When you want to stay but the company goes. The best laid plans of investors often go awry (to paraphrase and Anglicise Robert Burns). A reader has made “an amused comment” about my recent statement that we should always buy shares with the intention of holding them for at least 10 years.
Readers defend stop loss orders. My arguments in my last column — that stop loss orders are a bad idea — failed to convince two readers. What about Feltex, GDC Communications, RMG, National Mail and other shares that have dropped a long way?, they asked.
Stop loss orders a dead loss. A reader writes that he is concerned about my advice in my last column. “Your two rules of share investing are to a) diversify (i.e. neutralize returns), and b) not sell when the market bombs,” he writes. “One would have hoped you would have added a third — enter a stop loss to avoid catastrophic loss if/when the market does bomb.” Not in my rulebook.
Readers’ questions on renting v home ownership. My last column — which said that you may do just as well renting as owning your home, provided you are disciplined about saving elsewhere — brought interesting questions from two readers. The first one is 40 and planning to return to New Zealand with his family. “I would be happy renting until I retire whilst growing our capital in areas other than property,” he writes. “At some time later I might buy a small place to live in. However, do you think in 25 years that ownership of property might be out of reach?”
Owning your home not always the best option. Most New Zealanders grow up expecting to own their own home, but soaring house prices have made it harder for people to get into the market. Does that matter? Is home ownership all it’s cracked up to be?
A worrying prediction about the way share funds are run. A section in a submission to the government from Shareholders Association chairman Bruce Sheppard caught my eye. Referring to proposed changes in the way share funds are taxed, he wrote: “The ability of NZ and Australian funds to trade without having to pay tax may well result in higher trading by institutions, as the active funds strive to differentiate their performance from the index by generating trading gains.
Which index fund — if any? A reader asks which index fund to invest in. These days, though, we need to ask first whether any index fund is still a good idea. Index funds invest in all the shares in a sharemarket index. For example, the TENZ fund invests in the ten biggest companies that make up the NZX 10 index.
Bigger and better houses distort numbers. Readers keep sending in thought-provoking letters about the shares v rental property debate. It’s central to the question of how to invest long-term savings, so it’s worth continuing to explore the issues. Today, excerpts from two letters: “Your reader who commented on comparisons between housing price indexes and share market indexes has overlooked many points. Sometimes very large amounts are spent on home improvements without being considered when calculating house price increases. “With new houses, a trend for larger houses and obviously the higher cost for more square feet will also distort the figures to indicate asset value growth where there is none.
Property backers underplay risk. Property backers seem to go in for hyperbole. Two examples from readers’ letters: “Shares are not and have never been as lucrative as property…. We now know why the richest people in the world and in NZ are property investors.”; “The average person can quietly work themselves into a residential property portfolio worth several million dollars with a decade or two of judicious acquisitions…. People putting a portion of their income aside to buy into share funds are left in the dust.”
Index distortion not what it seems. A reader’s point about the ongoing shares v houses debate sounds fair enough. “Your comparisons do not compare like with like,” he writes, “because you are using an index for shares, which only covers some companies, whereas for housing, you are using the average over all houses.”