First Trust ISE Revere Natural Gas Index Fund(FCG) to gain exposure to leading companies in the agriculture, coal, as well as natural gas industries respectively.
View the original article here
Whilst the risk of an upheaval remains present, as we have seen in latest days, the fog can be lifting on hard assets.
At the start of the week, commercial giant Caterpillar(CAT) injected a welcomed dose of confidence into commodities. The firm noted that its mining branch had been a major contributor to its analyst-beating quarterly earnings numbers.
In addition, hunting ahead CAT appeared confident that demand for mined resources will stay strong. Iin the middle of the summer, the company expanded its reach into the mining industry, spending over $8 billion to acquire Bucyrus International, an equipment firm.
Investment experts are optimistic regarding hard assets too. On Monday, Bloomberg reported that the number of bullish bets on commodities from the hedge fund industry had increased to levels last seen in August. According to the report, waning concerns regarding a double-dip recession combined with improving sentiment towards emerging markets are helping to restore these investors' appetites for energy and agricultural products.
In the past I have pointed to futures-backed money like the PowerShares Commodity Fund(DBC) as an attractive how to gain exposure to commodities.
While long-only products such as DBC are attractive during periods of strength, I additionally directed investor attention towards the WisdomTree Managed Futures Fund(WDTI) during the opening half of the month. This pseudo active ETF casts a web over a broad collection of commodity- and currency-tracking futures contracts, taking long as well as short positions. This strategy allows the fund to navigate any kind of market environment.
These money have proven to be effective for resource-hungry investors in the past. However, definitely not all people are comfortable with the idea of targeting their favorite commodities using futures contracts. Those wary of these instruments can would like to consider taking aim at hard assets using an equity-backed ETF.
The growth of the ETF industry has led to the creation of a vast collection of funds designed to provide investors with exposure to single commodity-related industries. For example, investors can use products such as the Marketplace Vectors Agribusiness ETF(MOO), Market Vectors Coal ETF(KOL) or the First Trust ISE Revere Natural Gas Index Fund(FCG) to gain exposure to leading companies in the agriculture, coal, as well as natural gas industries respectively.
View the original article here
Friday, December 2, 2011
Fundamental Index Money Look Promising
With a great deal fanfare, fundamental index money began appearing in 2006.
Proponents predicted that the brand new funds would definitely outdo the S&P 500 as well as other traditional benchmarks. Have the fundamental funds lived up to the hype? It is too soon to draw final conclusions, but the early results look promising. A few fundamental money have outdone the S&P 500 and other traditional benchmarks.
In many cases the margins of victory have been little. But the results are noteworthy mainly because many of the fundamental money emphasize value stocks -- a segment of the market that has been out of favor in recent years. When value stocks return to the forefront, the fundamental funds could surge.
Among the winners is PowerShares FTSE RAFI US 1000(PRF), a large-cap fundamental ETF that returned 0.44% annually during the past five many years, according to Morningstar.
In comparison, Vanguard 500 Index(VFINX), the granddaddy of S&P 500 mutual funds, lost 0.37% annually. Fundamental money also excelled in small-cap categories. During the past 3 many years, Schwab Fundamental US Small/Mid Company(SFSNX) returned 18.10% yearly, compared to 14.7% for Vanguard Small Cap Index(VSCIX), a traditional index mutual fund.
Proponents of fundamental money say that traditional benchmarks are inferior because they are weighted by market capitalization. Under the traditional program, stocks with big marketplace values account for a bigger percentage of assets. In the S&P 500, the stock with the largest market value is Exxon Mobil(XOM), which accounts for 3.5% of the assets in the index. Among the smallest holdings is Washington Post(WPO), which accounts for 0.02% of the benchmark.
As a stock appreciates, its weighting in the cap-weighted index can rise, while the weighting of unloved shares can decline. Critics say that cap weighting can depress returns because it needs investors to put more cash into expensive stocks. The flaws in the approach were highlighted in the late 1990s whenever a few of technology stocks soared as well as came to account for a big percentage of the S&P 500. Whenever the technology stars collapsed, the index sank hard.
To avoid emphasizing expensive stocks, fundamental money weight holdings according to financial measures such as a company's sales, dividends, or earnings. A few fundamental money rank stocks according to 1 measure, while other people use a combination of many indicators.
View the original article here
Proponents predicted that the brand new funds would definitely outdo the S&P 500 as well as other traditional benchmarks. Have the fundamental funds lived up to the hype? It is too soon to draw final conclusions, but the early results look promising. A few fundamental money have outdone the S&P 500 and other traditional benchmarks.
In many cases the margins of victory have been little. But the results are noteworthy mainly because many of the fundamental money emphasize value stocks -- a segment of the market that has been out of favor in recent years. When value stocks return to the forefront, the fundamental funds could surge.
Among the winners is PowerShares FTSE RAFI US 1000(PRF), a large-cap fundamental ETF that returned 0.44% annually during the past five many years, according to Morningstar.
In comparison, Vanguard 500 Index(VFINX), the granddaddy of S&P 500 mutual funds, lost 0.37% annually. Fundamental money also excelled in small-cap categories. During the past 3 many years, Schwab Fundamental US Small/Mid Company(SFSNX) returned 18.10% yearly, compared to 14.7% for Vanguard Small Cap Index(VSCIX), a traditional index mutual fund.
Proponents of fundamental money say that traditional benchmarks are inferior because they are weighted by market capitalization. Under the traditional program, stocks with big marketplace values account for a bigger percentage of assets. In the S&P 500, the stock with the largest market value is Exxon Mobil(XOM), which accounts for 3.5% of the assets in the index. Among the smallest holdings is Washington Post(WPO), which accounts for 0.02% of the benchmark.
As a stock appreciates, its weighting in the cap-weighted index can rise, while the weighting of unloved shares can decline. Critics say that cap weighting can depress returns because it needs investors to put more cash into expensive stocks. The flaws in the approach were highlighted in the late 1990s whenever a few of technology stocks soared as well as came to account for a big percentage of the S&P 500. Whenever the technology stars collapsed, the index sank hard.
To avoid emphasizing expensive stocks, fundamental money weight holdings according to financial measures such as a company's sales, dividends, or earnings. A few fundamental money rank stocks according to 1 measure, while other people use a combination of many indicators.
View the original article here
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Finding Jewels in Emerging Markets Bond Funds
Worried about the uncertain economic outlook, investors have been dumping emerging marketplace bonds and racing to buy Treasuries. During the previous three months, emerging market bond money have lost 3.4%, while extended government funds have gained 19.8%, according to Morningstar.
But definitely not all emerging bond funds have suffered equally. During the previous three months, Fidelity Brand new Markets Income (FNMIX) about broke even. The fund avoided trouble by following the cautious approach favored by portfolio manager John Carlson. The Fidelity manager shuns the lowest-quality bonds and emphasizes government securities that are issued in dollars -- not in foreign currencies. The dollar bonds frequently prove resilient in downturns. "Our first rule is to play good defense as well as avoid blowups," says Carlson.
Is the recent turbulence a sign of trouble to come in the emerging markets? Probably certainly not, says Carlson. He says that the emerging markets have been pulled down by concerns regarding debt problems in Europe. But the panic has subsided, and the bonds have been recovering as international markets have rebounded. Now the bonds seem poised to deliver decent returns, he says. "The basics of many emerging countries are in good form," he says.
Fidelity and other emerging bond money have attracted bigger followings lately. During the previous year, investors poured $14 billion into the funds. That's a huge flood of money for a category that just has $43 billion in total assets. Investors have been attracted by the improving outlook for emerging markets. At a time whenever the U.S. and Europe struggle with crushing debt burdens, many countries in Asia as well as Latin America have solid balance sheets as well as fast growing economies. As their prospects have improved, emerging marketplace bonds have strengthened. During the previous three years, emerging bond money have returned 17.3% yearly, ranking as the top-performing fixed-income category tracked by Morningstar.
Besides providing a chance to benefit from growing economies, emerging bonds additionally offer competitive yields. Emerging bond benchmarks yield around 6.0%, an attractive payout at a time when 10-year Treasuries give 2.18%.
View the original article here
But definitely not all emerging bond funds have suffered equally. During the previous three months, Fidelity Brand new Markets Income (FNMIX) about broke even. The fund avoided trouble by following the cautious approach favored by portfolio manager John Carlson. The Fidelity manager shuns the lowest-quality bonds and emphasizes government securities that are issued in dollars -- not in foreign currencies. The dollar bonds frequently prove resilient in downturns. "Our first rule is to play good defense as well as avoid blowups," says Carlson.
Is the recent turbulence a sign of trouble to come in the emerging markets? Probably certainly not, says Carlson. He says that the emerging markets have been pulled down by concerns regarding debt problems in Europe. But the panic has subsided, and the bonds have been recovering as international markets have rebounded. Now the bonds seem poised to deliver decent returns, he says. "The basics of many emerging countries are in good form," he says.
Fidelity and other emerging bond money have attracted bigger followings lately. During the previous year, investors poured $14 billion into the funds. That's a huge flood of money for a category that just has $43 billion in total assets. Investors have been attracted by the improving outlook for emerging markets. At a time whenever the U.S. and Europe struggle with crushing debt burdens, many countries in Asia as well as Latin America have solid balance sheets as well as fast growing economies. As their prospects have improved, emerging marketplace bonds have strengthened. During the previous three years, emerging bond money have returned 17.3% yearly, ranking as the top-performing fixed-income category tracked by Morningstar.
Besides providing a chance to benefit from growing economies, emerging bonds additionally offer competitive yields. Emerging bond benchmarks yield around 6.0%, an attractive payout at a time when 10-year Treasuries give 2.18%.
View the original article here
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
3 Factors to Stop Worrying as well as Invest Now
The following commentary comes from an independent investor or perhaps marketplace observer as part of TheStreet's guest contributor program, which is separate from the company's news coverage.
We may think it's a stupid idea to purchase stocks now. As well as I'll admit, things are a bit bleak. Seasonal hiring is disappointing as well as unemployment remains stubbornly high. Inflation is eroding family budgets whilst wages as well as personal income are stagnant. Debt woes in Europe are in focus, but the "super committee" ensures that debt issues in America is the topic of ridicule sometime soon.
It's indeed ugly on Wall Street. September saw us shed about 4% from the major indices -- as well as if we hadn't seen some big up days last week, we can have languished at lows that have been off regarding 6% on the month. As well as that knows exactly what October will bring after a flop earlier this week and a rally off of the lows in the last two days.
But the risk we should be focusing on now isn't the risk of having stocks. No, the real risk could be what will happen if we are not invested in the marketplace.
Here are three reasons precisely why we should stop fretting and start investing now, with investment opportunities to prove the point to consider:
The myth of going to money is the fact that you'll protect the revenue. Possibly it's true that you will not see a red arrow next to your own bank account unless you make a withdrawal, but the sad reality is that if the cash is just sitting there, it is losing value every day. The U.S. Labor Department reported recently that consumer costs had been rising at a 3.8% annual rate -- the hottest pace of inflation since November 2008. In short, the money can buy regarding 4% less now that it did a year ago.
Still think it's wise to allow your own cash simply sit there?
View the original article here
We may think it's a stupid idea to purchase stocks now. As well as I'll admit, things are a bit bleak. Seasonal hiring is disappointing as well as unemployment remains stubbornly high. Inflation is eroding family budgets whilst wages as well as personal income are stagnant. Debt woes in Europe are in focus, but the "super committee" ensures that debt issues in America is the topic of ridicule sometime soon.
It's indeed ugly on Wall Street. September saw us shed about 4% from the major indices -- as well as if we hadn't seen some big up days last week, we can have languished at lows that have been off regarding 6% on the month. As well as that knows exactly what October will bring after a flop earlier this week and a rally off of the lows in the last two days.
But the risk we should be focusing on now isn't the risk of having stocks. No, the real risk could be what will happen if we are not invested in the marketplace.
Here are three reasons precisely why we should stop fretting and start investing now, with investment opportunities to prove the point to consider:
The myth of going to money is the fact that you'll protect the revenue. Possibly it's true that you will not see a red arrow next to your own bank account unless you make a withdrawal, but the sad reality is that if the cash is just sitting there, it is losing value every day. The U.S. Labor Department reported recently that consumer costs had been rising at a 3.8% annual rate -- the hottest pace of inflation since November 2008. In short, the money can buy regarding 4% less now that it did a year ago.
Still think it's wise to allow your own cash simply sit there?
View the original article here
Monday, November 28, 2011
How Fund Investors Can Spread Gold Bets
Gold has been whipsawing investors lately, as well as shareholders of precious metals funds have special factors to feel disappointed.
And so far this year, gold prices have climbed 14% to $1,662, while precious metals money have dropped 15.7%, according to Morningstar.
The performance is unusual because most often the funds rise along with bullion prices. Fund portfolio managers provide several theories regarding exactly what has caused the bad returns.
The funds invest in stocks of mining companies. Those have faced increasing costs for fuel as well as steel. In addition, many companies have struggled to find new reserves.
But the biggest cause of the weak showing could just be that investors expect gold costs to sink in the next couple years. If that happens, mine profits could drop sharply.
"People are afraid that mining stocks can be at the top of the cycle," says Stephen Land, portfolio manager of Franklin Gold as well as Precious Metals(FKRCX).
Under typical conditions, the precious metals money outperform bullion during bull markets as well as trail in downturns.
This happens due to the fact mining stocks are leveraged to the price of gold.
To appreciate how the leverage works, consider that it costs some miners regarding $700 to produce an ounce of gold.
Say the price of gold is $1,000; a mine then earns a profit of $300 an ounce. If the price climbs to $1,300, the mine's profits would increase 100%. But investors in bullion would only record 30% gains.
In a downturn, leverage works in reverse, and mining stocks suffer big losses when gold falls.
During the past decade, gold prices have climbed regarding 18% annually. Leverage has boosted precious metals money, which have returned 23.5% annually and ranked as the top-performing category tracked by Morningstar.
If you such as gold, should you purchase a precious metals fund or hold bullion directly?
Some analysts claim that the funds have an edge mainly because mining stocks look cheap. Many of the stocks have usually sold at price-to-earnings ratios of 20 to 30. But after the bad performance this year, the P/Es have slipped into the 10 to 20 range. Naturally the multiples could fall more if gold prices plunge, as many analysts predict.
View the original article here
And so far this year, gold prices have climbed 14% to $1,662, while precious metals money have dropped 15.7%, according to Morningstar.
The performance is unusual because most often the funds rise along with bullion prices. Fund portfolio managers provide several theories regarding exactly what has caused the bad returns.
The funds invest in stocks of mining companies. Those have faced increasing costs for fuel as well as steel. In addition, many companies have struggled to find new reserves.
But the biggest cause of the weak showing could just be that investors expect gold costs to sink in the next couple years. If that happens, mine profits could drop sharply.
"People are afraid that mining stocks can be at the top of the cycle," says Stephen Land, portfolio manager of Franklin Gold as well as Precious Metals(FKRCX).
Under typical conditions, the precious metals money outperform bullion during bull markets as well as trail in downturns.
This happens due to the fact mining stocks are leveraged to the price of gold.
To appreciate how the leverage works, consider that it costs some miners regarding $700 to produce an ounce of gold.
Say the price of gold is $1,000; a mine then earns a profit of $300 an ounce. If the price climbs to $1,300, the mine's profits would increase 100%. But investors in bullion would only record 30% gains.
In a downturn, leverage works in reverse, and mining stocks suffer big losses when gold falls.
During the past decade, gold prices have climbed regarding 18% annually. Leverage has boosted precious metals money, which have returned 23.5% annually and ranked as the top-performing category tracked by Morningstar.
If you such as gold, should you purchase a precious metals fund or hold bullion directly?
Some analysts claim that the funds have an edge mainly because mining stocks look cheap. Many of the stocks have usually sold at price-to-earnings ratios of 20 to 30. But after the bad performance this year, the P/Es have slipped into the 10 to 20 range. Naturally the multiples could fall more if gold prices plunge, as many analysts predict.
View the original article here
Saturday, November 26, 2011
None of Your Mutual Money Are Creating Money
U.S. stock mutual money that invest in a diverse array of companies turned in a shameful performance last quarter, as none -- that's right, none -- made funds.
Among funds that purchase mostly U.S. stocks as well as use no leverage or perhaps brief positions, only 3 sector-specific funds eked out gains from the beginning of July to the end of September, according to fund-research firm Morningstar: Icon Telecommunications & Utilities(ICTUX), up 1.9%; Franklin Utilities(FKUTX), up 1.7%; and Invesco Utilities Investor(FSTUX), up 0.3%.
The stock-market rout gathered steam last month on concern the U.S. economy is slipping into an additional recession as well as Europe's debt burden will sink more banks and cause a further decline in global corporate profits. In September, materials stocks fell the most, by 13%, followed by energy, with a 10% drop, as well as financial services, which tumbled 8.3%, according to Capital IQ. Utilities shares have been the sole sector to rise, by 1%.
The utility stocks that make up the winning money last quarter have historically been categorized as the turtles of equity investing, due to their slow, albeit steady, share-price returns.
But now they're seen as attractive investments for those seeking dividends and the preservation of funds in volatile markets.
Here's a snapshot of the five companies that have been the top gainers in the utility sector in the third quarter:
Progress Energy(PGN), 1 of the nation's biggest regulated utilities, is up 20% this year, including 8% in the 3rd quarter. It has a projected dividend yield of 4.75%.
Progress Energy is a holding company with a market value of $15 billion that offers electricity generation, transmission, as well as distribution throughout the Southeast, principally in North Carolina, South Carolina as well as Florida.
Progress as well as Duke Energy(DUK) have announced plans to merge in a $14 billion deal that will create the biggest electrical power utility in the U.S. They aim to close the deal by year-end.
The Duke merger, which faces several regulatory hurdles before it gets approved, would give Progress' shareholders an immediate premium to the pre-deal stock price as well as a 3% dividend increase. But the company has agreed to make $650 million in rate concessions to its customers through 2016.
Analysts are unanimous on their view of the stock, giving it 15 "hold" reviews, according to TheStreet Reviews.
View the original article here
Among funds that purchase mostly U.S. stocks as well as use no leverage or perhaps brief positions, only 3 sector-specific funds eked out gains from the beginning of July to the end of September, according to fund-research firm Morningstar: Icon Telecommunications & Utilities(ICTUX), up 1.9%; Franklin Utilities(FKUTX), up 1.7%; and Invesco Utilities Investor(FSTUX), up 0.3%.
The stock-market rout gathered steam last month on concern the U.S. economy is slipping into an additional recession as well as Europe's debt burden will sink more banks and cause a further decline in global corporate profits. In September, materials stocks fell the most, by 13%, followed by energy, with a 10% drop, as well as financial services, which tumbled 8.3%, according to Capital IQ. Utilities shares have been the sole sector to rise, by 1%.
The utility stocks that make up the winning money last quarter have historically been categorized as the turtles of equity investing, due to their slow, albeit steady, share-price returns.
But now they're seen as attractive investments for those seeking dividends and the preservation of funds in volatile markets.
Here's a snapshot of the five companies that have been the top gainers in the utility sector in the third quarter:
Progress Energy(PGN), 1 of the nation's biggest regulated utilities, is up 20% this year, including 8% in the 3rd quarter. It has a projected dividend yield of 4.75%.
Progress Energy is a holding company with a market value of $15 billion that offers electricity generation, transmission, as well as distribution throughout the Southeast, principally in North Carolina, South Carolina as well as Florida.
Progress as well as Duke Energy(DUK) have announced plans to merge in a $14 billion deal that will create the biggest electrical power utility in the U.S. They aim to close the deal by year-end.
The Duke merger, which faces several regulatory hurdles before it gets approved, would give Progress' shareholders an immediate premium to the pre-deal stock price as well as a 3% dividend increase. But the company has agreed to make $650 million in rate concessions to its customers through 2016.
Analysts are unanimous on their view of the stock, giving it 15 "hold" reviews, according to TheStreet Reviews.
View the original article here
Friday, November 25, 2011
You Own More Apple Stock Than We Think
The death of Apple(AAPL) co-founder as well as former Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs on Wednesday can have jostled many investors into checking on how many Apple shares they actually have.
Some will be amazed regarding how many they hold, given the tech firm's ubiquity as a top holding in mutual money, pension funds as well as index money. That popularity should prompt them to reassess their have portfolio's diversity, since a focus in one stock, or one industry, can add to volatility as well as reduce returns.
That's definitely not to say Apple investors have not been richly rewarded by their loyalty to the revolutionary maker of iPods, iPads and iPhones. The company's shares have a 10-year average yearly return of a staggering 47% versus the S&P 500's 2.6% return. This year, Apple's shares are up 17% compared with the S&P 500's 7.6% decline.
Tom Roseen, head of research services for fund-research fast Lipper, said "a lot of people can have become complacent in keeping up with their yearly reports" from fund providers and investment advisers. They can definitely not have realized portfolio weightings shifted over time. Therefore, a reshuffling may be in order.
Apple, now selling for almost $380 a share, bringing the total market value to a dizzying $350 billion, is 2nd just to Exxon Mobil(XOM) in the S&P 500 Index, creating it a top-10 holding in most passively managed index money as well as actively managed large-cap mutual money.
A total of 26% of U.S. and international equity mutual money have Apple in their top 10 holdings, according to Standard & Poor's mutual fund industry analyst Todd Rosenbulth. Peruse any kind of fund report as well as you're probably to see "AAPL" as a holding. It's the 1 no-brainer stock for mutual fund managers to have.
The company's ubiquity is due, in part, to the goals of the fund as well as investors' timing. For example, at some point Apple was viewed as a growth stock, and so that category of fund loaded up on it. Whenever its shares fell, it may have been viewed as a value stock, so got picked up by value fund managers. And its large-cap size makes it a part of any so-called core mutual fund or index fund. But few managers ever sold Apple when it entered their portfolios as well as juiced returns like no other.
View the original article here
Some will be amazed regarding how many they hold, given the tech firm's ubiquity as a top holding in mutual money, pension funds as well as index money. That popularity should prompt them to reassess their have portfolio's diversity, since a focus in one stock, or one industry, can add to volatility as well as reduce returns.
That's definitely not to say Apple investors have not been richly rewarded by their loyalty to the revolutionary maker of iPods, iPads and iPhones. The company's shares have a 10-year average yearly return of a staggering 47% versus the S&P 500's 2.6% return. This year, Apple's shares are up 17% compared with the S&P 500's 7.6% decline.
Tom Roseen, head of research services for fund-research fast Lipper, said "a lot of people can have become complacent in keeping up with their yearly reports" from fund providers and investment advisers. They can definitely not have realized portfolio weightings shifted over time. Therefore, a reshuffling may be in order.
Apple, now selling for almost $380 a share, bringing the total market value to a dizzying $350 billion, is 2nd just to Exxon Mobil(XOM) in the S&P 500 Index, creating it a top-10 holding in most passively managed index money as well as actively managed large-cap mutual money.
A total of 26% of U.S. and international equity mutual money have Apple in their top 10 holdings, according to Standard & Poor's mutual fund industry analyst Todd Rosenbulth. Peruse any kind of fund report as well as you're probably to see "AAPL" as a holding. It's the 1 no-brainer stock for mutual fund managers to have.
The company's ubiquity is due, in part, to the goals of the fund as well as investors' timing. For example, at some point Apple was viewed as a growth stock, and so that category of fund loaded up on it. Whenever its shares fell, it may have been viewed as a value stock, so got picked up by value fund managers. And its large-cap size makes it a part of any so-called core mutual fund or index fund. But few managers ever sold Apple when it entered their portfolios as well as juiced returns like no other.
View the original article here
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Extreme Selling Punishes Mutual Money as Investors Purchase ETFs
Investors are pulling money from U.S. equity mutual funds as fast as they can as the stock-market decline accelerates. They're buying government bonds, boosting savings as well as, amazingly, moving into exchange traded money.
"Extreme selling" by individual investors has caused $94.7 billion in redemptions from U.S. stock mutual funds in the four months through September, investment-research fast TrimTabs said. For all of 2008, which hosted the financial meltdown, economic recession as well as stock-market crash, outflows totaled $162 billion.
The wholesale dumping of U.S. equity mutual money underscores investors' aversion to the stock market's wild volatility. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has had intraday swings of more than 300 points in 20 trading sessions since Aug. 1. A latest survey by Natixis International Asset Management found 47% of U.S. investors are worried about losing revenue due to volatility.
The selling isn't contained to U.S. stock funds. Investors additionally pulled $9 billion from global funds from the begin of June till the end of August, which TrimTabs researchers say is the heaviest bleeding in 2 1/2 years. Less than two weeks into this month, October's outflows from global funds total $1.3 billion already.
"Mother and pop are extremely disgusted with international stocks," with "performance probably partly to blame," TrimTabs researchers write in their report released late Wednesday. International money have slumped 15.4% this year, over the 9.6% drop of the average domestic fund.
Morningstar analysts report similar findings, saying September had $6.9 billion flowing out of U.S. stock mutual funds.
So where's the income going? Morningstar notes that $90 billion has flowed into long-term mutual funds this year as $160 billion has flowed from money market funds. That leaves $70 billion unaccounted for, as well as builds on a difference of $216 billion from all of 2010.
"With cash continuing to flow out of income market money, a small proportion flowing into long-term mutual funds, and bank-deposit growth slowing, it's possible that investors are now utilizing money that utilized to go into savings for consumption," Morningstar Editorial Director Kevin McDevitt writes in today's research note.
TrimTabs analysts have a different take. They claim that investors are dumping actively managed mutual funds for ETFs, that are easier to trade as well as offer better tax advantages. As currently constructed, ETFs are subject just to capital-gains taxes when they're sold. Mutual funds, on the other hand, get hit with capital-gains taxes when assets in the fund are sold.
View the original article here
"Extreme selling" by individual investors has caused $94.7 billion in redemptions from U.S. stock mutual funds in the four months through September, investment-research fast TrimTabs said. For all of 2008, which hosted the financial meltdown, economic recession as well as stock-market crash, outflows totaled $162 billion.
The wholesale dumping of U.S. equity mutual money underscores investors' aversion to the stock market's wild volatility. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has had intraday swings of more than 300 points in 20 trading sessions since Aug. 1. A latest survey by Natixis International Asset Management found 47% of U.S. investors are worried about losing revenue due to volatility.
The selling isn't contained to U.S. stock funds. Investors additionally pulled $9 billion from global funds from the begin of June till the end of August, which TrimTabs researchers say is the heaviest bleeding in 2 1/2 years. Less than two weeks into this month, October's outflows from global funds total $1.3 billion already.
"Mother and pop are extremely disgusted with international stocks," with "performance probably partly to blame," TrimTabs researchers write in their report released late Wednesday. International money have slumped 15.4% this year, over the 9.6% drop of the average domestic fund.
Morningstar analysts report similar findings, saying September had $6.9 billion flowing out of U.S. stock mutual funds.
So where's the income going? Morningstar notes that $90 billion has flowed into long-term mutual funds this year as $160 billion has flowed from money market funds. That leaves $70 billion unaccounted for, as well as builds on a difference of $216 billion from all of 2010.
"With cash continuing to flow out of income market money, a small proportion flowing into long-term mutual funds, and bank-deposit growth slowing, it's possible that investors are now utilizing money that utilized to go into savings for consumption," Morningstar Editorial Director Kevin McDevitt writes in today's research note.
TrimTabs analysts have a different take. They claim that investors are dumping actively managed mutual funds for ETFs, that are easier to trade as well as offer better tax advantages. As currently constructed, ETFs are subject just to capital-gains taxes when they're sold. Mutual funds, on the other hand, get hit with capital-gains taxes when assets in the fund are sold.
View the original article here
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
More depend on Social Security
Monthly benefit checks have a big role in funding retirement -- they make up nearly 40% of retirement income. Still, the size of a typical check is small than you might think.
Social Security is the many significant source of income for Americans age 65 and older, as well as its importance has continued to grow, according to a recent Social Safety Administration report (.pdf file).
Social Security made up 38% of the total income of people age 65 as well as older in 2009 -- up from 30% in 1962 -- and is the largest source of retirement income. The second-largest share of retirement income is earnings from work (29%), a proportion that has remained consistent because 1962. Asset income has shrunk from 15% of retirement income in 1962 to 11% in 2009. Over the same period, income from private pensions has grown from 3% to 9%, and government employee pensions have increased from 6% to 9% of all retirement income.
Just a fortunate minority of Americans have important sources of retirement income other than Social Security. Social Safety made up 50% or perhaps more of the retirement income of 66% of Americans age 65 and older in 2009, up from 64% in 2008. And more than a 3rd of retirees (35%) get 90% to more of their income as a monthly payment from the Social Safety Administration.
Social Safety also covers more people than any other type of retirement benefit. The great majority of retired Americans age 65 as well as older (87%) received Social Security income in 2009, up from 69% in 1962. In contrast, only about half (53%) of older Americans have asset income in retirement, a proportion that is unchanged because 1962. The proportion of retirees receiving private-sector pension income has grown from 9% to 28%. And 14% of seniors have government pension income, up from 9% in 1962. The proportion of older Americans with income from work has fallen from simply over a 3rd in 1962 to about a quarter in 2009.
Whilst Social Security makes up a large share of the typical retiree's income, the checks are fairly little. The average monthly payout to retired workers was $1,176 in 2010. More than 54 million Americans had been paid a Social Security benefit last year. Retired workers make up the mass of people receiving Social Safety payments (64%), but the program also makes payments to disabled workers (15%), spouses of deceased workers (12%), and the spouses as well as children of retired to disabled workers (9%).
The proportion of ladies receiving retired-worker benefits has quadrupled since the program was founded, from 12% in 1940 to 49% in 2010. Regarding a quarter (26%) of ladies age 62 or older received benefits on the basis of only their husband's earning record in 2010, down from 57% in 1960. A growing share of ladies (28%) now have a dual entitlement to Social Security on the basis of both individual and spousal earnings, up from 5% in 1960. Married individuals can claim Social Security on the basis of their have work record or perhaps up to half of the higher earner's benefit, whichever is higher.
Despite the program's growing importance, people now pay a smaller proportion of their income into the system than they did whenever it was founded. Just about 84% of earnings from employment have been taxable in 2010, compared with 92% in 1937. That's due to the fact workers pay into the Social Safety Trust Fund on earnings up to the taxable maximum, that was $106,800 in 2010. Many 6% of Americans had earnings from employment that exceeded the most amount subject to Social Safety taxes in 2010, compared with 3% whenever the system began.
The federal system additionally has a long-term deficit. The Social Security Trust Fund is projected to be exhausted in 2036. At that time, payroll taxes and other income will generate just enough income to pay out 77% of program costs, unless tax increases, benefit cuts to other changes to the program are implemented.
View the original article here
Social Security is the many significant source of income for Americans age 65 and older, as well as its importance has continued to grow, according to a recent Social Safety Administration report (.pdf file).
Social Security made up 38% of the total income of people age 65 as well as older in 2009 -- up from 30% in 1962 -- and is the largest source of retirement income. The second-largest share of retirement income is earnings from work (29%), a proportion that has remained consistent because 1962. Asset income has shrunk from 15% of retirement income in 1962 to 11% in 2009. Over the same period, income from private pensions has grown from 3% to 9%, and government employee pensions have increased from 6% to 9% of all retirement income.
Just a fortunate minority of Americans have important sources of retirement income other than Social Security. Social Safety made up 50% or perhaps more of the retirement income of 66% of Americans age 65 and older in 2009, up from 64% in 2008. And more than a 3rd of retirees (35%) get 90% to more of their income as a monthly payment from the Social Safety Administration.
Social Safety also covers more people than any other type of retirement benefit. The great majority of retired Americans age 65 as well as older (87%) received Social Security income in 2009, up from 69% in 1962. In contrast, only about half (53%) of older Americans have asset income in retirement, a proportion that is unchanged because 1962. The proportion of retirees receiving private-sector pension income has grown from 9% to 28%. And 14% of seniors have government pension income, up from 9% in 1962. The proportion of older Americans with income from work has fallen from simply over a 3rd in 1962 to about a quarter in 2009.
Whilst Social Security makes up a large share of the typical retiree's income, the checks are fairly little. The average monthly payout to retired workers was $1,176 in 2010. More than 54 million Americans had been paid a Social Security benefit last year. Retired workers make up the mass of people receiving Social Safety payments (64%), but the program also makes payments to disabled workers (15%), spouses of deceased workers (12%), and the spouses as well as children of retired to disabled workers (9%).
The proportion of ladies receiving retired-worker benefits has quadrupled since the program was founded, from 12% in 1940 to 49% in 2010. Regarding a quarter (26%) of ladies age 62 or older received benefits on the basis of only their husband's earning record in 2010, down from 57% in 1960. A growing share of ladies (28%) now have a dual entitlement to Social Security on the basis of both individual and spousal earnings, up from 5% in 1960. Married individuals can claim Social Security on the basis of their have work record or perhaps up to half of the higher earner's benefit, whichever is higher.
Despite the program's growing importance, people now pay a smaller proportion of their income into the system than they did whenever it was founded. Just about 84% of earnings from employment have been taxable in 2010, compared with 92% in 1937. That's due to the fact workers pay into the Social Safety Trust Fund on earnings up to the taxable maximum, that was $106,800 in 2010. Many 6% of Americans had earnings from employment that exceeded the most amount subject to Social Safety taxes in 2010, compared with 3% whenever the system began.
The federal system additionally has a long-term deficit. The Social Security Trust Fund is projected to be exhausted in 2036. At that time, payroll taxes and other income will generate just enough income to pay out 77% of program costs, unless tax increases, benefit cuts to other changes to the program are implemented.
View the original article here
Monday, November 21, 2011
5 ways to sabotage your own retirement
We can definitely not necessarily be thinking of retirement when we celebrate a promotion, but possibly you should be. Plan -- and save -- now to avoid worry as well as need later.
Retirement isn't impossible for we, but we frequently get and so wrapped up in navigating our busy schedule that we unknowingly sabotage our have retirement. Look into these five specific areas of the program to see if you're doing damage to your goal of a comfortable retirement.
In this economy, it's easy to be grateful for even having a job. But you're definitely shortchanging your self if we don't negotiate for higher pay as soon as an employer presents a job provide. A higher starting income sets you up for bigger paychecks down the line due to the fact many raises are calculated as a percentage of your current pay. The worst an employer can say is no. And unless we are very rude in the negotiations, it's highly unlikely that an employer will take back the original provide because we asked if there is any kind of space for improvement.
We can be drastically cutting your own Social Safety checks without having even knowing it if you decide to retire early. Your own Social Security checks will be based on your 35 highest yearly salaries. (The Social Security web site has a tool to estimate your own benefit.) If we work less than 35 many years, you get a zero averaged in for every year that we didn't work. And it's usually a good idea to work even more than 35 many years to cancel out unfortunate many years that you didn't work a lot due to layoffs to your lower salary at the beginning of the career. (Are you saving enough for retirement? Check with MSN Money's calculator.)
It's easy to spend a little more each time the income increases. Spending more money improves the high quality of lifetime, allows you to celebrate the achievements as well as helps to keep we inspired. Even though cash isn't simply for hoarding, it's important to additionally save for the future as the paychecks grow.
If the retirement plan includes owning volatile investments like stocks, you should understand that the performance of those investments can vary widely from year to year.
Let's say you had $500,000 invested in 2009 as well as began your 4% withdrawal at $20,000 a year. Whenever 2011 rolled around, we probably had over $500,000 of liquid assets available even though we withdrew income for two many years. Seeing that you now have more funds, some people might start to inflate their withdrawals as well as take 4% of the brand new total. If your own account balance grew to $700,000, a 4% withdrawal is $28,000 instead of $20,000. But just what if the stock part of your portfolio later loses 20%? Those that stay with their original $20,000 withdrawal probably will not run out of cash, due to the fact the down many years were already accounted for.
People that take out more funds in years when their investments work well increase their risk of running from revenue mainly because that level of investment growth is not likely to continue forever.
If we consistently put off saving, you will certainly not have enough saved to retire well. For most people, retiring well takes many years of diligent saving. The earlier you begin saving, the more time the funds has to accumulate interest as well as grow.
View the original article here
Retirement isn't impossible for we, but we frequently get and so wrapped up in navigating our busy schedule that we unknowingly sabotage our have retirement. Look into these five specific areas of the program to see if you're doing damage to your goal of a comfortable retirement.
In this economy, it's easy to be grateful for even having a job. But you're definitely shortchanging your self if we don't negotiate for higher pay as soon as an employer presents a job provide. A higher starting income sets you up for bigger paychecks down the line due to the fact many raises are calculated as a percentage of your current pay. The worst an employer can say is no. And unless we are very rude in the negotiations, it's highly unlikely that an employer will take back the original provide because we asked if there is any kind of space for improvement.
We can be drastically cutting your own Social Safety checks without having even knowing it if you decide to retire early. Your own Social Security checks will be based on your 35 highest yearly salaries. (The Social Security web site has a tool to estimate your own benefit.) If we work less than 35 many years, you get a zero averaged in for every year that we didn't work. And it's usually a good idea to work even more than 35 many years to cancel out unfortunate many years that you didn't work a lot due to layoffs to your lower salary at the beginning of the career. (Are you saving enough for retirement? Check with MSN Money's calculator.)
It's easy to spend a little more each time the income increases. Spending more money improves the high quality of lifetime, allows you to celebrate the achievements as well as helps to keep we inspired. Even though cash isn't simply for hoarding, it's important to additionally save for the future as the paychecks grow.
If the retirement plan includes owning volatile investments like stocks, you should understand that the performance of those investments can vary widely from year to year.
Let's say you had $500,000 invested in 2009 as well as began your 4% withdrawal at $20,000 a year. Whenever 2011 rolled around, we probably had over $500,000 of liquid assets available even though we withdrew income for two many years. Seeing that you now have more funds, some people might start to inflate their withdrawals as well as take 4% of the brand new total. If your own account balance grew to $700,000, a 4% withdrawal is $28,000 instead of $20,000. But just what if the stock part of your portfolio later loses 20%? Those that stay with their original $20,000 withdrawal probably will not run out of cash, due to the fact the down many years were already accounted for.
People that take out more funds in years when their investments work well increase their risk of running from revenue mainly because that level of investment growth is not likely to continue forever.
If we consistently put off saving, you will certainly not have enough saved to retire well. For most people, retiring well takes many years of diligent saving. The earlier you begin saving, the more time the funds has to accumulate interest as well as grow.
View the original article here
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Tax law can make grandkids rich
Congress last year enacted temporary changes that allow for a massive estate-tax break through a Roth IRA. As a result, a grandchild could pocket millions, tax-free, over a life.
Sometimes Congress hands out a break that is so generous it seems it must be a mistake. This your a doozy: The ability to get a totally tax-free inheritance of $400 million or perhaps more.
Thanks to 2 recent changes in the tax code, investors with huge 401k accounts have a method to turn them into completely tax-free income for their grandchildren's lifetimes.
This is by far the biggest estate-planning break on record, created even as lawmakers debate over which tax giveaways should be killed to help shore up the federal budget.
"I call this tax break the government's going-out-of-business sale," says individual retirement account guru Ed Slott, that travels the country teaching advisers as well as accountants how to squeeze benefits out of the Roth IRA. "This is a tax break we can drive 10 Mack trucks through. It's an incredible opportunity to a totally tax-free transfer of wealth."
This massive estate-tax break was created last year in 2 steps. First, Congress lifted a $100,000 income restriction on that can convert a 401k to IRA to a Roth IRA, allowing even the wealthiest investors to convert. Then, late in the year, it raised the generation-skipping transfer tax exemption to $5 million until 2013. The GST exemption was previously $3.5 million as well as was scheduled to drop to $1 million this year before Congress stepped in.
Both of these provisions on their own create possibilities for important tax savings, upon conversion. But utilized in combination, the results are exponentially greater.
The Roth IRA has always been on a different playing field compared with alternatives, due to the fact it allows gains to be withdrawn tax-free. Funds taken from a 401k, regular IRA or other retirement accounts is subject to income tax rates. Also, the Roth doesn't need that minimum distributions be taken after we turn 70½, as other plans do. Thus if you don't want retirement plan assets to live on, the Roth preserves it best for heirs.
Certainly not everyone jumps at the chance to convert to a Roth IRA, because we have to pay income taxes on the assets moved into the account. And so if you plan to live off of retirement account assets, a conversion may definitely not make sense. But from an estate-planning perspective, when there are decades of gains ahead, the tax bill is a small price to pay for big benefits down the road.
With the new GST exemption, the estate-planning benefits that can be wrung from a Roth are eye-popping. Consider an extreme case: A wealthy individual converts a large 401k account to a Roth IRA as well as names a grandchild as the beneficiary. The grandchild, at age 1, inherits the Roth, whose assets have grown to $5 million. Due to the fact of the new $5 million GST exemption, the Roth assets would not be topic to estate tax or perhaps generation-skipping transfer tax.
Under Roth rules, an heir should take needed minimum distributions, but the distributions can be stretched over a lifetime, and assets left in the Roth can continue to grow tax-free. Based on a 1-year-old's 81.6-year life expectancy and assuming an average annual return of 8%, Slott calculates that the grandchild's lifetime income from the Roth would definitely be $408 million -- "completely without estate, gift, income and capital gains taxes," he says.
If both grandparents left a big Roth account to the same grandchild, the tax-free inheritance would be almost twice that amount, depending on the age of the grandchild whenever the second Roth is inherited.
View the original article here
Sometimes Congress hands out a break that is so generous it seems it must be a mistake. This your a doozy: The ability to get a totally tax-free inheritance of $400 million or perhaps more.
Thanks to 2 recent changes in the tax code, investors with huge 401k accounts have a method to turn them into completely tax-free income for their grandchildren's lifetimes.
This is by far the biggest estate-planning break on record, created even as lawmakers debate over which tax giveaways should be killed to help shore up the federal budget.
"I call this tax break the government's going-out-of-business sale," says individual retirement account guru Ed Slott, that travels the country teaching advisers as well as accountants how to squeeze benefits out of the Roth IRA. "This is a tax break we can drive 10 Mack trucks through. It's an incredible opportunity to a totally tax-free transfer of wealth."
This massive estate-tax break was created last year in 2 steps. First, Congress lifted a $100,000 income restriction on that can convert a 401k to IRA to a Roth IRA, allowing even the wealthiest investors to convert. Then, late in the year, it raised the generation-skipping transfer tax exemption to $5 million until 2013. The GST exemption was previously $3.5 million as well as was scheduled to drop to $1 million this year before Congress stepped in.
Both of these provisions on their own create possibilities for important tax savings, upon conversion. But utilized in combination, the results are exponentially greater.
The Roth IRA has always been on a different playing field compared with alternatives, due to the fact it allows gains to be withdrawn tax-free. Funds taken from a 401k, regular IRA or other retirement accounts is subject to income tax rates. Also, the Roth doesn't need that minimum distributions be taken after we turn 70½, as other plans do. Thus if you don't want retirement plan assets to live on, the Roth preserves it best for heirs.
Certainly not everyone jumps at the chance to convert to a Roth IRA, because we have to pay income taxes on the assets moved into the account. And so if you plan to live off of retirement account assets, a conversion may definitely not make sense. But from an estate-planning perspective, when there are decades of gains ahead, the tax bill is a small price to pay for big benefits down the road.
With the new GST exemption, the estate-planning benefits that can be wrung from a Roth are eye-popping. Consider an extreme case: A wealthy individual converts a large 401k account to a Roth IRA as well as names a grandchild as the beneficiary. The grandchild, at age 1, inherits the Roth, whose assets have grown to $5 million. Due to the fact of the new $5 million GST exemption, the Roth assets would not be topic to estate tax or perhaps generation-skipping transfer tax.
Under Roth rules, an heir should take needed minimum distributions, but the distributions can be stretched over a lifetime, and assets left in the Roth can continue to grow tax-free. Based on a 1-year-old's 81.6-year life expectancy and assuming an average annual return of 8%, Slott calculates that the grandchild's lifetime income from the Roth would definitely be $408 million -- "completely without estate, gift, income and capital gains taxes," he says.
If both grandparents left a big Roth account to the same grandchild, the tax-free inheritance would be almost twice that amount, depending on the age of the grandchild whenever the second Roth is inherited.
View the original article here
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Time to check out Saks, Tiffany?
The economy is slowing, and most consumers are cutting back -- but it looks such as the well-heeled have hardly noticed. That means the stocks of luxury retailers will be in for lift.
Do we have "class warfare" in the U.S.? You bet. And the deep are winning.
Don't take my word for it. No less an expert on affluence than Warren Buffett said it in an interview with Charlie Rose last week: "In fact my class is certainly not simply winning, we're killing. It's been a rout."
Buffett was talking about a pet peeve of his: tax rates that mean effectively lower taxes for the well-heeled. It can just as easily apply to the well-documented and growing gap between the deep Americans as well as everyone else.
I have written more than as soon as about the issues this gap creates as well as about how the recession has just created it worse. But there's also an investing angle we should not miss.
With the economy slowing again and ordinary Americans again cutting back, this has been a brutal summer for retail stocks. Luxury retailers have been sold off like everything else -- on the assumption the well-to-do must cut back with the rest of us.
Except that, well, they haven't. To the victors go the spoils, and so the deep are still purchasing.
This tells me that for investors, it's time to consider the places the rich go shopping. Let's take a look at precisely why luxury retail stocks are poised for bounce in an increasingly tough marketplace -- and why names such as Nordstrom (JWN, news) as well as Saks (SKS, news) will belong on the shopping list.
By any measure, August was a tough month for the stock marketplace as well as the economy. September brought more volatility as well as certainly not much good news. The evidence suggests that consumers had been pinching pennies as they digested all the bad news from Washington and Europe.
The marketplace seemed to assume this consumer crunch used across the board and that the wealthy would be putting off purchases of TechnoMarine watches, Gucci handbags and Miu Miu footwear.
The shares of luxury stores have all been hammered. The stocks of Tiffany (TIF, news), Saks, Coach (COH, news) as well as luxury chain Morgans Hotel Group (MHGC, news) have fallen 25% to 30% from their July highs. Nordstrom is down regarding 12%. In contrast, the Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) is off around 18%.
But in fact, the deep barely blinked.
"We are seeing that even when the stock market trembles, the affluent don't get afraid as easily as they did," says Candace Corlett, the president of WSL Strategic Retail, a consultancy. The deep lived through the 2008 market meltdown and the recession that followed with their wealth "intact enough," she says. Thus now, "they don't panic like they did in 2008."
We will know how true that is as sales reports from September roll in. But here's exactly where some of the key players stand now.
Nordstrom: In early September, Nordstrom reported that August sales at shops open more than a year were up 6.7%, compared with the year before. That was almost no different from the 6.6% gains in July. And it's essentially the same as the year-over-year gains the retailer posted for the first half of the year. Including money from new shops, sales were up more than 12% during the first half of the year, a pace that continued in August.Saks: This chain did report a important decline in same-store sales growth for August to 6.1%. In contrast, it reported 12.7% year-to-year growth for February through July. But still, 6% growth isn't bad at a time when consumers overall have pulled back sharply. As well as Wall Street analysts are predicting no slowdown at Saks for September. They expect 6% growth, according to Thomson Reuters.Tiffany: This high-end jeweler doesn't report monthly sales. But the business reported total worldwide sales growth of 30%, as well as a 25% gain in U.S. sales, for the quarter ending in July. Sales at its New York flagship store surged 41%, in part mainly because of spending by Chinese tourists. Tiffany has additionally been raising costs, which hasn't fazed shoppers lookin to take home a splurge in 1 of the luxury retailer's coveted blue boxes. The business noted specific strength in sales of items costing more than $20,000. But it was additionally helped by the fact that luxury jewelry was the strongest retail category in the 2nd quarter, posting sales gains of 8.4%, according to American Express Business Insights, a division of American Express.Coach: This bag-maker additionally doesn't report monthly sales results. But it has additionally been shooting out the lights. Coach saw money jump 17% in the 2nd quarter. The U.S. retailer's success in Japan over the previous few many years has proved that it can hold its have against Old World European luxury brands. Now, Coach is building on its strengths to grow quickly in China and other developing markets. Naturally, a slowdown in China will hurt Coach. But I don't believe leaders in China will run the risk of civil unrest a significant economic slowdown would definitely bring.
In contrast to these luxury stores, more pedestrian stores such as J.C. Penney (JCP, news) as well as Kohl's (KSS, news) are expected to post same-store sales growth of only 1.2% as well as 1.7%, respectively, as they report this month, according to Thomson Reuters.
Expect this dichotomy to continue during the holiday season. Because the market turmoil began Aug. 1, Wall Street analysts have raised fourth-quarter earnings estimates for luxury retailers, while cutting them for J.C. Penney, Kohl's and similar chains catering to lower-income shoppers, according to information provided by Thomson Reuters.
View the original article here
Do we have "class warfare" in the U.S.? You bet. And the deep are winning.
Don't take my word for it. No less an expert on affluence than Warren Buffett said it in an interview with Charlie Rose last week: "In fact my class is certainly not simply winning, we're killing. It's been a rout."
Buffett was talking about a pet peeve of his: tax rates that mean effectively lower taxes for the well-heeled. It can just as easily apply to the well-documented and growing gap between the deep Americans as well as everyone else.
I have written more than as soon as about the issues this gap creates as well as about how the recession has just created it worse. But there's also an investing angle we should not miss.
With the economy slowing again and ordinary Americans again cutting back, this has been a brutal summer for retail stocks. Luxury retailers have been sold off like everything else -- on the assumption the well-to-do must cut back with the rest of us.
Except that, well, they haven't. To the victors go the spoils, and so the deep are still purchasing.
This tells me that for investors, it's time to consider the places the rich go shopping. Let's take a look at precisely why luxury retail stocks are poised for bounce in an increasingly tough marketplace -- and why names such as Nordstrom (JWN, news) as well as Saks (SKS, news) will belong on the shopping list.
By any measure, August was a tough month for the stock marketplace as well as the economy. September brought more volatility as well as certainly not much good news. The evidence suggests that consumers had been pinching pennies as they digested all the bad news from Washington and Europe.
The marketplace seemed to assume this consumer crunch used across the board and that the wealthy would be putting off purchases of TechnoMarine watches, Gucci handbags and Miu Miu footwear.
The shares of luxury stores have all been hammered. The stocks of Tiffany (TIF, news), Saks, Coach (COH, news) as well as luxury chain Morgans Hotel Group (MHGC, news) have fallen 25% to 30% from their July highs. Nordstrom is down regarding 12%. In contrast, the Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) is off around 18%.
But in fact, the deep barely blinked.
"We are seeing that even when the stock market trembles, the affluent don't get afraid as easily as they did," says Candace Corlett, the president of WSL Strategic Retail, a consultancy. The deep lived through the 2008 market meltdown and the recession that followed with their wealth "intact enough," she says. Thus now, "they don't panic like they did in 2008."
We will know how true that is as sales reports from September roll in. But here's exactly where some of the key players stand now.
Nordstrom: In early September, Nordstrom reported that August sales at shops open more than a year were up 6.7%, compared with the year before. That was almost no different from the 6.6% gains in July. And it's essentially the same as the year-over-year gains the retailer posted for the first half of the year. Including money from new shops, sales were up more than 12% during the first half of the year, a pace that continued in August.Saks: This chain did report a important decline in same-store sales growth for August to 6.1%. In contrast, it reported 12.7% year-to-year growth for February through July. But still, 6% growth isn't bad at a time when consumers overall have pulled back sharply. As well as Wall Street analysts are predicting no slowdown at Saks for September. They expect 6% growth, according to Thomson Reuters.Tiffany: This high-end jeweler doesn't report monthly sales. But the business reported total worldwide sales growth of 30%, as well as a 25% gain in U.S. sales, for the quarter ending in July. Sales at its New York flagship store surged 41%, in part mainly because of spending by Chinese tourists. Tiffany has additionally been raising costs, which hasn't fazed shoppers lookin to take home a splurge in 1 of the luxury retailer's coveted blue boxes. The business noted specific strength in sales of items costing more than $20,000. But it was additionally helped by the fact that luxury jewelry was the strongest retail category in the 2nd quarter, posting sales gains of 8.4%, according to American Express Business Insights, a division of American Express.Coach: This bag-maker additionally doesn't report monthly sales results. But it has additionally been shooting out the lights. Coach saw money jump 17% in the 2nd quarter. The U.S. retailer's success in Japan over the previous few many years has proved that it can hold its have against Old World European luxury brands. Now, Coach is building on its strengths to grow quickly in China and other developing markets. Naturally, a slowdown in China will hurt Coach. But I don't believe leaders in China will run the risk of civil unrest a significant economic slowdown would definitely bring.
In contrast to these luxury stores, more pedestrian stores such as J.C. Penney (JCP, news) as well as Kohl's (KSS, news) are expected to post same-store sales growth of only 1.2% as well as 1.7%, respectively, as they report this month, according to Thomson Reuters.
Expect this dichotomy to continue during the holiday season. Because the market turmoil began Aug. 1, Wall Street analysts have raised fourth-quarter earnings estimates for luxury retailers, while cutting them for J.C. Penney, Kohl's and similar chains catering to lower-income shoppers, according to information provided by Thomson Reuters.
View the original article here
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Bargain-hunting in rare earths
Rare earth stocks have gone from marketplace darlings to market dogs. But if we can live with the risks, there are many good reasons to take an additional look.
Remember rare earths? As well as how prices of these metals, that are necessary raw materials for technologies including wind turbines, hybrid cars as well as flat-screen displays, had soared? Technology manufacturers scrambled to find reliable sources of supply as China utilized its position as owner of 95% of global production of rare earths to restrict supplies to manufacturers outside of China. And investors scurried to find a rare earth stock or perhaps two to add to their portfolios.
As well as now?
Shares of Molycorp (MCP, news), the highest-profile U.S. rare earth miner, were down 33% in simply you week (Sept. 16 through 23) recently. Lynas (LYSDY, news) (LYC.AU in Australia) dropped 17% in Sydney and 12% in Brand new York on Sept. 26.
After falling an additional 3.5% on Sept. 30 to $32.87, Molycorp is 58% off its 52-week high. Lynas, at $1.07 in Brand new York on Sept. 30, is 64% off its 52-week high.
The plunge in the price of rare earth stocks is, of course, partly a result of macroeconomic fears -- of a slowdown in the Chinese economy, of a slide by the U.S. economy back into recession, of a chaotic default by the Greek government that will return the international financial program to the brink it faced in 2008.
Mainly because rare earth stocks such as Molycorp as well as Lynas are highly speculative issues -- Molycorp has simply begun full-scale mining, as well as Lynas is still waiting on approval from the Malaysian government to open a processing plant to turn rare earth ores into useful forms of rare earth minerals -- their share costs are more volatile than the highly volatile global financial markets.
The rare earth story isn't all macroeconomics. The drop in the cost of rare earth stocks -- and the odds that these shares may definitely not only recover and move up to brand new highs -- is a result of changes in the rare earth marketplace that have nothing to do with global macroeconomics. As well as the trajectory of any individual stock in any rally is strongly influenced by company-specific news.
In other words, if you want to figure out whether or not to invest in exactly what are currently very depressed rare earth stocks, you should understand what's been happening in this once-hot sector because it dropped from the headlines.
Let me take we back to days of yesteryear -- 2009 or perhaps and so, for many of us -- whenever rare earth stocks burst on the investment scene.
China, that controls about 95% of the global provide of rare earth elements, got the ball rolling with the risk of an export boycott. Because rare earth elements are a key ingredient in many of the world's emerging technologies, the risk was a big deal. Adding a bit of 1 of the 17 rare earth elements to a magnet in the engine of an electrical to hybrid vehicle increases the power as well as efficiency of the engine, mainly because rare earth magnets are the strongest type of permanent magnets now made. Rare earths improve the color in TV screens and in lasers. You will also find rare earth elements in tunable microwave resonators, as well as terbium, 1 of the rare earth elements, is a key ingredient in low-energy light bulbs.
We're definitely not talking about trace amounts of these elements, either. The electrical engine in a Toyota Prius uses about 2 pounds of neodymium in its permanent magnets. Each Prius battery also uses 20 to 30 pounds of yet another rare earth, lanthanum. As well as it takes about a ton of neodymium to make the big magnets used in each megawatt of wind-turbine capacity.
Fortunately, despite their name, rare earth elements aren't especially rare. They're found in reasonably high concentrations in the Earth's crust, with you, cerium, coming in at the 25th most abundant element in the crust. Global production came to about 140,000 metric tons of refined rare earths in 2008.
But supplies of the rare earths that can be profitably mined aren't distributed evenly across the world. Partly that's the luck of the geologic draw. But mostly it's a function of the huge environmental costs of mining these rare earths. The traditional way has been to bore holes into promising rock formations, pump acid down the holes to dissolve many of the rare earths, and then pump the slurry into holding ponds for extraction of the rare earths. That extraction leaves behind a lake of water mixed with acid as well as various and sundry dissolved minerals.
It's a great deal, a lot cheaper if a company can get away with spending just regarding nothing on controlling the resulting water and sludge. The world's low-cost manufacturers of rare earth elements are definitely not huge and efficient open-pit mines but small, completely unregulated mom-and-pop mining companies in China. (The Chinese government is now trying to force many of these companies from business. The motive is many combination of a desire to limit environmental damage in China as well as to exercise greater control over exports. I'd say that the latter dominates.)
Over the past 20 years, the accidents of geology as well as the realities of unequal regulation slowly led to the closure of most of the rare earth mines outside of China. The Mountain Pass, Calif., mine, the world's richest proven reserve of rare earths, stopped production in 2002, for example.
Rising demand began to change that pic. Companies like Lynas as well as Molycorp crept back onto the stage with plans to start brand new mines or perhaps resume production from old mines.
It took the Chinese overplaying their hand, however, to turn that small trend into a speculator's dream. The Chinese started to reduce the amount of rare earth metals that can be exported. Companies outside China began to worry about the very real possibilities of paying higher prices as well as of not being able to purchase required raw materials.
This appears to be a key goal in China's strategy. By restricting exports, China would definitely force high-technology companies that need these rare earths to relocate production to China, accelerating the transfer of intellectual property to Chinese companies. It's no secret that China wants to create major wind, solar as well as hybrid-car industries.
The restrictions on production have increased in 2011. Beijing just regarding closed down its industry in early August to assess pollution issues (at least that's the official story). China is also creating a government-controlled monopoly, Bao Gang Rare Earth, that would definitely consolidate the 35 companies that now mine rare earths in northern China. Three similar government-controlled companies will consolidate production in the south of the nation.
The growing demand for rare earths from brand new technologies, plus China's moves, had 2 immediate effects. First, prices for rare earth minerals, especially those of the heavy rare earth elements, soared. Costs for many rare earth elements climbed 10 times from 2009 into 2011. 2nd, the scramble was on for alternative sources of supply. Quickly, there was a lot of capital available to restart mines that had closed mainly because of low prices as well as stricter environmental regulation outside of China.
View the original article here
Remember rare earths? As well as how prices of these metals, that are necessary raw materials for technologies including wind turbines, hybrid cars as well as flat-screen displays, had soared? Technology manufacturers scrambled to find reliable sources of supply as China utilized its position as owner of 95% of global production of rare earths to restrict supplies to manufacturers outside of China. And investors scurried to find a rare earth stock or perhaps two to add to their portfolios.
As well as now?
Shares of Molycorp (MCP, news), the highest-profile U.S. rare earth miner, were down 33% in simply you week (Sept. 16 through 23) recently. Lynas (LYSDY, news) (LYC.AU in Australia) dropped 17% in Sydney and 12% in Brand new York on Sept. 26.
After falling an additional 3.5% on Sept. 30 to $32.87, Molycorp is 58% off its 52-week high. Lynas, at $1.07 in Brand new York on Sept. 30, is 64% off its 52-week high.
The plunge in the price of rare earth stocks is, of course, partly a result of macroeconomic fears -- of a slowdown in the Chinese economy, of a slide by the U.S. economy back into recession, of a chaotic default by the Greek government that will return the international financial program to the brink it faced in 2008.
Mainly because rare earth stocks such as Molycorp as well as Lynas are highly speculative issues -- Molycorp has simply begun full-scale mining, as well as Lynas is still waiting on approval from the Malaysian government to open a processing plant to turn rare earth ores into useful forms of rare earth minerals -- their share costs are more volatile than the highly volatile global financial markets.
The rare earth story isn't all macroeconomics. The drop in the cost of rare earth stocks -- and the odds that these shares may definitely not only recover and move up to brand new highs -- is a result of changes in the rare earth marketplace that have nothing to do with global macroeconomics. As well as the trajectory of any individual stock in any rally is strongly influenced by company-specific news.
In other words, if you want to figure out whether or not to invest in exactly what are currently very depressed rare earth stocks, you should understand what's been happening in this once-hot sector because it dropped from the headlines.
Let me take we back to days of yesteryear -- 2009 or perhaps and so, for many of us -- whenever rare earth stocks burst on the investment scene.
China, that controls about 95% of the global provide of rare earth elements, got the ball rolling with the risk of an export boycott. Because rare earth elements are a key ingredient in many of the world's emerging technologies, the risk was a big deal. Adding a bit of 1 of the 17 rare earth elements to a magnet in the engine of an electrical to hybrid vehicle increases the power as well as efficiency of the engine, mainly because rare earth magnets are the strongest type of permanent magnets now made. Rare earths improve the color in TV screens and in lasers. You will also find rare earth elements in tunable microwave resonators, as well as terbium, 1 of the rare earth elements, is a key ingredient in low-energy light bulbs.
We're definitely not talking about trace amounts of these elements, either. The electrical engine in a Toyota Prius uses about 2 pounds of neodymium in its permanent magnets. Each Prius battery also uses 20 to 30 pounds of yet another rare earth, lanthanum. As well as it takes about a ton of neodymium to make the big magnets used in each megawatt of wind-turbine capacity.
Fortunately, despite their name, rare earth elements aren't especially rare. They're found in reasonably high concentrations in the Earth's crust, with you, cerium, coming in at the 25th most abundant element in the crust. Global production came to about 140,000 metric tons of refined rare earths in 2008.
But supplies of the rare earths that can be profitably mined aren't distributed evenly across the world. Partly that's the luck of the geologic draw. But mostly it's a function of the huge environmental costs of mining these rare earths. The traditional way has been to bore holes into promising rock formations, pump acid down the holes to dissolve many of the rare earths, and then pump the slurry into holding ponds for extraction of the rare earths. That extraction leaves behind a lake of water mixed with acid as well as various and sundry dissolved minerals.
It's a great deal, a lot cheaper if a company can get away with spending just regarding nothing on controlling the resulting water and sludge. The world's low-cost manufacturers of rare earth elements are definitely not huge and efficient open-pit mines but small, completely unregulated mom-and-pop mining companies in China. (The Chinese government is now trying to force many of these companies from business. The motive is many combination of a desire to limit environmental damage in China as well as to exercise greater control over exports. I'd say that the latter dominates.)
Over the past 20 years, the accidents of geology as well as the realities of unequal regulation slowly led to the closure of most of the rare earth mines outside of China. The Mountain Pass, Calif., mine, the world's richest proven reserve of rare earths, stopped production in 2002, for example.
Rising demand began to change that pic. Companies like Lynas as well as Molycorp crept back onto the stage with plans to start brand new mines or perhaps resume production from old mines.
It took the Chinese overplaying their hand, however, to turn that small trend into a speculator's dream. The Chinese started to reduce the amount of rare earth metals that can be exported. Companies outside China began to worry about the very real possibilities of paying higher prices as well as of not being able to purchase required raw materials.
This appears to be a key goal in China's strategy. By restricting exports, China would definitely force high-technology companies that need these rare earths to relocate production to China, accelerating the transfer of intellectual property to Chinese companies. It's no secret that China wants to create major wind, solar as well as hybrid-car industries.
The restrictions on production have increased in 2011. Beijing just regarding closed down its industry in early August to assess pollution issues (at least that's the official story). China is also creating a government-controlled monopoly, Bao Gang Rare Earth, that would definitely consolidate the 35 companies that now mine rare earths in northern China. Three similar government-controlled companies will consolidate production in the south of the nation.
The growing demand for rare earths from brand new technologies, plus China's moves, had 2 immediate effects. First, prices for rare earth minerals, especially those of the heavy rare earth elements, soared. Costs for many rare earth elements climbed 10 times from 2009 into 2011. 2nd, the scramble was on for alternative sources of supply. Quickly, there was a lot of capital available to restart mines that had closed mainly because of low prices as well as stricter environmental regulation outside of China.
View the original article here
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
At half off, is Groupon a buy?
The website has scaled back its IPO in response to a weak stock marketplace, executive exits and questions regarding its accounting as well as business model. But the debut can still be a tough sell.
As with half-price crochet lessons, Groupon's newly planned stock providing is sharply discounted from a cost that was arbitrary to begin with.
The company is seeking to raise $621 million for a sliver of its shares, which would definitely imply a marketplace value of $11.4 billion, The Wall Street Journal reports. That's down from an estimated value of $15 billion to $20 billion -- with many projections as high as $25 billion -- that would have resulted from an initial public providing that was scrapped earlier this year.
In June I wrote that Groupon's theoretical cost was preposterously high relative to its revenues, not least due to the fact its revenues weren't really income.
Groupon holds no inventory but rather markets goods and services on behalf of merchants in exchange for a cut. It was claiming certainly not just its take but also the merchants' as revenues.
Last month, after regulators questioned the practice, Groupon said it will restate revenues, reducing them by over half for the year. It also said its No. 2 executive had left for Google (GOOG, news), which has launched its have local discount service called Google Offers.
Last week, Groupon released third-quarter results showing that revenues climbed 9% from the second quarter. That's a sharp slowdown from growth of 33% during the 2nd quarter and 72% during the first.
With world stock prices having tumbled because summer, investors and the media have turned less cheerful toward Groupon. Chief Executive Andrew Mason called criticism "insane" and "hilarious" in an August memo to employees but has remained quiet of late, so as certainly not to violate rules about information released before a stock providing.
A few of the criticism is overdone. If Groupon indeed secures an $11 billon stock marketplace value, its Nov. 3 offering will have been anything but a flop.
Definitely not very a year ago, Google offered $6 billion for the business. If the valuation strikes many as silly, that's the fault of investors, definitely not Groupon.
For that matter, if discounted massages as well as yoga visits strike a few as consumerist fluff, it reflects just on the consumers who purchased 33 million Groupons last quarter.
Prospective buyers of the stock should exercise caution, however.
In June I estimated Groupon's pending price-to-sales ratio at 18. It's around one-third of that now, but that's still a good deal for a profitless company with sharply slowing sales growth as well as over a dozen competitors.
The company has additionally exhausted a great deal of its expansion possible. In June 2009 it operated in five North American markets. It's up to 175, plus 40 nations.
"In any marketplace in America, we can market $500,000 of half-off manicures as well as teeth-whitening procedures in a year simply by hanging out a shingle," wrote Sucharita Mulpuru, an analyst with Forrester Research.
Groupon's expansion into new cities is akin to a retailer opening new shops, so exactly what matters is its "same-store" sales growth, which has been sharply slower than its total sales growth, according to Mulpuru.
Will the stock jump on its first day of trading? That depends on Morgan Stanley (MS, news), Goldman Sachs Group (GS, news) and the deal's other underwriters. If they do well by both their investment banking clients and their retail investors, the deal will raise the most that the public pays, absolutely nothing more, as well as shares is small changed on their first day. Naturally, that rarely happens.
As well as the tiny size of the Groupon deal seems to set the conditions for a scarcity of shares, a run-up in the cost and -- pure speculation here -- a follow-on providing in which insiders market more.
So if you're thinking about buying Groupon shares with funds you'd otherwise bet on a horse, go ahead. Grab a few on a dip as well as try to unload it on a more eager buyer a day to 2 later.
If, however, you are a long-term investor hunting to settle down with a dot-com stock, go for Google instead. It's very priced, stuffed with money and, seven years after its stock providing, it's still expected to grow its sales by over 30% this year.
View the original article here
As with half-price crochet lessons, Groupon's newly planned stock providing is sharply discounted from a cost that was arbitrary to begin with.
The company is seeking to raise $621 million for a sliver of its shares, which would definitely imply a marketplace value of $11.4 billion, The Wall Street Journal reports. That's down from an estimated value of $15 billion to $20 billion -- with many projections as high as $25 billion -- that would have resulted from an initial public providing that was scrapped earlier this year.
In June I wrote that Groupon's theoretical cost was preposterously high relative to its revenues, not least due to the fact its revenues weren't really income.
Groupon holds no inventory but rather markets goods and services on behalf of merchants in exchange for a cut. It was claiming certainly not just its take but also the merchants' as revenues.
Last month, after regulators questioned the practice, Groupon said it will restate revenues, reducing them by over half for the year. It also said its No. 2 executive had left for Google (GOOG, news), which has launched its have local discount service called Google Offers.
Last week, Groupon released third-quarter results showing that revenues climbed 9% from the second quarter. That's a sharp slowdown from growth of 33% during the 2nd quarter and 72% during the first.
With world stock prices having tumbled because summer, investors and the media have turned less cheerful toward Groupon. Chief Executive Andrew Mason called criticism "insane" and "hilarious" in an August memo to employees but has remained quiet of late, so as certainly not to violate rules about information released before a stock providing.
A few of the criticism is overdone. If Groupon indeed secures an $11 billon stock marketplace value, its Nov. 3 offering will have been anything but a flop.
Definitely not very a year ago, Google offered $6 billion for the business. If the valuation strikes many as silly, that's the fault of investors, definitely not Groupon.
For that matter, if discounted massages as well as yoga visits strike a few as consumerist fluff, it reflects just on the consumers who purchased 33 million Groupons last quarter.
Prospective buyers of the stock should exercise caution, however.
In June I estimated Groupon's pending price-to-sales ratio at 18. It's around one-third of that now, but that's still a good deal for a profitless company with sharply slowing sales growth as well as over a dozen competitors.
The company has additionally exhausted a great deal of its expansion possible. In June 2009 it operated in five North American markets. It's up to 175, plus 40 nations.
"In any marketplace in America, we can market $500,000 of half-off manicures as well as teeth-whitening procedures in a year simply by hanging out a shingle," wrote Sucharita Mulpuru, an analyst with Forrester Research.
Groupon's expansion into new cities is akin to a retailer opening new shops, so exactly what matters is its "same-store" sales growth, which has been sharply slower than its total sales growth, according to Mulpuru.
Will the stock jump on its first day of trading? That depends on Morgan Stanley (MS, news), Goldman Sachs Group (GS, news) and the deal's other underwriters. If they do well by both their investment banking clients and their retail investors, the deal will raise the most that the public pays, absolutely nothing more, as well as shares is small changed on their first day. Naturally, that rarely happens.
As well as the tiny size of the Groupon deal seems to set the conditions for a scarcity of shares, a run-up in the cost and -- pure speculation here -- a follow-on providing in which insiders market more.
So if you're thinking about buying Groupon shares with funds you'd otherwise bet on a horse, go ahead. Grab a few on a dip as well as try to unload it on a more eager buyer a day to 2 later.
If, however, you are a long-term investor hunting to settle down with a dot-com stock, go for Google instead. It's very priced, stuffed with money and, seven years after its stock providing, it's still expected to grow its sales by over 30% this year.
View the original article here
Get prepared for the middle-class boom
It will happen around the world -- but not here -- as the middle class grows globally. Two big questions for investors trying to catch this trend: How big it is and how long it will last.
It's big as well as it's growing fast.
But that's regarding all the experts agree on about the global middle class.
I don't expect investors to achieve enlightenment where a generation of political and social scientists, development experts, investment strategists and economists have tied themselves into statistical knots.
But because I think the growth of the global middle class is the single many important investing trend for the next 20 many years, I think investors ought to make a begin at sorting through the myths.
I'd start by trying to distinguish myth from our imperfect grasp on reality in four areas.
Myth versus Reality No. 1: We don't have a good head count on the rising global middle class.
The global middle class numbers 1.8 billon, or perhaps 28% of the world's population, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation as well as Development. According to The Economist magazine, however, in February 2009, more than half of the world's population was already middle class. The World Bank projects that between 16% and 19% of the world's population is middle class by 2030.
Whenever you are talking about a world population of 7 billion, a difference of 10 or 20 percentage points, or a decade or perhaps two, amounts to a lot of people.
The projections don't necessarily get a whole lot closer when we go from a global perspective to an individual country.
The McKinsey Global Institute projects that India's middle class of 50 million, less than 5% of the country's population, will explode to 583 million by 2030. But economist Nancy Birdsall, the president of the Center for Global Development, calculates that India has no middle class at all. McKinsey Global puts China's middle class at 43% of its population today, on its way to 76% in 2025. Birdsall calculates that China's middle class was simply 3% of the population in 2005.
The extraordinary difference in these estimates comes from the difficulty in defining the middle class. By Birdsall's definition, the middle class consists of people who earn more than $10 a day but who aren't in the top 5% of the population by income. In 2005, India's extremes of income inequality put just regarding everyone creating over $10 a day in the top 5% of the population. The World Bank uses a range between the mean income levels in Brazil as well as Italy to define middle class.
Other estimates say the middle class begins at either $2 a day (twice the World Bank's $1 a day definition of extreme poverty), or at $6 a day.
Myth versus Fact No. 2: Forget regarding the look for a single definition of a international middle class. There isn't you international middle class -- there are at least 2. When I consider all these struggles to define "middle class," the thing that jumps out is how a lot of the difficulty comes from trying to mash together the income levels of the existing middle class of the developed world with the income levels of the developing world.
If we take a behavioral approach to our definition of "middle class," economists see middle-class activities such as discretionary purchasing for status, or the use of credit to turn future wealth into current consumption, emerging, to a degree, at income levels of $2 or perhaps $6 a day.
But whilst it can make an interesting intellectual challenge to try to somehow unify all these people at such disparate income levels under a single heading of middle class, from a business perspective -- as well as thus an investing perspective -- it makes no sense at all and may in fact be dangerous to a company's top line and the portfolio.
This division into 2 -- to more -- middle classes shows up, for example, in the method Coca-Cola (KO, news) markets its products in China. In urban areas, where incomes and aspirations are higher, Coke sells its products at prices that are just slightly lower than in Western markets. The fairly high price is part of a strategy to brand Coke as a product that consumers aspire to as incomes rise. In rural areas, Coke sets its costs reduce, sells in slightly small bottles and requires customers to drink their Cokes on-site as well as return the bottles to vendors. Coke remains an aspirational product for rural Chinese consumers with rising incomes, but the income bar is set reduce.
Coke's pricing strategy is being duplicated by other consumer companies, including Procter & Gamble (PG, news), that market their products in developing economies in smaller sizes as well as at lower costs, but the strategy suggests that there's a sizable opening for companies to develop brand new products as well as create brand new brands that fit different price points for the developing-economy middle class. If this massive developing-economy middle class doesn't have the income of its developed-economy peers -- at least definitely not yet -- it still has the aspirations to signal its new wealth and status.
Investors should not assume that the fruits of the growth of the developing-economy middle class will automatically flow to developed-economy consumer companies. We are seeing a process in the cellphone sector, for example, where Taiwan's HTC as well as Korea's Samsung have created brands that are displacing phones from Nokia (NOK, news) as well as successfully waging mind-share battles with Apple (AAPL, news).
You of the factors that companies including Nestlé (NSRGY, news) are investing and so much cash to set up research, development and marketing centers in developing economies is a belief, well-founded I think, that the rise of a developing-economy middle class requires over simply transporting middle-class products from the developed economies to the developing world with, perhaps, many tinkering at price points.
Following this perspective just a bit down the road raises the possibility that there are over two middle classes -- developed as well as developing-economy models. There's sufficient difference in income levels between the BRICS economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China as well as South Africa) and the next wave of developing economies that look willing for international takeoff (nations such as Vietnam and Indonesia) to create openings for an additional group of companies catering to the aspirations as well as cost points of these new middle-class consumers.
View the original article here
It's big as well as it's growing fast.
But that's regarding all the experts agree on about the global middle class.
I don't expect investors to achieve enlightenment where a generation of political and social scientists, development experts, investment strategists and economists have tied themselves into statistical knots.
But because I think the growth of the global middle class is the single many important investing trend for the next 20 many years, I think investors ought to make a begin at sorting through the myths.
I'd start by trying to distinguish myth from our imperfect grasp on reality in four areas.
Myth versus Reality No. 1: We don't have a good head count on the rising global middle class.
The global middle class numbers 1.8 billon, or perhaps 28% of the world's population, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation as well as Development. According to The Economist magazine, however, in February 2009, more than half of the world's population was already middle class. The World Bank projects that between 16% and 19% of the world's population is middle class by 2030.
Whenever you are talking about a world population of 7 billion, a difference of 10 or 20 percentage points, or a decade or perhaps two, amounts to a lot of people.
The projections don't necessarily get a whole lot closer when we go from a global perspective to an individual country.
The McKinsey Global Institute projects that India's middle class of 50 million, less than 5% of the country's population, will explode to 583 million by 2030. But economist Nancy Birdsall, the president of the Center for Global Development, calculates that India has no middle class at all. McKinsey Global puts China's middle class at 43% of its population today, on its way to 76% in 2025. Birdsall calculates that China's middle class was simply 3% of the population in 2005.
The extraordinary difference in these estimates comes from the difficulty in defining the middle class. By Birdsall's definition, the middle class consists of people who earn more than $10 a day but who aren't in the top 5% of the population by income. In 2005, India's extremes of income inequality put just regarding everyone creating over $10 a day in the top 5% of the population. The World Bank uses a range between the mean income levels in Brazil as well as Italy to define middle class.
Other estimates say the middle class begins at either $2 a day (twice the World Bank's $1 a day definition of extreme poverty), or at $6 a day.
Myth versus Fact No. 2: Forget regarding the look for a single definition of a international middle class. There isn't you international middle class -- there are at least 2. When I consider all these struggles to define "middle class," the thing that jumps out is how a lot of the difficulty comes from trying to mash together the income levels of the existing middle class of the developed world with the income levels of the developing world.
If we take a behavioral approach to our definition of "middle class," economists see middle-class activities such as discretionary purchasing for status, or the use of credit to turn future wealth into current consumption, emerging, to a degree, at income levels of $2 or perhaps $6 a day.
But whilst it can make an interesting intellectual challenge to try to somehow unify all these people at such disparate income levels under a single heading of middle class, from a business perspective -- as well as thus an investing perspective -- it makes no sense at all and may in fact be dangerous to a company's top line and the portfolio.
This division into 2 -- to more -- middle classes shows up, for example, in the method Coca-Cola (KO, news) markets its products in China. In urban areas, where incomes and aspirations are higher, Coke sells its products at prices that are just slightly lower than in Western markets. The fairly high price is part of a strategy to brand Coke as a product that consumers aspire to as incomes rise. In rural areas, Coke sets its costs reduce, sells in slightly small bottles and requires customers to drink their Cokes on-site as well as return the bottles to vendors. Coke remains an aspirational product for rural Chinese consumers with rising incomes, but the income bar is set reduce.
Coke's pricing strategy is being duplicated by other consumer companies, including Procter & Gamble (PG, news), that market their products in developing economies in smaller sizes as well as at lower costs, but the strategy suggests that there's a sizable opening for companies to develop brand new products as well as create brand new brands that fit different price points for the developing-economy middle class. If this massive developing-economy middle class doesn't have the income of its developed-economy peers -- at least definitely not yet -- it still has the aspirations to signal its new wealth and status.
Investors should not assume that the fruits of the growth of the developing-economy middle class will automatically flow to developed-economy consumer companies. We are seeing a process in the cellphone sector, for example, where Taiwan's HTC as well as Korea's Samsung have created brands that are displacing phones from Nokia (NOK, news) as well as successfully waging mind-share battles with Apple (AAPL, news).
You of the factors that companies including Nestlé (NSRGY, news) are investing and so much cash to set up research, development and marketing centers in developing economies is a belief, well-founded I think, that the rise of a developing-economy middle class requires over simply transporting middle-class products from the developed economies to the developing world with, perhaps, many tinkering at price points.
Following this perspective just a bit down the road raises the possibility that there are over two middle classes -- developed as well as developing-economy models. There's sufficient difference in income levels between the BRICS economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China as well as South Africa) and the next wave of developing economies that look willing for international takeoff (nations such as Vietnam and Indonesia) to create openings for an additional group of companies catering to the aspirations as well as cost points of these new middle-class consumers.
View the original article here
Sunday, November 13, 2011
A risk manager's 5 funds moves now
There's no going back to the pre-crash economy, says Satyajit Das. Today's winning investors should do exactly the opposite of what was commonplace before the crisis hit.
There is no polite way to convey what Satyajit Das is saying regarding the world investors will face for several years, but it must be said: The unwinding of the international debt crisis will make some people extremely wealthy, but we will have to live with less -- in a few cases, far less.
Das, a risk consultant in Sydney, Australia, has for years been an expert on the use as well as abuse of credit derivatives. Thus while viewing the world's governments, businesses as well as consumers binge on cheap, borrowed revenue -- as well as seeing central bankers as well as financial regulators doing little to stop it -- Das understood that this party would definitely end badly.
Soft-spoken and matter-of-fact, Das told anyone who would definitely listen that the international economy was on the precipice of a credit crash that would definitely trigger a worldwide deleveraging as well as the mother of all bear markets for stocks.
That was in 2006. Five many years as well as you international crisis later, those same governments, businesses as well as consumers are hamstrung.
"People wasted trillions of dollars, that now has come home to roost," Das mentioned in a recent telephone interview.
Put just, at this wee hour of the global economy's morning, partygoers are too hung over to have a coherent conversation about cleaning up the mess, let alone pour more drinks to get the festivities started again.
The problem child in this debt crisis and credit crunch is Europe, mentioned Das, the author of "Extreme Money: The Masters of the Universe as well as the Cult of Risk."
European leaders dallied so delayed the day of reckoning, Das said. "The real problems have been not dealt with. If we not really deal with the problems, then obviously they come back to haunt we."
Now, Europe's meisters and ministers are trying to orchestrate an orderly default for Greece, you that also recapitalizes weak European banks exposed to troubled Greek debt and props them up enough to deal with an anemic global economy that will affect even China.
"In Europe the steps are extremely straightforward, if they would like to do them," Das mentioned. "Greece, Ireland and Portugal have to restructure their debts. That will cause losses of between 35% as well as 75%" on bond principal, he added.
"Whenever that happens we trigger massive losses in the banking program," he continued. "And if Greece and Ireland as well as Portugal go, then companies in these countries whose debt we don't talk about will also be problematic. Economies will go into deep recessions. The losses will be substantial."
The amount of cash needed to shore up this crumbling wall will be enormous as well as can even require the recapitalization of the European Central Bank itself through money printing to funding from other central banks, Das said.
His reality check for Europe (as well as the big U.S. money-center banks additionally exposed to eurozone woes): "Allow the countries fail, recapitalize the banks, put German and French balance sheets at risk and gain competitiveness. Then at least you've got a chance."
In an overly indebted world, this is just what passes for "orderly" default. In a disorderly event, Das said, "self-interest dominates."
Financial markets at the moment are priced for such an orderly default, he noted, though more on the order of a 20% haircut than 50% to worse. Mentioned Das, "They're assuming the people in charge will manage to muddle their method through."
Das said he's certainly not convinced. "The vested interests and divisive positions that everybody has make it far more difficult to engineer that orderly crash landing," he said.
Yet at some point this financial crisis too will subside and allow a healing process to evolve, Das mentioned. But it will require patience and cooperation from political as well as business leaders as well as average people in Europe, the United States, Asia as well as elsewhere, who neither welcome compromise nor are happy regarding a new reality that looks absolutely nothing like the old.
"Economic growth is not going to go back to high levels," Das mentioned. "I don't know precisely why this surprises anybody. The growth was debt-fueled. If you can't have debt, which is just what deleveraging means, you'll see a huge decline in growth."
View the original article here
There is no polite way to convey what Satyajit Das is saying regarding the world investors will face for several years, but it must be said: The unwinding of the international debt crisis will make some people extremely wealthy, but we will have to live with less -- in a few cases, far less.
Das, a risk consultant in Sydney, Australia, has for years been an expert on the use as well as abuse of credit derivatives. Thus while viewing the world's governments, businesses as well as consumers binge on cheap, borrowed revenue -- as well as seeing central bankers as well as financial regulators doing little to stop it -- Das understood that this party would definitely end badly.
Soft-spoken and matter-of-fact, Das told anyone who would definitely listen that the international economy was on the precipice of a credit crash that would definitely trigger a worldwide deleveraging as well as the mother of all bear markets for stocks.
That was in 2006. Five many years as well as you international crisis later, those same governments, businesses as well as consumers are hamstrung.
"People wasted trillions of dollars, that now has come home to roost," Das mentioned in a recent telephone interview.
Put just, at this wee hour of the global economy's morning, partygoers are too hung over to have a coherent conversation about cleaning up the mess, let alone pour more drinks to get the festivities started again.
The problem child in this debt crisis and credit crunch is Europe, mentioned Das, the author of "Extreme Money: The Masters of the Universe as well as the Cult of Risk."
European leaders dallied so delayed the day of reckoning, Das said. "The real problems have been not dealt with. If we not really deal with the problems, then obviously they come back to haunt we."
Now, Europe's meisters and ministers are trying to orchestrate an orderly default for Greece, you that also recapitalizes weak European banks exposed to troubled Greek debt and props them up enough to deal with an anemic global economy that will affect even China.
"In Europe the steps are extremely straightforward, if they would like to do them," Das mentioned. "Greece, Ireland and Portugal have to restructure their debts. That will cause losses of between 35% as well as 75%" on bond principal, he added.
"Whenever that happens we trigger massive losses in the banking program," he continued. "And if Greece and Ireland as well as Portugal go, then companies in these countries whose debt we don't talk about will also be problematic. Economies will go into deep recessions. The losses will be substantial."
The amount of cash needed to shore up this crumbling wall will be enormous as well as can even require the recapitalization of the European Central Bank itself through money printing to funding from other central banks, Das said.
His reality check for Europe (as well as the big U.S. money-center banks additionally exposed to eurozone woes): "Allow the countries fail, recapitalize the banks, put German and French balance sheets at risk and gain competitiveness. Then at least you've got a chance."
In an overly indebted world, this is just what passes for "orderly" default. In a disorderly event, Das said, "self-interest dominates."
Financial markets at the moment are priced for such an orderly default, he noted, though more on the order of a 20% haircut than 50% to worse. Mentioned Das, "They're assuming the people in charge will manage to muddle their method through."
Das said he's certainly not convinced. "The vested interests and divisive positions that everybody has make it far more difficult to engineer that orderly crash landing," he said.
Yet at some point this financial crisis too will subside and allow a healing process to evolve, Das mentioned. But it will require patience and cooperation from political as well as business leaders as well as average people in Europe, the United States, Asia as well as elsewhere, who neither welcome compromise nor are happy regarding a new reality that looks absolutely nothing like the old.
"Economic growth is not going to go back to high levels," Das mentioned. "I don't know precisely why this surprises anybody. The growth was debt-fueled. If you can't have debt, which is just what deleveraging means, you'll see a huge decline in growth."
View the original article here
Saturday, November 12, 2011
5 market myths debunked
In this marketplace, stocks aren't all that's taken a beating. Conventional investing wisdom isn't holding up thus well either.
This market isn't pounding simply your portfolio. It's additionally smashing some of the biggest myths that investors have relied on for a generation.
1. We can't time the market. And so much for that. 2 metrics have done a very good job of telling you over the decades when to be in stocks and whenever to be from them. As well as both appear to be on the money when again: They were flashing red for months leading up to the summer swoon.
The first, called "Tobin's q," compares share costs to the cost of rebuilding those companies' assets from scratch. The logic is obvious: Precisely why would definitely you pay $1 billion to buy a business if you can start an identical you, with identical assets, for, say, $700 million?
The 2nd metric is the "cyclically-adjusted" price-to-earnings ratio, also known as the "Shiller PE" after Yale professor Robert "Irrational Exuberance" Shiller, who has popularized it. The measure compares stock prices to average earnings over the previous 10 many years, in contrast with a typical P/E that is a one-year snapshot.
Both measures continue to signal caution, though less than they did six months ago. The Shiller measure can be found on the professor's website. Tobin's q is trickier: It needs sifting through the Federal Reserve's quarterly Flow of Money report.
2. The cash on the sidelines will drive this marketplace higher. How often have we heard this? Definitely not long ago I met a bunch of professional investors, and this line came up again.
But it's a total myth. Take a deep breathing, please. For every buyer of a stock, a person else should be a seller. Sorry, but there it is. If somebody "on the sidelines" takes $1,000 in cash as well as uses it to buy, say, Exxon Mobil (XOM, news) stock, then somebody else should sell $1,000 of Exxon Mobil stock . . . as well as take the cash.
3. Markets are efficient. We know the line: Stock and bond prices reflect all available information. Attempts to outperform are fruitless.
Not long ago, this myth dominated Wall Street and financial theory. The Supreme Court even relied on it in rulings.
But this is nonsense. Three months ago Greek government bonds had been already trading as if a default were almost inevitable. The yield on the one-year Greek bond was 35%. At the same time, the Russell 2000 Index ($RUT.X) index of small company stocks was at 850, nearly an all-time high -- as well as a record compared with the cost of large-company stocks.
Thus back then, the "efficient" market was at the same time betting that Greece would definitely default, little companies would keep booming and investors would definitely continue to desire more risk in their portfolios. On which world?
4. Share buybacks will drive the market higher. We've been told over as well as over again that companies have "record amounts of cash on the balance sheet," as well as that this should be great for stockholders. After all, they will return that cash to investors by buying back shares. As well as that should raise the stock price by reducing the amount of shares in issue.
So much for that. Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) companies spent a massive $103 billion purchasing back their stock in the second quarter, over $85 billion in the first quarter. And the results so far haven't been that impressive. InsiderScore reports that the second-quarter figure was the highest amount spent on share buybacks "because the first quarter of 2008." Hmm. How'd that exercise?
Turns out this logic was flawed in at least 3 different methods. First, the "record money on the balance sheets" is matched by record debts. 2nd, if a company spends $100 million purchasing back stock, it should, rationally, make no real difference to the share price: The market value should fall by $100 million. Third, "buybacks" are largely a fiction: Whilst the company spends stockholders' money purchasing in stock, the compensation committee quietly hands out new stock to executives.
Web result: You are really going backward. Standard & Poor's reports that from 2000 through 2010, S&P 500 members spent a massive $2.7 trillion buying in stock. Yet at the end of the decade they actually had more shares as well as options great than they did at the beginning.
5. To get higher returns you have to take on more risk. This 1 continues to be alive. But is it really so simple? Back in 2000 I had lunch in London with a very wise old portfolio manager. He told me to sell all my stocks as well as buy inflation-protected U.S. bonds. As it happens I did not own many stocks, but I was a young whippersnapper that had grown up during a two-decade bull marketplace, as well as I did not see a lot appeal in Treasury inflation-protected securities -- the "safest," supposedly dullest, investment around. After all, was not a young investor supposed to be taking on "risk"?
Because then, the Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities (VIPSX) fund has more than doubled investors' money. That's been a spectacular result -- from the "safest" investment around. Meanwhile the dangerous S&P 500 Index has really lost revenue. (Over the same lunch, the same manager also told me to purchase gold. We keep in touch).
In early 2007, according to an analysis by fund firm GMO, the relationship between "risk" as well as return was actually upside down. At that point, they said, "risky" investments were thus overpriced that they have been almost guaranteed to make worse returns than "safe" investments. In other words, investors were not being "paid to take on risk" -- they had been instead paying for the privilege.
View the original article here
This market isn't pounding simply your portfolio. It's additionally smashing some of the biggest myths that investors have relied on for a generation.
1. We can't time the market. And so much for that. 2 metrics have done a very good job of telling you over the decades when to be in stocks and whenever to be from them. As well as both appear to be on the money when again: They were flashing red for months leading up to the summer swoon.
The first, called "Tobin's q," compares share costs to the cost of rebuilding those companies' assets from scratch. The logic is obvious: Precisely why would definitely you pay $1 billion to buy a business if you can start an identical you, with identical assets, for, say, $700 million?
The 2nd metric is the "cyclically-adjusted" price-to-earnings ratio, also known as the "Shiller PE" after Yale professor Robert "Irrational Exuberance" Shiller, who has popularized it. The measure compares stock prices to average earnings over the previous 10 many years, in contrast with a typical P/E that is a one-year snapshot.
Both measures continue to signal caution, though less than they did six months ago. The Shiller measure can be found on the professor's website. Tobin's q is trickier: It needs sifting through the Federal Reserve's quarterly Flow of Money report.
2. The cash on the sidelines will drive this marketplace higher. How often have we heard this? Definitely not long ago I met a bunch of professional investors, and this line came up again.
But it's a total myth. Take a deep breathing, please. For every buyer of a stock, a person else should be a seller. Sorry, but there it is. If somebody "on the sidelines" takes $1,000 in cash as well as uses it to buy, say, Exxon Mobil (XOM, news) stock, then somebody else should sell $1,000 of Exxon Mobil stock . . . as well as take the cash.
3. Markets are efficient. We know the line: Stock and bond prices reflect all available information. Attempts to outperform are fruitless.
Not long ago, this myth dominated Wall Street and financial theory. The Supreme Court even relied on it in rulings.
But this is nonsense. Three months ago Greek government bonds had been already trading as if a default were almost inevitable. The yield on the one-year Greek bond was 35%. At the same time, the Russell 2000 Index ($RUT.X) index of small company stocks was at 850, nearly an all-time high -- as well as a record compared with the cost of large-company stocks.
Thus back then, the "efficient" market was at the same time betting that Greece would definitely default, little companies would keep booming and investors would definitely continue to desire more risk in their portfolios. On which world?
4. Share buybacks will drive the market higher. We've been told over as well as over again that companies have "record amounts of cash on the balance sheet," as well as that this should be great for stockholders. After all, they will return that cash to investors by buying back shares. As well as that should raise the stock price by reducing the amount of shares in issue.
So much for that. Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) companies spent a massive $103 billion purchasing back their stock in the second quarter, over $85 billion in the first quarter. And the results so far haven't been that impressive. InsiderScore reports that the second-quarter figure was the highest amount spent on share buybacks "because the first quarter of 2008." Hmm. How'd that exercise?
Turns out this logic was flawed in at least 3 different methods. First, the "record money on the balance sheets" is matched by record debts. 2nd, if a company spends $100 million purchasing back stock, it should, rationally, make no real difference to the share price: The market value should fall by $100 million. Third, "buybacks" are largely a fiction: Whilst the company spends stockholders' money purchasing in stock, the compensation committee quietly hands out new stock to executives.
Web result: You are really going backward. Standard & Poor's reports that from 2000 through 2010, S&P 500 members spent a massive $2.7 trillion buying in stock. Yet at the end of the decade they actually had more shares as well as options great than they did at the beginning.
5. To get higher returns you have to take on more risk. This 1 continues to be alive. But is it really so simple? Back in 2000 I had lunch in London with a very wise old portfolio manager. He told me to sell all my stocks as well as buy inflation-protected U.S. bonds. As it happens I did not own many stocks, but I was a young whippersnapper that had grown up during a two-decade bull marketplace, as well as I did not see a lot appeal in Treasury inflation-protected securities -- the "safest," supposedly dullest, investment around. After all, was not a young investor supposed to be taking on "risk"?
Because then, the Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities (VIPSX) fund has more than doubled investors' money. That's been a spectacular result -- from the "safest" investment around. Meanwhile the dangerous S&P 500 Index has really lost revenue. (Over the same lunch, the same manager also told me to purchase gold. We keep in touch).
In early 2007, according to an analysis by fund firm GMO, the relationship between "risk" as well as return was actually upside down. At that point, they said, "risky" investments were thus overpriced that they have been almost guaranteed to make worse returns than "safe" investments. In other words, investors were not being "paid to take on risk" -- they had been instead paying for the privilege.
View the original article here
Thursday, November 10, 2011
This "bear" market won't last
The springtime rally that sent stocks higher, driven by sunny optimism as well as hope, has faded into memory. Fear and anxiety have followed in its wake.
Now, doomsayers are fighting for attention with ever more grandiose predictions. The eurozone is apparently beyond saving, according to currency traders. As well as the Economic Cycle Research Institute, a forecasting group popular among traders, announced Friday that not just had U.S. economy fallen into a new recession, there was nothing anyone can do regarding it.
It's no surprise then that stocks have been falling out of the sky such as doves filled with birdshot. The Russell 2000 ($RUT.X) is down almost 30%, whilst the Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) is down 20% from its high. The latter reached bear-market-level losses on Tuesday for the first time since the 2009 market lows. (It then turned up sharply, that chart experts would interpret as a sign of strength.)
The evidence suggests the sell-off has reached an extreme. All this negativity as well as fear is unsustainable. And that sets the stage for a powerful fourth-quarter rally. Here's why, along with a few value-rich recommendations to take advantage.
Back in late April, I warned that things such as the energy cost spike driven by the Arab Spring, supply-chain woes driven by Japan's earthquake and tsunami, the rise in inflation as well as the looming end of the Fed's $600 billion "QE2" stimulus effort had been economic head winds the marketplace had but to discount.
The fallout from this, along with Europe's bailout of Portugal, sent stocks lower in Will and June. Then, the Democrats and the Republicans did the unthinkable: They played political games with the debt ceiling, lost America's AAA credit rating and delivered a massive blow to consumer, business and investor confidence.
We've been bouncing along the bottom even since, preoccupied now with the European debt problem and the program to save Greece -- a country with an economy small than Arizona's. Whilst the marketplace has been obsessed with things such as the German parliament's vote to enhance Europe's bailout fund (that passed without a hitch), the economy has been quietly gaining strength.
The easy truth is that the basics are starting to turn positive once again.
I've been banging on the table over the last few weeks that a lot of the latest decline in stock costs was caused by a deficiency of confidence, certainly not a downturn in real output. Indeed, the economy managed to grow by 1.3% in the 2nd quarter despite all of the head winds. And by all indications, we are regarding to see growth accelerate.
That's because confidence is an ethereal thing, driven by the vagaries of human emotion. Low confidence doesn't necessarily mean the economy is headed for recession. And it can be fast reversed as the economic outlook improves.
I think that's what's happening now as the real economy -- driven by things such as manufacturing activity as well as corporate profits -- dusts itself off and gets back to work.
Drags from earlier in the year have fully faded. Japanese car production jumping 1.7% in August, the first increase in 11 months. With rebels in control of Tripoli and Col. Moammar Gadhafi in hiding, Libya's second-largest oil refinery has restarted production. Manufacturer price inflation is falling. As well as the Fed has simply kicked off a $400 billion stimulus effort dubbed "Surgery Twist" that is targeting long-term interest rates and mortgage rates.
Now, we've got the wind at our backs. Commercial commodities like copper as well as crude oil are dropping rapidly -- easing inflationary pressures and boosting business profit margins as well as consumer spending power. Real interest rates are deeply damaging. Central banks are extremely accommodative. And talk of fiscal stimulus has returned to Capitol Hill.
We can already see the turn happening. Initial weekly jobless claims dropped below 400,000 last week for the first time because April. The Chicago Purchasing Managers Index showed new order activity jumping the many because June. Consumer sentiment is rebounding. Construction spending jumped 1.4% in August for the first year-over-year increase since the recession started. Factory activity spooled back up in September, with the Institute of Supply Management Index rising to 51.6 (versus a consensus estimate of 50.5 and 50.6 the month before).
In China, The September Production PMI rose to a four-month high of 51.2, whilst the Services PMI jumped to 59.3 versus 57.6 the month before. In Europe, the September Production PMI came in slightly before expectations at 48.5. As well as in Japan, the Tankan survey of business sentiment and spending plans improved, returning to pre-earthquake levels. (For the PMI indexes, readings over 50 indicate month-to-month growth.)
View the original article here
Now, doomsayers are fighting for attention with ever more grandiose predictions. The eurozone is apparently beyond saving, according to currency traders. As well as the Economic Cycle Research Institute, a forecasting group popular among traders, announced Friday that not just had U.S. economy fallen into a new recession, there was nothing anyone can do regarding it.
It's no surprise then that stocks have been falling out of the sky such as doves filled with birdshot. The Russell 2000 ($RUT.X) is down almost 30%, whilst the Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) is down 20% from its high. The latter reached bear-market-level losses on Tuesday for the first time since the 2009 market lows. (It then turned up sharply, that chart experts would interpret as a sign of strength.)
The evidence suggests the sell-off has reached an extreme. All this negativity as well as fear is unsustainable. And that sets the stage for a powerful fourth-quarter rally. Here's why, along with a few value-rich recommendations to take advantage.
Back in late April, I warned that things such as the energy cost spike driven by the Arab Spring, supply-chain woes driven by Japan's earthquake and tsunami, the rise in inflation as well as the looming end of the Fed's $600 billion "QE2" stimulus effort had been economic head winds the marketplace had but to discount.
The fallout from this, along with Europe's bailout of Portugal, sent stocks lower in Will and June. Then, the Democrats and the Republicans did the unthinkable: They played political games with the debt ceiling, lost America's AAA credit rating and delivered a massive blow to consumer, business and investor confidence.
We've been bouncing along the bottom even since, preoccupied now with the European debt problem and the program to save Greece -- a country with an economy small than Arizona's. Whilst the marketplace has been obsessed with things such as the German parliament's vote to enhance Europe's bailout fund (that passed without a hitch), the economy has been quietly gaining strength.
The easy truth is that the basics are starting to turn positive once again.
I've been banging on the table over the last few weeks that a lot of the latest decline in stock costs was caused by a deficiency of confidence, certainly not a downturn in real output. Indeed, the economy managed to grow by 1.3% in the 2nd quarter despite all of the head winds. And by all indications, we are regarding to see growth accelerate.
That's because confidence is an ethereal thing, driven by the vagaries of human emotion. Low confidence doesn't necessarily mean the economy is headed for recession. And it can be fast reversed as the economic outlook improves.
I think that's what's happening now as the real economy -- driven by things such as manufacturing activity as well as corporate profits -- dusts itself off and gets back to work.
Drags from earlier in the year have fully faded. Japanese car production jumping 1.7% in August, the first increase in 11 months. With rebels in control of Tripoli and Col. Moammar Gadhafi in hiding, Libya's second-largest oil refinery has restarted production. Manufacturer price inflation is falling. As well as the Fed has simply kicked off a $400 billion stimulus effort dubbed "Surgery Twist" that is targeting long-term interest rates and mortgage rates.
Now, we've got the wind at our backs. Commercial commodities like copper as well as crude oil are dropping rapidly -- easing inflationary pressures and boosting business profit margins as well as consumer spending power. Real interest rates are deeply damaging. Central banks are extremely accommodative. And talk of fiscal stimulus has returned to Capitol Hill.
We can already see the turn happening. Initial weekly jobless claims dropped below 400,000 last week for the first time because April. The Chicago Purchasing Managers Index showed new order activity jumping the many because June. Consumer sentiment is rebounding. Construction spending jumped 1.4% in August for the first year-over-year increase since the recession started. Factory activity spooled back up in September, with the Institute of Supply Management Index rising to 51.6 (versus a consensus estimate of 50.5 and 50.6 the month before).
In China, The September Production PMI rose to a four-month high of 51.2, whilst the Services PMI jumped to 59.3 versus 57.6 the month before. In Europe, the September Production PMI came in slightly before expectations at 48.5. As well as in Japan, the Tankan survey of business sentiment and spending plans improved, returning to pre-earthquake levels. (For the PMI indexes, readings over 50 indicate month-to-month growth.)
View the original article here
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
How To Find The Best Penny Stocks To Buy
Finding the best penny stocks to purchase takes more than simply wishing for luck. People who go into this form of trading such as gamblers usually end up like many gamblers as well as walk away from the casino with nothing. It may have been fun but it was not profitable. If you need to actually make revenue from your penny stock trades, you should examine a few of the indicators that suggest viability as well as possible for a breakout in a specific stock.
The best penny stocks to purchase will usually experience high percentage gains in their costs over a couple of days. This will be accompanied by high levels of transactional amount. These events recommend that an up trend is in the creating. Get in on it and so to market whenever it starts to peak.
Based on your own research, determine if the business behind the stock has a sound business model. Ignore the hype that the company or perhaps other investors make regarding the stock. Listen to research that comes from neutral sources as well as evaluate stocks based on solid financial information.
You can make fairly accurate predictions about the future performance of the best penny stocks to purchase based on their previous performance. This is called technical analysis. Examine a stock’s moving averages over 50-day and 200-day time schemes. If the former is better than the latter, this suggests that something is afoot as well as the penny stock will be experiencing and extended up trend.
Insider buying sounds ominous to illegal but it is a good sign. When people inside the company purchase their own stock, this reflects their have firsthand knowledge of the company s basics. Combine this revelation with solid information you have already gathered and absolutely nothing should stop you from finding the best penny stocks to buy.
View the original article here
The best penny stocks to purchase will usually experience high percentage gains in their costs over a couple of days. This will be accompanied by high levels of transactional amount. These events recommend that an up trend is in the creating. Get in on it and so to market whenever it starts to peak.
Based on your own research, determine if the business behind the stock has a sound business model. Ignore the hype that the company or perhaps other investors make regarding the stock. Listen to research that comes from neutral sources as well as evaluate stocks based on solid financial information.
You can make fairly accurate predictions about the future performance of the best penny stocks to purchase based on their previous performance. This is called technical analysis. Examine a stock’s moving averages over 50-day and 200-day time schemes. If the former is better than the latter, this suggests that something is afoot as well as the penny stock will be experiencing and extended up trend.
Insider buying sounds ominous to illegal but it is a good sign. When people inside the company purchase their own stock, this reflects their have firsthand knowledge of the company s basics. Combine this revelation with solid information you have already gathered and absolutely nothing should stop you from finding the best penny stocks to buy.
View the original article here
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Penny Stock Picks and Penny Stocks: What Are They?
Penny stocks are usually defined as a common stock that trades for less than two cents a share as well as are traded over the counter (OTC) through quotation services including the OTC Bulletin Board (OTC BB) or the Pink Sheets. Even though penny stocks have additionally been defined as any kind of stock currently trading under $5.
Precisely why trade penny stocks?
Many traders are fans of penny stocks due to the fact a penny stock has a chance for huge gains. For example a penny stock trading at $0.01 can very easily jump to $0.03 therefore tripling the penny stock traders cash! Make sure to check into Strategic Stocks and Penny Stocks often for the latest hot penny stocks!
Fans of the stock market today should make sure to find a free stock screener. Make sure to find a top quality brokerage to purchase stocks. Searching for dividend stocks can help balance out your own stock portfolio. As well as, then make sure to find a few coupon codes to save more revenue for penny stock trading.
View the original article here
Precisely why trade penny stocks?
Many traders are fans of penny stocks due to the fact a penny stock has a chance for huge gains. For example a penny stock trading at $0.01 can very easily jump to $0.03 therefore tripling the penny stock traders cash! Make sure to check into Strategic Stocks and Penny Stocks often for the latest hot penny stocks!
Fans of the stock market today should make sure to find a free stock screener. Make sure to find a top quality brokerage to purchase stocks. Searching for dividend stocks can help balance out your own stock portfolio. As well as, then make sure to find a few coupon codes to save more revenue for penny stock trading.
View the original article here
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Penny stock trading Tips
Purchasing penny stock lists is becoming a good profitable proposition. Allow me to explain: You invest a few income, to around we well can, but because they OTC stocks are priced so low, we can afford to purchase many volume. However, the trick to creating a huge profit with Pink Sheet Stocks is usually to know how to select the ones that are planning to actually become profitable as well as become outside the stinkers. Do we need to learn how to do this?
Hear, purchasing stocks whether inexpensive ones such as pink sheet stocks to normal ones isn't the identical to gambling to playing the lotto. You need a solid investment plan, otherwise you'll wind up throwing the income away. Without having a doubt, the one best way to obtain information is a cent stock newsletter, which by the way, are no cost and contain fantastic and up up to now information. Less than bad, huh?
penny stock
Whenever you join get this kind of information, you'll end up getting premier information as well as tips regarding the top penny stock lists to watch. The skills to blame for putting together these details have a proven record of choosing the correct stocks before they blow up, making them a great pick: purchase low, market high.
Look, you can pretend to know very well just what just what we are doing or worse, you can keep leaving your investing advisor responsible for your financial future, to you can certainly take control of your finances and register with receive penny stock trading alerts. This particular service is free of charge, but packed with great information that can help you obtain top profits very quickly. Able to act?
View the original article here
Hear, purchasing stocks whether inexpensive ones such as pink sheet stocks to normal ones isn't the identical to gambling to playing the lotto. You need a solid investment plan, otherwise you'll wind up throwing the income away. Without having a doubt, the one best way to obtain information is a cent stock newsletter, which by the way, are no cost and contain fantastic and up up to now information. Less than bad, huh?
penny stock
Whenever you join get this kind of information, you'll end up getting premier information as well as tips regarding the top penny stock lists to watch. The skills to blame for putting together these details have a proven record of choosing the correct stocks before they blow up, making them a great pick: purchase low, market high.
Look, you can pretend to know very well just what just what we are doing or worse, you can keep leaving your investing advisor responsible for your financial future, to you can certainly take control of your finances and register with receive penny stock trading alerts. This particular service is free of charge, but packed with great information that can help you obtain top profits very quickly. Able to act?
View the original article here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)