UA-300188601-1 The Dividend Girl: The advantage of being fully invested while being a retail investor middle class type of

Social Icons

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

The advantage of being fully invested while being a retail investor middle class type of

There you go! Today, what I taught wouldn’t happen again actually happen, the TSX hit and even exceed the 12 000 points. The effect on my non-registered portfolio? Absolutely spectacular! My non-registered portfolio close today session at a very great 104 177.01$. That’s my market value. My book value is of 113 277$. I am still at a -9 099.99$ behind. However, I find this quite good. At least, I didn’t lost more money and under the 10k mark, it’s really not that bad.

And it’s exactly the reason why I decided to move forward with my investment projects. Paying off debt is good for people who don’t know what to do with their money. Remaining high quality stocks focus is what’s going to help me to cover up that 9k lost, not paying off debt.

This is a problem that is specific to my own personal financial situation. Being fully invested brings in multiple challenges. And recovering from August 2011 latest stock crash is something that is among the challenges I am facing. So while being fully invested, I decided to continue just like before.

Luckily, the TSX will gain again shortly more points and when it happen, I will be hitting the old 113 277$ stocks value. Imagine that: 113 277$ worth in stocks! Yeahhhh

No matter how excited I am, the TSX remains extremely volatile. The smartest of all like Jean-François Tardif are not fully invested. Tardif himself is 30% invested and I am 100%. So why that? What’s that wrong with me? Nothing that much, just that the middle class retail investor that I am was willing to hit the jack pot. That’s really just all. While facing a 9k lost in my portfolio, there’s no way out for me. By staying in the stock market, by remaining fully invested by keeping investing whenever I have a chance, I significantly increase my chances to recover from that 9k lost that I currently experimenting in my portfolio.

It’s too late for me but for a fresh starter, it could worth it to be sensible to the fact Jean-François Tardif is invested at 30% of his full potential. Because while having million in cash, it’s better not to play with richness. But while being poor middle class, I think the best way to go is to remain in the market because anyway, I don’t have millions, I am only playing on a getting closer 200k portfolio. Fun? Kind of, but it’s certainly interesting. Just go get what you want.

16 comments:

SPBrunner said...

I am also 100% invested all the time. I guess I see nothing wrong with this. I guess I missed some good low stock prices on the way, but I would think I would make up for that by always earning dividends.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if anyone with a decent level of English understood this post.

Sunny said...

Thanks Susan!

I guess Jean-François Tardif comments about being invested at 30% really disturb me.

I am over it now and ready to continue to be fully invested!

Well, Anonymous, someone understood me perfectly well and that person is Susan but that's because she's now used to my raw English. Give yourself Anonymous a couple of months to enjoy my writing style. You'll see, after a couple of weeks you'll be doing just fine.

Don't worry.

:0)

Anonymous said...

113K is your previous high? book value = average cost... in fact you never mentionned throughout your blog how much of your money you have invested and how much money you have made. i believe this is more useful.

Anonymous said...

She has never mentioned how much she invested because she doesn't know. She only knows the book value from her current investments that TD Waterhouse gives her which is not the real figures.

For Examples, she sold HZD at a loss of about 1,200 and bought Kinross at 16.58. TD shows a book value at $1,668 and market value of $1,482 for a loss of 186$ on Kinross but nowhere does it show the $1,200 loss she suffered on HZD.

In order for her to know how much money she invested and made (or lost), she would need to keep track on a spreadsheet which she obviously isn't doing. Probably better that way, cause then she would realize she hasn't made any money on the market yet, actually lost some.

I actually taught she was doing not too bad until this year. But her uses of margins, her bad timing for investment in gold and silver and other bad investments such as DGI.UN, NFI.UN, HZD, SPB and FTN has erased all her gains she made in the last few years.

In April 2009, she had a net worth of 24k with only 16k in debt. Today her net worth is about 60k but with 87k in debt. On paper, you might think she did good, but the fact is that the increase of 36k in her net worth in the last 2 1/2 years is from her own money invested and not stock market gains.

Sunny has been doing a good job of saving money, but not so much protecting it. As the money she has invested on the stock market grows from 100k to 200k and so on, and we witness corrections, her loss will be greater. Maybe then she'll concentrate more on protecting her money instead of trying to find investments that might double (like silver) or lose half its value. Even Derek Foster needed a market crash to invest in larger cap dividend paying companies and not volatile one that can lost more than half their value and cut their dividend like Just Energy, Canadian Oil Sands and so on.

Sunny said...

This is not right. I never invested in Canadian Oil Sands of my life. Never.

I basically share everything I do financially speaking. You should appreciate. If not, go joint the Wall Street protesters.

But in the other hand, I am pretty impress how good you are at following me. you,re not perfect, but very good at it.

Anonymous said...

I was referring to Derek Foster holding Canadian oil sands when it was paying 1.25 distribution per quarter before they cut it to 15 cents. They now pay 30 cents per quarter. I was pointing to the fact that he now invest in larger cap companies that has fewer risk of cutting their dividend and less volatile in down market. I did do an error by saying JE cut it's distribution as it didn't.

I know you share everything you do financially, but as a few posters has mentioned, you don't mention how much money you actually earned or lost from the market. What's the point of doing all this without being able to see the results.

I don't need to be protesting on Wall Street, I am doing just fine benefiting from the current system.

Anonymous said...

Haven't check on you in a while. I'm not surprised you are still losing money. And are under water. I'm at my all time high. You need a good mix of bonds and stocks, yes dividends are good. and mostly etf's. perhaps it is your stock picking that is making you lose money. i'd also weight about 70% bonds to equities in this environment. and hold some gold.

Anonymous said...

here's a tip to protect yourself. 70% cbo - 1-5 short term corps. 10%xiu. 10% bric etf. 10% s&p500 etf, hedged. and yes, adds some gold.

Anonymous said...

you just have to read reader's comment more carefully. the previous poster mentions that derek foster invested in stocks like canadian oil sands that cut their distribution by half. the majority of your holding are small companies that have huge dividend payout. YES you get more dividends... but also way more risk... further, this may lead to cuts if the company does not do well in bad times like a recession. anyway, good luck. once you see your portfolio value dwindle and your debts are greater than your assets then you will feel the big pain...

Anonymous said...

Hey Sunny

If you make a watchlist of stocks you would like to buy and ones that you would like to buy more of. Then when you have money to invest, you should invest in the one you feel it the best value.

You say you would like Enbridge to possibly be your next stock to buy. People are given the impression that you are buying the stock even though it is not an attractive buy at the time. For example, BNS or TRP could be a better stock at that time. You bought CNR at around 65 dollars. That is a lot better than buying at 72 dollars with the same dividend rate.

This approach would be better for your asset total, your number of shares of a company, and your margin.

Sunny said...

It's just very funny to see all those really long anonymous comments... just like if I give a damn about what everyone think. Not at long. I am not interested in reading all those too long comments.

Anonymous said...

I get it, too hard for you to comprehend.
You're the one putting it all up here and pretending you're a genius at investing and making money at it while the opposite is true.
Your readers need to know before they start doing as you're doing and lose all their money.

Sunny said...

Come on! This is a personal blog about my finances. I am not saying in any way that I am good at investing!! Not at all. The purpose of the blog is just to share my investment experience. I think at a point people like yourself have to realize that. Kind of crazy jerks out there.

Anonymous said...

I quote from your blog "Paying off debt is good for people who don’t know what to do with their money."

What a very strange thought!
In my humble opinion, paying off debt is usually an excellent choice and wise on very many levels. I find your comment to be rather unfortunate, as i'm sure many vulnerable people read your blog.

Anonymous said...

Anybody can leverage themselves with 100,000 and pick a bunch of cheap high dividend stocks that will pay 6% and more to average 6,000 dividend per year. We'll see how good that strategy will work when interest rates start going up. It hasn't worked yet with low interest rates as you're losing more capital than the money you're earning from dividends.

 

Thank you

Thank you for visiting!
 
Blogger Templates