Forum Replies Created
- Posts
-
Well, it's good that you're asking yourself 3000 questions because here, between the blog and the forum, since 2010, you must find around 10,000 answers 🙂
For example for UBS, look at my latest analysis: https://www.dividendes.ch/2018/10/analyse-dubs-ubsgvtx/
For the portfolio titles, look here: https://www.dividendes.ch/2019/06/performance-du-1er-semestre-2019/
You will still find some Swiss there, some Swiss but no more US. Too expensive!
At the time I had quite a few of these:
https://www.dividendes.ch/super-aristocrates-40-internationaux/
Why do you say that the stocks I mention are expensive?
If the stock price falls, the dividend is not necessarily cut. In fact, it is rather when profits and their representatives (dividends) fall that the price falls. If the price falls because the market panics, but the fundamentals are good, then dividends continue to be paid and even increased. This has happened very often in the past and it offers extraordinary opportunities.
The question of whether or not to sell a stock that sees its value drop is not easy to answer. In general it is no, but there may be situations that justify it. So I invite you to read this article:
I also invite you to go through the tutorial in the menu.
Here I have exploded the polls on the homepage
I have had UBS for a very long time for reasons that have nothing to do with my usual investment criteria. It's an old story... Let's just say that I wouldn't recommend buying it as such. On the other hand, more generally, I quite like the financial sector since it crashed in 2008. It's stagnating, it's not expensive and offers good dividends. Sooner or later, when rates go up (it's already the case in the US), things will get better. For example, I like TD, VATN and on the insurance side SLHN.
Nestlé and Novartis, nothing to complain about, except the price.
I know the US market very well, but same problem...much too expensive. I left it in 2017. Before that was almost all I had.
No, not at all. I don't know where all these people come from (hey, that gives me an idea for a survey). I know that there are a few Valaisans indeed, there are also some from Geneva and Vaud. I don't know about the other cantons.
The SMI is made up of some very good values but on the other hand it is really too expensive overall at present.
For valuation ratios I advise you to read my series of articles that talk about it (see tutorial menu). However, this does not concern the market but the shares. So I do not discuss the PE Schiller ratio.
Otherwise you can also read this:
Research_2016-01_Predicting_Stock_Market_Returns_Shiller_CAPE_Keimling-1
For screeners I use those of financial times, free, but access to company data is paid. I also use the one from quant investing, paid.
Indeed I tested this Swiss IBAN thing the other day and it works. Thanks for the tip. Super fast too.
Concerning the valuation of indices, there are three indicators that work well. At the international level, the PE Schiller ratio and the P/B ratio. In the USA, there is also the 'Buffett ratio', i.e. the ratio between American indices and GNP. Most indices are indeed expensive at the moment, except in emerging countries and Japan. In the latter, unlike the former, there is also quality. In Europe, prices are quite reasonable overall. You can find a bit of everything there, expensive, fairly cheap, and not always quality.
To find stocks I use screeners and sometimes I feel around a bit at random.
Hello again,
Thanks for your encouragement, it's always a pleasure. A few words about your post:
– LPP: well, we agree, this is the biggest organized collective theft in Switzerland, maybe even worse than the AVS. A real scandal. We have to take advantage of getting this s… out while we can.
– Banks: I understand your point of view very well. I know that many investors have become totally resistant to it. Nevertheless, I think that this is precisely why there are some good moves to be made. Contrary to what is happening elsewhere, bank valuations are still quite attractive, even for quality stocks.
– buy & hold: following a dividend strategy, this is indeed most of the time the correct approach. However, there are a few cases where selling can make sense. I have already written about this several times on the blog or in my e-book, and I will come back to this topic very soon in a new article.
– the Swiss market: it’s a quality market, with some nice little gems. Dividinde won’t say otherwise. However, I find it too expensive overall at the moment. Not dividinde, the market of course 😉
– pharma/watchmaking: I am obviously more of a fan of the former, because it can practically be considered a “basic necessity”. For me, I put this sector in the same category as food, beverages, clothing, retail, alcohol and tobacco. These are generally very good providers of sustainable dividends. Watchmaking is necessarily more cyclical.
Good luck and I look forward to reading you in the comments, or here.
Hello apprentice
Welcome among us. You will find plenty of answers to your questions in the Tutorial. Don't hesitate to also wander around the blog and the forum.
If you have any other more specific questions, don't hesitate.
Hi Jean-Luc,
sorry about your friend. He actually gave you good advice.
I no longer offer a paid subscription because I had to discontinue it following a change in the service provider from whom I took the basic raw data to put it through the grinder of my algorithm.
Today I continue to provide fundamental stock analyses fairly regularly, free of charge.
Classic dividend-paying stocks, such as the aristocrats you own in your portfolio, have unfortunately become overpriced. I still think that this strategy is one of the best for a (future) rentier. However, at the moment, it is not really advisable, at least for purchase. For this reason, I have hardly conducted any analyses of aristocrats for quite some time.
An annuitant should not sell these securities, because he is purely income-oriented and cannot afford to have cash. On the other hand, a future annuitant, like me, can see this period as an opportunity to lighten his portfolio of securities that have become really too expensive, to temporarily reallocate them to other less expensive assets, or even a little cash. If he can buy back new aristocrat shares later after a correction, he can still improve his return on purchase cost. For this reason, I have modified my portfolio considerably over the past two years, gradually leaving American aristocrats, to buy more diverse and much less well-known securities, particularly in Japan, China and a little in Europe.
I suggest you browse my site a bit, you will find in principle everything you need to know there. In relation to your questions, I am thinking of one article in particular:
You didn't miss anything.
I follow the indices in a top-down approach. If the index as a whole is too expensive or in a bearish phase, I don't look any further. On the contrary, if it is cheap and in a bullish phase, I put on my glasses and look for good candidates.
For beginners or those who don't want to bother, they can stop directly at the ETF. Which is what I personally do for gold, bonds and real estate.
For more details read my series of articles on portfolio diversification in the tutorial.
No, the S&P 500 with inflation has a historical average annual performance of 9-10%.
And I advise you against technical analysis, you will waste time and money. Not only has it been proven that it does not work, but I also unfortunately speak from experience. My friend dividinde would tell you the same. If you can avoid making the same mistakes as us, that would be a good start.
However, I strongly advise you to read Jeremy Siegel's book "Investing in Long-Term Stocks", which you can find on my reference works page:
My god, this is all complicated. If you put all this energy into studying fundamental analysis, you would already be a worthy disciple of Benjamin Graham :)
You say the stock market has an average annual return of 3.5%… By return, that means dividends only. The total average annual performance on the S&P 500 is for example in the order of about 9-10% in nominal terms, 7-8% in real terms.
To avoid the hassle of transaction/exchange fees, why not invest directly in Switzerland in a Swiss ETF, listed in CHF?
I still don't understand this back and forth you want to do between IB and Postfinance, it doesn't make sense (send cash every month, buy the ETF, sell it, then send the money back to CH and buy the ETF back). I understand that you want to do dollar cost averaging, it's a good strategy, but you don't need to have such a complicated system to do it. Buy either in Switzerland or at IB.
You don't have to buy every month either, every other or third month is also fine. Just so the fees don't represent too much compared to the position purchased... That's what I did at the beginning.
I have a Postfinance account for my large classic positions that I keep for a long time and an IB account for small more exotic positions that I keep for a shorter time. And I assure you that I am well beyond the 3.5% average that you quote.
We misunderstood each other. I was talking about what was written on the link you sent. I know you didn't talk about limit order.
1) OK, I understand, well I try… But why do you want to go back and forth several times? Since I opened my IB account I have never sent any cash back.
2) Same as above. Yes indeed it would be better if we could not change the currency during transfers, but in the end if you only make a round trip every ten or twenty years your difference is quite negligible compared to the gains generated on the stock market. I will perhaps ask myself the question when I live off my dividend income, but certainly at that time I will repatriate my foreign funds to Switzerland. But perhaps you are already an annuitant??? I would understand better then!
That's what I meant to say to answer your last question. The important thing is to invest in investments with a good quality/price ratio, to diversify them and to hold on over the long term. You also have to be prepared to suffer losses and therefore your investments correspond to your propensity for risk. Yes, you may lose 0.75% on foreign exchange, yes you will also leave commissions along the way and custody fees, especially if you choose your intermediaries badly (but there you are well on your way), but you must be prepared to lose even more.
What will happen when your investments have plunged by 10, 20 or more %? Will you be strong enough not to sell and continue to buy as is apparently your strategy? Or will you also be strong enough to sell and cut your losses as another strategy could also? Are you diversified enough to avoid too big crashes… etc.
Don't worry, you don't need to answer all of these questions. In fact, you will only be able to answer some of them once you have experienced them.
