Even for ETF (ABF) under Dbs InvestSaver there's custody charges?
Official Shiny Things thread—Part III
- Thread starter Shiny Things
- Start date
- Status
Even for ETF (ABF) under Dbs InvestSaver there's custody charges?
Supposed by who ? Only Shiny and his followers do.
I’ve never come across any research article that encourages corporate bonds as a buffer to market crashes. In fact they discourage u so. Many have debunk the fallacy of corporate bonds even when risk adjusted returns were studied.
Every single article when referring to buffering bonds uses safe haven government bonds. A35 comes closest yet not perfect.
Because corporate bonds simply have equity risk in them ! holding them is akin to increasing your equity risk.
if you expect bonds to buffer and NOT For long term expected return. You are on the right tract of thinking and not like some who are argue for MBH having better long term returns. When you want better long term returns, you simply increase your equity component while your buffer should be filled with quality safe haven assets. And even they are no guarantees as evidence in the recent bond rout !
I’ve never come across any research article that encourages corporate bonds as a buffer to market crashes. In fact they discourage u so. Many have debunk the fallacy of corporate bonds even when risk adjusted returns were studied.
Every single article when referring to buffering bonds uses safe haven government bonds. A35 comes closest yet not perfect.
Because corporate bonds simply have equity risk in them ! holding them is akin to increasing your equity risk.
if you expect bonds to buffer and NOT For long term expected return. You are on the right tract of thinking and not like some who are argue for MBH having better long term returns. When you want better long term returns, you simply increase your equity component while your buffer should be filled with quality safe haven assets. And even they are no guarantees as evidence in the recent bond rout !
Hi everyone, I have set up an IBKR account to invest in IWDA. I have done quite a bit of reading but I am still very confused. I can't find a step-by-step guide on how to use IB for investing in IWDA and am very bad with investing/financial related terms. Here are my questions I hope to get answered.
1. Do I need a cdp?
2. IBKR is a brokerage account right?
3. Where does the money go to when I sell the IWDA etfs?
4. Will the etfs be sold in USD or a currency of my choice?
5. Where can I see IBKR's fees (transaction/holding/etc)? I have been searching but cannot find something as clear as e.g. POSB's 0.82% purchase charge and 0% selling charge.
1. Do I need a cdp?
2. IBKR is a brokerage account right?
3. Where does the money go to when I sell the IWDA etfs?
4. Will the etfs be sold in USD or a currency of my choice?
5. Where can I see IBKR's fees (transaction/holding/etc)? I have been searching but cannot find something as clear as e.g. POSB's 0.82% purchase charge and 0% selling charge.
Shiny Things
Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2009
- Messages
- 9,605
- Reaction score
- 854
Time to check in - how’s everyone doing?
I’m glad to see there are people popping up and asking “how do I get started with investing?”. Your timing’s excellent; let’s get to some of those questions now.
Nah. The idea is to have an allocation and stick to it—that way, you don’t have to guess whether equities are “cheap” or “expensive” or whatever, and you’re not spending your time trying to out-guess the market. You’ve got better things to do.
The standard approach - the most common way people do it - is to dribble your warchest in over a period of 4-6 months. That way, you avoid the “buyer’s remorse” risk - basically the risk that you’ll buy in with your whole warchest, stocks will dip a bit, you’ll feel bad and bail out. This is a bad outcome, and you want to avoid it if you can.
If you’re going in 20% at a time, or 25% at a time, then you get the opposite effect, and it works really well:
$1000 a month is right near the line, but with a big warchest like yours, I’d say you can jump straight to Interactive Brokers for your overseas stocks and Stanchart for your local stocks.
No worries—I say this a lot, because it’s true, but we were all newbies once, and everyone has questions that they might think are basic but are really insightful.
Thanks! We’re all locked down over here in the Bay Area—I’ve been working from home for nearly four weeks now—and the family and I are all safe and healthy. Can’t ask for more than that.
Firstly: this person’s portfolio is down 12% year-to-date. That’s a bit of a pain, but it’s not bad at all.
That person could probably continue to withdraw at a sensible withdrawal rate with no worries at all. Their portfolio would be yielding about 2.5%, so if they’re withdrawing 3% per annum they’d hardly be selling anything; they’d still basically be living off the dividends.
The toughest thing for this person would be to avoid panicking and selling their stocks down 30% from the highs.
This one.
——
This, on the other hand, has completely the wrong idea:
If you’re paying attention to day-to-day moves in the markets—stop. You aren’t an active trader, and you don’t want to be one; paying attention to every little blip up and down will just freak you out.
If you want absolutely zero risk: SSBs, or Singapore Government bonds if you’ve got six figures or more. The interest rate will not be very exciting, though.
That’s correct. Your shares are not held by Stanchart itself; they’re held by a ring-fenced subsidiary of SCB. SCB is not allowed to touch those shares, and if anything were ever to happen to SCB, those shares would be transferred to another custodian. They’d still be yours.
This is only speculation at the moment. Nobody knows if and when IBKR is going to open a Singapore office; and even if they do open a Singapore office, nobody knows whether they will allow Singaporean residents to trade SGX stocks.
This is a fair question. First, let’s get this clear: MBH is down about 1.5% since the start of the year. It’s done exactly what it’s supposed to—stabilise your portfolio during a volatile time.
MBH has been tugged in two different directions by two different impulses. On the one hand, corporate credit spreads widened (corporate bonds became perceived as riskier), which was bad for corporate bonds. On the other hand, interest rates collapsed, which has been good for bonds as a whole: lower yield = higher price.
This is very normal behavior for corporate bonds during crises, and it pays to take a slightly longer-term view. Month-to-month swings are volatile, but if you’re investing for years or decades, you shouldn’t even notice them.
MBH wasn’t around during the GFC, but LQD (an equivalent for US dollar bonds) was. Its value peaked in August 2018, dipped in October, and it was back in the black on a total-return basis by December.
The upshot is that I’m still comfortable with corporate bonds instead of government bonds. Investment-grade corporate bonds still have a much higher return than government bonds—more than enough to compensate for any extra risk, as long as you’re comfortable holding them and not bailing out at the lows.
Most of the time we're not in a crisis. And when we're not, IG corporate bonds significantly outperform government bonds.
The extra yield you get from corporate bonds more than outweighs the extra risk of default—and the swings and roundabouts that you're seeing right now are a good thing for long-term investors like you. Bond fund managers are selling corporate bonds because they have to, not because they want to; those forced sales are a bonus for you, because you can pick up those bonds on the cheap.
You’re thinking too hard about this. The performance is basically the same, because the only difference is that a small wedge of VWRA is invested in EM stocks instead of DM stocks. Either one is perfectly fine.
Yeah, I’ve done this and IBKR is very good—connectivity to lots of exchanges, great execution, and relatively generous cross-margining. What specifically do you want to know?
Flowerpalms, be nice. This comment was pretty unnecessary.
I’m glad to see there are people popping up and asking “how do I get started with investing?”. Your timing’s excellent; let’s get to some of those questions now.
Nah. The idea is to have an allocation and stick to it—that way, you don’t have to guess whether equities are “cheap” or “expensive” or whatever, and you’re not spending your time trying to out-guess the market. You’ve got better things to do.
The standard approach - the most common way people do it - is to dribble your warchest in over a period of 4-6 months. That way, you avoid the “buyer’s remorse” risk - basically the risk that you’ll buy in with your whole warchest, stocks will dip a bit, you’ll feel bad and bail out. This is a bad outcome, and you want to avoid it if you can.
If you’re going in 20% at a time, or 25% at a time, then you get the opposite effect, and it works really well:
- If you buy some, and then stocks go up—that’s great! You’ve participated, and made some money;
- If you buy some, and then stocks go down—that’s fine as well! You’re able to buy more at a lower price, so you’ll have more than you would otherwise.
$1000 a month is right near the line, but with a big warchest like yours, I’d say you can jump straight to Interactive Brokers for your overseas stocks and Stanchart for your local stocks.
No worries—I say this a lot, because it’s true, but we were all newbies once, and everyone has questions that they might think are basic but are really insightful.
Thanks! We’re all locked down over here in the Bay Area—I’ve been working from home for nearly four weeks now—and the family and I are all safe and healthy. Can’t ask for more than that.
Firstly: this person’s portfolio is down 12% year-to-date. That’s a bit of a pain, but it’s not bad at all.
That person could probably continue to withdraw at a sensible withdrawal rate with no worries at all. Their portfolio would be yielding about 2.5%, so if they’re withdrawing 3% per annum they’d hardly be selling anything; they’d still basically be living off the dividends.
The toughest thing for this person would be to avoid panicking and selling their stocks down 30% from the highs.
This one.
——
This, on the other hand, has completely the wrong idea:
If you’re paying attention to day-to-day moves in the markets—stop. You aren’t an active trader, and you don’t want to be one; paying attention to every little blip up and down will just freak you out.
If you want absolutely zero risk: SSBs, or Singapore Government bonds if you’ve got six figures or more. The interest rate will not be very exciting, though.
That’s correct. Your shares are not held by Stanchart itself; they’re held by a ring-fenced subsidiary of SCB. SCB is not allowed to touch those shares, and if anything were ever to happen to SCB, those shares would be transferred to another custodian. They’d still be yours.
This is only speculation at the moment. Nobody knows if and when IBKR is going to open a Singapore office; and even if they do open a Singapore office, nobody knows whether they will allow Singaporean residents to trade SGX stocks.
- Yes
- No.
This is a fair question. First, let’s get this clear: MBH is down about 1.5% since the start of the year. It’s done exactly what it’s supposed to—stabilise your portfolio during a volatile time.
MBH has been tugged in two different directions by two different impulses. On the one hand, corporate credit spreads widened (corporate bonds became perceived as riskier), which was bad for corporate bonds. On the other hand, interest rates collapsed, which has been good for bonds as a whole: lower yield = higher price.
This is very normal behavior for corporate bonds during crises, and it pays to take a slightly longer-term view. Month-to-month swings are volatile, but if you’re investing for years or decades, you shouldn’t even notice them.
MBH wasn’t around during the GFC, but LQD (an equivalent for US dollar bonds) was. Its value peaked in August 2018, dipped in October, and it was back in the black on a total-return basis by December.
The upshot is that I’m still comfortable with corporate bonds instead of government bonds. Investment-grade corporate bonds still have a much higher return than government bonds—more than enough to compensate for any extra risk, as long as you’re comfortable holding them and not bailing out at the lows.
Most of the time we're not in a crisis. And when we're not, IG corporate bonds significantly outperform government bonds.
The extra yield you get from corporate bonds more than outweighs the extra risk of default—and the swings and roundabouts that you're seeing right now are a good thing for long-term investors like you. Bond fund managers are selling corporate bonds because they have to, not because they want to; those forced sales are a bonus for you, because you can pick up those bonds on the cheap.
You’re thinking too hard about this. The performance is basically the same, because the only difference is that a small wedge of VWRA is invested in EM stocks instead of DM stocks. Either one is perfectly fine.
Yeah, I’ve done this and IBKR is very good—connectivity to lots of exchanges, great execution, and relatively generous cross-margining. What specifically do you want to know?
Flowerpalms, be nice. This comment was pretty unnecessary.
Last edited:
Shiny Things
Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2009
- Messages
- 9,605
- Reaction score
- 854
1) no
2) yes
3) It goes to your IBKR brokerage account.
4) It'll be sold in whatever the listing currency of the ETF is. For IWDA that's USD.
5) let me google that for you. IBKR's fee structures are more complex because they offer a lot more markets than POSB, but it's all on there.
hahaman111
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2018
- Messages
- 784
- Reaction score
- 82
ST, I asked the other time but think you missed my question.
A35 or MBH etf for bonds?
Was using SSB but the downside for SSB is that withdrawal for rebalancing need to wait for 1 month (leading to overwithdrawal or underwithdrawal as the value change while waiting).
A35 or MBH etf for bonds?
Was using SSB but the downside for SSB is that withdrawal for rebalancing need to wait for 1 month (leading to overwithdrawal or underwithdrawal as the value change while waiting).
Hello, I set up an IBKR account and have gotten it funded by following this guide https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/...my-interactive-brokers-account-5821618-4.html and tried with $1.
I have not found a step by step guide on how to invest in the IWDA and was wondering if this is the correct one https://imgur.com/a/hiTCiPN
Why does it show shares / EUR though? Shouldn't I be purchasing it using USD as mentioned in some other threads? That I need to convert SGD to USD to purchase the IWDA?
I have not found a step by step guide on how to invest in the IWDA and was wondering if this is the correct one https://imgur.com/a/hiTCiPN
Why does it show shares / EUR though? Shouldn't I be purchasing it using USD as mentioned in some other threads? That I need to convert SGD to USD to purchase the IWDA?
yeahbeatitscrub
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2014
- Messages
- 118
- Reaction score
- 3
Got a question on options assignment.
How does the option assignment chooses which seller to assign upon? Randomly? Or is there some tracking going on the options you write, which the assignment is then dependant on wheher the end counterparty exercises the option.
Thanks.
How does the option assignment chooses which seller to assign upon? Randomly? Or is there some tracking going on the options you write, which the assignment is then dependant on wheher the end counterparty exercises the option.
Thanks.
hwckhs
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 1,188
- Reaction score
- 1,347
The fund is listed on multiple exchanges, and sometimes with the same stock code: https://www.ishares.com/uk/individu...shares-msci-world-ucits-etf-acc-fund#listings
To be exact, you need IWDA on London Stock Exchange (LSE). Looks like you selected the one on Euronext Amsterdam that's why you see EUR.
Purplestars
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2005
- Messages
- 5,265
- Reaction score
- 759
This question has been asked for years, and several times by me.
Shiny will just sidestep this question and call you a troll. I have been called that by him multiple times. But he can never address this.
I have always recommended you just keep cash in a high interest bank account, only to be rubbished by him and his loyal followers.
It’s unfortunate that you have been suckered by this bad advice. Now watch me get infracted for calling this out and trying to save people like you from making this mistake.
Purplestars
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2005
- Messages
- 5,265
- Reaction score
- 759
None. Buy SSBs or just hold cash.
celtosaxon
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,816
- Reaction score
- 910
This is not just happening with MBH in Singapore, but also with bond ETFs listed elsewhere in the world. It has taken many investors by surprise (including myself) since this large drop did not occur in the 2008 crisis.
The way I understand it, there has been an unprecedented level of bond selling recently, and this lack of demand has caused their rates to spike (normally, just the opposite should occur when interest rates are falling). As a consequence, bond ETF prices have fallen... in some cases, detaching widely from their net asset value.
In the US, this lack of bond buyers was creating such a liquidity crunch that the Fed had to step in and start buying up bonds to stabilize the market. This has helped, but it probably won’t get back to normal until this period of volatility has passed.
Personally, I don’t mind high volatility with equities because the value of risk versus rewards is understood. However, I expect bonds to be less risky since they have less rewards to offer. This current experience shows that there are more risks with bonds “in ETF form” than there are in the underlying bond assets. This is because unlike holding an individual bond to maturity, an ETF is forced to sell at bad times when investors in the ETF are abandoning ship.
Please feel free to correct me if my understanding is wrong in any aspect.
hwckhs
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 1,188
- Reaction score
- 1,347
The USD investment-grade bond ETF (LQD) did drop a lot during the GFC.
It was trading at about $105 before the crisis. It dropped to $76 at its lowest point. That's a 27.6% drop. MBH is only -3.33% YTD, there is still a lot of room to drop if the crisis worsens.
Anyway, I buy both MBH and A35 (in 3:1 ratio) as I understand what I want from both. One (MBH) has higher long-term return, while the other (A35) is resilient against crisis. It is my own "total bond" mix, albeit heavier on the corp-bond side.
Just know what you are buying:
- MBH: higher long-term return, but can take a hit during crisis.
- A35: resilient against crisis, but lower return.
- SSB: capital guaranteed, but does not appreciate in price (when interest rate drops) and it takes up to a month to liquidate.
celtosaxon
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,816
- Reaction score
- 910
Agree, bond ETFs saw drops in 2008, but most did not see as much of a drop (relative to equities) in 2008 as this time around.
Some fund managers have recently defended this drop as simply a market function of price discovery, however, that doesn’t explain why they snapped back so much. In my mind, it’s simply added volatility caused by illiquidity, and that presents undesirable risk to investors seeking to dial back risk with bonds.
Sure, if you hold on, maybe you will be made whole eventually. But that is little comfort when you expected bonds to be a safety component during turbulent times.
Personally, I will take it as a lesson learned, greater diversity of fixed income instruments (beyond bond ETFs) is a must to tamp down volatility and preserve principle in a portfolio during periods of market stress.
Shiny Things
Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2009
- Messages
- 9,605
- Reaction score
- 854
Let's talk bond ETFs.
So here are the options I regularly get asked about:
1) MBH: This is my preferred option. It gives a higher return than government bonds, which more than compensates for the additional default risk. I use corporate bonds for my bond allocation myself.
2) SSBs: These are a good option too. The yield is lower than MBH, but in an environment of rising interest rates, they have a great little hidden feature: the price doesn't drop! If interest rates go up, you can redeem your SSBs and buy a new, higher-yielding series. The downside is that they take a month to redeem, and there's a cap on how much you can buy.
3) A35: A35 used to be the best option, but now SSBs and MBH exist, there are options that perform better over the long term (MBH) and have protection against drops in price (SSBs). You'd only use A35 if you a) want the absolute lowest-risk option and don't care about return, and b) have more to invest than SSBs will allow.
4) Funds denominated in USD or whatever: No. There's no point owning "stable" bonds when you add a huge lump of currency risk on top of that! For larger investors, maybe, because there are segments like junk bonds that aren't really accessible in SGD, but most investors should avoid foreign-currency bonds like the plague.
As I pointed out upthread (and so did hwckhs!), this did happen in 2008. LQD dipped 10-11% from its highs in August to its lows in October, but it was back at its highs (including dividends) by December.
That was a five-month drawdown. It didn't affect investors unless they panicked and sold at the lows.
OK, I'll be blunt. You're wrong in a few important respects, and your end conclusion is fundamentally wrong.
1) Bond ETFs are never "forced to sell bonds". That's how bond unit trusts work, because they have to pay redemptions in cash; but bond ETFs can (and often do) handle redemptions by handing over the underlying bonds. The ETF doesn't have to sell them.
2) Yes, bond ETFs have traded away from their underlying NAVs—in both directions. Sometimes, bond ETFs have traded below their NAVs, and sometimes they've traded above the NAVs.
The important thing is that this is temporary; when dealers regain their appetite to trade bonds against the ETFs, the discount/premium will compress back toward zero.
3) Owning bond ETFs is less risky than owning individual bonds, for two reasons: firstly, the bond ETF gives you access to a wide range of corporates in one purchase, and it reduces your risk if one company defaults on its bonds (anyone who bought the Hyflux perpetuals knows what I'm talking about). Secondly, bond ETFs are more liquid—easier to sell and buy—than the underlying bonds. Corporate bond spreads—the cost to buy or sell—have exploded wider in the last few weeks, if you can even find someone to show a bid on a bond you'll want to sell. But the ETFs are still actively traded, and you can buy and sell smaller amounts (there's no $250k minimum on MBH).
In short—this has been an out-of-the-ordinary, 2008-type event for corporate bonds, and for ETFs that own those corporate bonds. I'm not going to pretend it's not. But 2008 is the best analogy we have, and anyone who sat on their hands through 2008 was fine. (In fact, 2008 had some pretty great buying opportunities!)
Oh, I get you.
If you're trying to say that you want to own the underlying bonds instead of the ETF, because you think the bonds are less volatile than the ETF, you're in for a nasty shock. A lot of corporate bonds simply stopped trading in the last few weeks: you couldn't find anyone to buy them if you wanted to sell.
Bond ETFs never stopped trading; you were always able to sell and buy them.
This varies by country, but OCC (the Options Clearing Corporation, which handles this stuff for US equity options) assigns randomly between brokers; then the brokers choose how to assign it to their customers (typically randomly as well). Basically it's random.
Purplestars, stop it. You came in here years ago arguing that high-interest bank accounts were better than bonds. You were wrong, and people in here pointed that out to you over and over again.
I engaged with you, and I actually found your arguments kind of persuasive; you persuaded me that high-interest accounts were a pretty good option for people's emergency funds, and I said as much at the time. I wasn't persuaded that high-interest accounts were a good alternative to bonds; I gave you good reasons, and I also said that at the time.
At that point, a normal person would say to themselves "OK, I wasn't able to persuade this person completely, I'll leave it alone. Maybe I'll start my own thread". But you started calling me names, and you kept coming in here over and over again to start the same fight.
You're trying to restart a fight from three years ago. Get over it.
No, Purplestars, you get infracted because you do nothing but start fights, and the board has a explicit rule against fighting. If you stopped being so obnoxious and argumentative you wouldn't get infracted so much. How have you not figured this out?
So here are the options I regularly get asked about:
1) MBH: This is my preferred option. It gives a higher return than government bonds, which more than compensates for the additional default risk. I use corporate bonds for my bond allocation myself.
2) SSBs: These are a good option too. The yield is lower than MBH, but in an environment of rising interest rates, they have a great little hidden feature: the price doesn't drop! If interest rates go up, you can redeem your SSBs and buy a new, higher-yielding series. The downside is that they take a month to redeem, and there's a cap on how much you can buy.
3) A35: A35 used to be the best option, but now SSBs and MBH exist, there are options that perform better over the long term (MBH) and have protection against drops in price (SSBs). You'd only use A35 if you a) want the absolute lowest-risk option and don't care about return, and b) have more to invest than SSBs will allow.
4) Funds denominated in USD or whatever: No. There's no point owning "stable" bonds when you add a huge lump of currency risk on top of that! For larger investors, maybe, because there are segments like junk bonds that aren't really accessible in SGD, but most investors should avoid foreign-currency bonds like the plague.
As I pointed out upthread (and so did hwckhs!), this did happen in 2008. LQD dipped 10-11% from its highs in August to its lows in October, but it was back at its highs (including dividends) by December.
That was a five-month drawdown. It didn't affect investors unless they panicked and sold at the lows.
OK, I'll be blunt. You're wrong in a few important respects, and your end conclusion is fundamentally wrong.
1) Bond ETFs are never "forced to sell bonds". That's how bond unit trusts work, because they have to pay redemptions in cash; but bond ETFs can (and often do) handle redemptions by handing over the underlying bonds. The ETF doesn't have to sell them.
2) Yes, bond ETFs have traded away from their underlying NAVs—in both directions. Sometimes, bond ETFs have traded below their NAVs, and sometimes they've traded above the NAVs.
The important thing is that this is temporary; when dealers regain their appetite to trade bonds against the ETFs, the discount/premium will compress back toward zero.
3) Owning bond ETFs is less risky than owning individual bonds, for two reasons: firstly, the bond ETF gives you access to a wide range of corporates in one purchase, and it reduces your risk if one company defaults on its bonds (anyone who bought the Hyflux perpetuals knows what I'm talking about). Secondly, bond ETFs are more liquid—easier to sell and buy—than the underlying bonds. Corporate bond spreads—the cost to buy or sell—have exploded wider in the last few weeks, if you can even find someone to show a bid on a bond you'll want to sell. But the ETFs are still actively traded, and you can buy and sell smaller amounts (there's no $250k minimum on MBH).
In short—this has been an out-of-the-ordinary, 2008-type event for corporate bonds, and for ETFs that own those corporate bonds. I'm not going to pretend it's not. But 2008 is the best analogy we have, and anyone who sat on their hands through 2008 was fine. (In fact, 2008 had some pretty great buying opportunities!)
Oh, I get you.
If you're trying to say that you want to own the underlying bonds instead of the ETF, because you think the bonds are less volatile than the ETF, you're in for a nasty shock. A lot of corporate bonds simply stopped trading in the last few weeks: you couldn't find anyone to buy them if you wanted to sell.
Bond ETFs never stopped trading; you were always able to sell and buy them.
This varies by country, but OCC (the Options Clearing Corporation, which handles this stuff for US equity options) assigns randomly between brokers; then the brokers choose how to assign it to their customers (typically randomly as well). Basically it's random.
Purplestars, stop it. You came in here years ago arguing that high-interest bank accounts were better than bonds. You were wrong, and people in here pointed that out to you over and over again.
I engaged with you, and I actually found your arguments kind of persuasive; you persuaded me that high-interest accounts were a pretty good option for people's emergency funds, and I said as much at the time. I wasn't persuaded that high-interest accounts were a good alternative to bonds; I gave you good reasons, and I also said that at the time.
At that point, a normal person would say to themselves "OK, I wasn't able to persuade this person completely, I'll leave it alone. Maybe I'll start my own thread". But you started calling me names, and you kept coming in here over and over again to start the same fight.
You're trying to restart a fight from three years ago. Get over it.
No, Purplestars, you get infracted because you do nothing but start fights, and the board has a explicit rule against fighting. If you stopped being so obnoxious and argumentative you wouldn't get infracted so much. How have you not figured this out?
Last edited:
unknownplayer
Junior Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm trying to build towards 100k on ib.. What would be a good bond etf for starters? Any on lse and Irish domiciled that will benefit from tax treaty for withholding taxes if any?
I'm still progressively buying into the dip.. Unrealised p&l is down by quite a bit already but need to persevere on. My own view is this could drag on and be much worse so war chest to be split over the next few months. To be honest I get tempted to put it to use when I see markets picking up (etc previous week)... Best to stick to predefined dates (risk of price moving up or down) or target price (risk of price going lower, or not being invested if price rebounds)
Still unsure of what to do but I think we're going to see more bad stuff the next couple of weeks
I'm still progressively buying into the dip.. Unrealised p&l is down by quite a bit already but need to persevere on. My own view is this could drag on and be much worse so war chest to be split over the next few months. To be honest I get tempted to put it to use when I see markets picking up (etc previous week)... Best to stick to predefined dates (risk of price moving up or down) or target price (risk of price going lower, or not being invested if price rebounds)
Still unsure of what to do but I think we're going to see more bad stuff the next couple of weeks
I purchased ES3 using FSM ETF RSP since Feb this year and G3B on POSB Invest Saver for more than 5 years...
Which is better depend on the amount you spending and whether you are investing regularly like monthly...
flowerpalms
Great Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2018
- Messages
- 58,166
- Reaction score
- 18,750
Depends on what is your monthly investment.
Less than 1k: use POSB RSP and SCB
1k and above: use SCB and IB
Less than 1k: use POSB RSP and SCB
1k and above: use SCB and IB
flowerpalms
Great Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2018
- Messages
- 58,166
- Reaction score
- 18,750
- Status
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ Forums. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.
Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards and Terms and Conditions for more information.
