[ad_1]
Analyst Report: Halliburton Co.
[ad_2]
Tag: investing
-
Who you gonna trust: Barry Ritholtz or Jim Cramer? – MoneySense
[ad_1]
The first can be regarded by retirees and those on the cusp of retirement as a must read: William Bengen’s A Richer Retirement, the long-awaited update of his classic book on the much-cited 4% Rule: Conserving Client Portfolios During Retirement. First published in 2006, that book was really aimed at financial advisors but became popular with the general investing public after it got extensive press exposure over the years.
The 4% Rule—which is actually closer to a 4.7% Rule depending how you interpret it—refers to the “safe” percentage of a portfolio that retirees can withdraw each year without running out of money in 30 years, net of inflation. Bengen’s term for this is “SAFEMAX.”
The new book is supposedly aimed at average investors. Still, I found it pretty technical, filled chock-a-block with charts and tables that are probably more accessible to the original audience of financial professionals. Counting some useful appendices, the book is just under 250 pages.
After wading through all Bengen’s tweaks meant to minimize the impact of inflation, bear markets, and unexpected longevity, I was left with the impression the original 4% Rule remains a pretty good initial guestimate for what retirees can safely withdraw in any given year.
Sure, 3.5% or 3% may be technically “safer,” especially if you expect to live a very long life or want to leave an estate for your heirs. I’ve even seen arguments that a 2% retirement rule may be appropriate for extremely risk-averse retirees.
On the other hand, it’s not too dangerous to withdraw 6% or 7% or more as long as stock markets and interest rates cooperate. That’s what many retirees intuitively do anyway; they reduce withdrawals in bear markets, and splurge a bit in raging bull markets.
It’s also worth noting that whether you choose 3%, 5%, or larger percentages, that guideline really just applies to your investment portfolios, whether held in tax-deferred or tax-exempt accounts or taxable ones. Most Canadian retirees can also count on the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS), not to mention employer pensions. Those lacking big defined-benefit pensions but who have plenty saved in RRSPs and TFSAs can choose to pensionize or partially pensionize their nest eggs by buying annuities. (For timing, see this piece published recently on my blog.) For that concept, refer to Professor Moshe Milevsky’s excellent book, Pensionize Your Nest Egg.
Making money in any market
More controversial is Jim Cramer’s How to Make Money in Any Market. I know it’s fashionable for some mainstream financial journalists to disparage the long-time host of Mad Money and in-house stock-picking guru on Squawk on the Street. I never watch him on TV (MSNBC) but often listen to his podcasts while walking or at the gym, usually at 1.5x speed and skipping over interviews with the CEOs of more speculative stocks I have no interest in. Cramer’s critics tend to be diehard indexers who swear it’s impossible to consistently pick stocks and “beat” the market over the long run. I tend to side with them, but more on that below.
Obviously, Cramer begs to differ, often trotting out testimonials from Nvidia millionaires who bought that spectacular artificial intelligence (AI) chip stock the moment he named his dog after it (sadly now deceased). Cramer devotes an entire chapter to that call, which he mentions every chance he gets. I did buy that stock too, although I was too late and risk-averse to bet the farm enough to change my life with it.
What his critics may not realize is that even Cramer believes in indexing at least 50% of a portfolio. In fact, he tells newcomers to stocks that their first $10,000 (US) should go in an S&P500 index fund. Hard to argue with that.
Where I part ways is his book’s recommendation of holding just five stocks for the 50% of a portfolio that is not indexed. That would mean holding around 10% of your total portfolio in each such stock, which is way more concentrated than most investors would countenance. Much of the book goes into how to choose the kind of secular growth stocks he prefers, with the help of modern AI tools like ChatGPT, Grok, and all the rest.
I used to wonder about his show’s regular segment, Am I diversified?, where readers submit their five picks for Cramer’s consideration. I’d be surprized if there is an investor anywhere whose portfolio is that concentrated. Even Cramer’s much-cited Charitable Trust holds many more than five stocks.
Canada’s best dividend stocks
How not to invest
This leads me to the third book I ordered from Amazon, recently reviewed by Michael J. Wiener of the Michael James on Money blog: Barry Ritholtz’s book How Not to Invest. Cramer cynics might quip that would have been a better title for How to make money in any market had it not already been taken by Ritholtz; Cramer has after all famously inspired some ETF companies to provide “reverse Cramer” funds that short his major long recommendations.
Ritholtz’s book clocks in at almost 500 pages but is quite readable. It has attracted multiple testimonials ranging from William Bernstein (“Destined to become a classic.”) to DFA’s David Booth, Shark Tank’s Mark Cuban and author Morgan Housel, known through The Motley Fool, and who penned the foreword.
Ritholtz organizes his book in four parts: Bad Ideas, Bad Numbers, Bad Behavior, and Good Advice. While Cramer tempts us into individual stock-picking, Ritholtz reminds us that few can do it well; nor can most of us successfully pull off market timing. He devotes a fair bit of space to how badly some pundits’ predictions have panned out in the past. I was left with a renewed appreciation for the benefits of indexing, certainly for the core of portfolios if not for their entirety. As he puts it: “Index (mostly). Own a broad set of low-cost equity indices for the best long-term results.” He lists five advantages to indexing: lower costs and taxes, you own all the winners, better long-term performance, simplicity and less bad behaviour.
Fortunately, ordinary investors have many advantages over the pros, such as not having to benchmark against indices or worry about investors who sell a fund, the ability to keep costs low, and in theory a much longer time horizon. But the clincher is that “indexing gives you a better chance to be ‘less stupid.’”
[ad_2]
Jonathan Chevreau
Source link -
Covered call ETFs have high yields but come with a trade-off – MoneySense
[ad_1]
Prerna Mathews, vice-president of ETF product strategy at Mackenzie Investments, said covered call ETFs typically invest in dividend-paying equities and further enhance income by writing call options on those holdings. A call option provides the right to purchase a security at a set price. She said covered call ETFs essentially earn option premiums in exchange for “giving up” some of the stock’s future gains beyond the set option price.
She noted covered call ETFs have flourished in the market recently, fuelled by investor enthusiasm for their higher yields. Mathews said these products can be attractive to those who prioritize income over growth and help manage market volatility.
“There’s definitely a trade-off; there’s no free lunch. The higher yield off the options premiums is coming off of the fact that you are giving up long-term return in the stock,” Mathews said. “Those options premiums, you’re getting paid out on them today, but that total return impact is usually much more significant than the yield that you’re actually generating off of them.”
Mathews said there is more onus on investors to do due diligence and not get “distracted by a flashy yield number and marketing material.”
Covered call ETFs offer income—but at a cost
Fred Masters, president of Masters Money Management Inc., said the best way to view these products is to think of them as “enhanced income products” that use options strategies to boost their yields. He said retail investors shouldn’t base their portfolios around these products, pointing to higher fees and lower overall returns. Though he said they can work as a smaller part of a larger portfolio.
Masters highlighted that management fees for these products can be “up to ten times higher” than a typical ETF in the same category.
“You can’t control outcomes in many cases when investing in equity markets, but you can control costs and keeping costs to a minimum year after year is a crucial tenet of long-term investing success,” he said. “We know these covered call ETFs are expensive and that eats into returns annually.”
Covered call ETFs can shine when markets stall but lag in rallies
Covered call ETFs can perform better under certain market conditions though, according to Nick Hearne, a financial adviser and portfolio manager at RGF Integrated Wealth Management. In a range-bound market, where stocks are moderately increasing, and in declining markets, he said covered call ETFs will often outperform traditional strategies due to the income investors receive.
“Where they’re going to underperform is when the market increases significantly over a period of time … what they’re really doing is when they sell those call options, they’re selling their upside. That’s the downside,” Hearne said. “And over the long term, (covered call ETF investors) have less exposure to the market because they are selling part of their exposure, and so the expectation would be that a long-only or traditional strategy would outperform a covered call strategy.”
Steady payouts attract retirees despite added market risk
Mathews said covered call ETFs can be suited to investors prioritizing income, including people in retirement who can’t handle as much volatility in their portfolio. “Fixed income will only get you so far. In 1995, you could generate a 6% yield off of just Treasuries and investment-grade (bonds). And today, getting to that same 6% yield is so much more challenging,” she said.
However, investors choosing this path are taking on a higher level of risk through covered call exposure compared with fixed income, Mathews noted.
Despite any trade-offs, covered call ETFs have been gaining momentum in the market. Mathews said there are 17 providers that offer covered call products in Canada, with over $35 billion allocated to covered call ETFs as of September. “We continue to see very strong flows even year-to-date into these products and, unsurprisingly, with an aging demographic in Canada, we’re seeing that trend persist,” she said.
Get free MoneySense financial tips, news & advice in your inbox.
Read more about investing:
[ad_2]
The Canadian Press
Source link -
Stock news for investors: Iamgold expands, Teck advances merger talks, and Wealthsimple hits $100B milestone – MoneySense
[ad_1]
Under the transaction, Northern Superior’s shareholders will receive 0.0991 of an Iamgold share and 19 cents in cash for each common share of Northern Superior. The offer implies a total value of $2.05 per Northern Superior share, based on the closing price of the Iamgold shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Oct. 17. The transaction will also include a concurrent distribution to Northern Superior’s shareholders of all the shares in ONGold Resources Ltd. currently held by Northern Superior.
Under a second deal, Iamgold will acquire Mines D’Or Orbec Inc. in a stock-and-cash deal valued at $17.2 million, net of the 6.7 per cent stake it already holds in the company. Orbec shareholders will receive 6.25 cents and 0.003466 of an Iamgold share for each Orbec share they hold for a value of 12.5 cents per share.
Source Google
Teck Resources ‘very pleased’ with progress of talks with regulators on Anglo deal
Teck Resources (TSX:TECK.B)
Numbers for its third quarter of 2025.
- Profit: $281 million (up from loss of $748 million a year ago)
- Revenue: $3.39 billion (up from $2.86 billion in same quarter last year)
The head of Teck Resources (TSX:TECK.B) says he’s happy with the way talks with government officials are going as the company seeks Ottawa’s approval for its proposed merger with U.K. mining giant Anglo American—even as the industry minister signalled last month she wanted more from the companies.
“Conversations are ongoing, and they’re productive and we’re very pleased in the way that they’re unfolding at the moment,” chief executive Jonathan Price told a conference call to discuss the company’s latest results Wednesday.
Teck announced a deal last month to merge with Anglo American to form the Anglo Teck group; however, the deal requires approval under the Investment Canada Act, which can be used to block deals deemed against the national interest.
“We are engaging on an ongoing and collaborative basis with the Canadian government here,” Price said.
“Those discussions have been frequent and productive.” He said he believes the company has put forward a strong and comprehensive package of commitments to Canada, a key element of which is the plan to move the headquarters of Anglo to Vancouver.
The companies have said the combination would create a $70-billion copper mining powerhouse with headquarters and top executives based in Vancouver. They have pitched it as a “merger of equals” even though Anglo American is worth more than double Teck. Shareholders vote on the deal in December, while Price said the company will be completing all of its filings related to antitrust and competition with regulators globally.
Industry Minister Mélanie Joly has said Ottawa wants to see longer-term commitments to Canada if Teck is allowed to merge with Anglo American. Teck and Anglo American have committed about $4.5 billion in spending in Canada over five years as part of the deal. However, a significant portion of that has already been announced by Teck, including the mine life extension of its Highland Valley copper mine.
Price’s comments came as the company reported a profit from continuing operations attributable to shareholders amounted to $281 million or 57 cents per diluted share for its third quarter. The result compared with a loss of $748 million or $1.45 per diluted share in the same quarter last year. On an adjusted basis, Teck says it earned 76 cents per diluted share from continuing operations in its latest quarter, up from an adjusted profit of 60 cents per diluted share a year earlier. Revenue totalled $3.39 billion, up from $2.86 billion in the same quarter last year.
In reporting its third-quarter results, Teck said production at Quebrada Blanca in Chile continues to be constrained by the pace of development of a tailings management facility, requiring downtime in the concentrator.
Source Google
Mullen Group Q3 profit down from year ago as acquisitions boost revenue
Mullen Group Ltd. (TSX:MTL)
Numbers for its third quarter of 2025.
- Profit: $33.2 million (down from $38.3 million a year ago)
- Revenue: $561.8 million (up from $532 million in same quarter last year)
Mullen Group Ltd. (TSX:MTL) reported its third-quarter profit fell compared with a year ago as acquisitions helped boost its revenue.
The trucking and logistics company says it earned $33.2 million or 36 cents per diluted share for the quarter ended Sept. 30. The result compared with a profit of $38.3 million or 41 cents per diluted share a year earlier.
Revenue for the quarter totalled $561.8 million, up from $532.0 million in the same quarter last year. The increase was helped by the acquisition of Cole International Inc. and Pacific Northwest Moving (Yukon) Ltd.
On an adjusted basis, Mullen Group says it earned 38 cents per share in its latest quarter, down from an adjusted profit of 41 cents per share a year earlier.
Source Google
Wealthsimple says assets top $100 billion under administration
Wealthsimple Inc. says its assets under administration have reached $100 billion as the company tweaks its offerings. The privately-held financial platform has seen its assets roughly double from a year ago, while in 2023 it had set a target of 2028 to reach the $100 billion mark.
[ad_2]
The Canadian Press
Source link -
What Resolution’s Investor Strategy Tells Us About Corporate Climate Action
[ad_1]
Two veteran investors with experience in the climate technology and clean energy sectors have launched a new firm and their investment strategy sheds light on some important trends during a volatile period for corporate climate action.
David Lowish and Akhil Monappa are the driving forces behind Resolution Investors, which aims to “capture the opportunities created by the climate transition.” Both were formerly with Generation Investment Management, the pioneering sustainable investment management firm founded by former Vice President Al Gore a little more than 20 years ago.
With Resolution, Lowish explained, he and his partners will concentrate on a portfolio of 30 companies across a range of sectors, all benchmarked against rigorous climate action measures.
“What we’re looking to do is to select those businesses that are quality companies in their own right but also have their eyes firmly on a net zero future,” Lowish told Newsweek.
That includes companies that are directly involved in reducing emissions and developing adaptations to the impacts of climate change. But the main focus is on what Lowish called transition leaders.
“That transition leader group of companies is one which has really been ignored by mainstream investors,” he said.
Resolution is interested in legacy companies that are strongly aligned with meeting international climate targets, addressing emissions across their operations and supply chains, and limiting exposures to climate risks.
“Our lens on climate is broad,” Monappa said, adding that they are focused on companies with “concrete plans of delivering on that commitment” and those offering products and services that help move the world toward cleaner energy and climate adaptation.
That often means looking beyond companies just within the clean energy sector.
“In renewables, it’s just been harder for us to find high-quality companies that meet our criteria for business quality and people and leadership quality,” Monappa said.
Instead of just looking at solar and wind power manufacturers, Resolution is tracking companies that help to electrify more of the economy, thus allowing for wider reach of clean power and the displacement of fossil fuels.
As one example, Lowish said Resolution is tracking the French electronics equipment company Legrand.
“They make a lot of cables, wirings, breakers and the infrastructure, which goes into all kinds of buildings and helps to facilitate more efficient energy use in those buildings, connecting to batteries and connecting to renewable energy sources,” he said. “We tend to focus on those types of enablers.”
Resolution’s strategy reflects a broader recent trend in corporate sustainability as many company leaders move from making high profile public commitments on emissions reductions and toward the more operational requirements to integrate sustainability goals into core business practices.
Companies in the clean tech sector have been through a volatile period with inflationary pressure on supply chains (and, more recently, the impact of tariffs), changes in interest rates and an unprecedented shift in U.S. federal policy on climate and energy.
“It’s been a really rough ride,” Lowish said. “But the technologies are still here, especially the more mature ones, there’s still a role for them.”
Resolution is betting that the role for the clean tech sector will grow as demand for power grows with the boom in AI data centers and more industrial activity in the U.S.
Lowish said the uncertainty hanging over the industry during the early months of the Trump administration is beginning to wane as people adjust to the political reality and the impacts of legislation that stripped away federal support for clean energy.
“The political moves have been made, the regimes have been fixed,” he said. “When all is said and done, people are still turning to renewables as a way to plug the energy gap.”
Despite the Trump administration’s crackdown on clean energy, the bulk of new electricity generation capacity added to the grid this year has been in the form of solar, wind and batteries, which are often the fastest and cheapest sources of new power.
Lowish said the continued strength of renewable energy will allow also improve the position of the transition leader companies Resolution tracks. And they’re not the only ones making that bet.
Bloomberg recently reported that the S&P Global Clean Energy Transition Index has outperformed the S&P 500 even in the face of policy changes hostile to clean energy.
The same week that Resolution announced its arrival, Brookfield Asset Management announced that it had raised $20 billion for what it called the world’s biggest private fund dedicated to the clean energy transition.
Despite political headwinds and some negative headlines about sustainable investing, Lowish said, many companies continue to adapt to the reality of climate change.
“There’s a drumbeat of modifying your business footprint to make it more future-proof for the climate transition,” he said. “We think that’s what’s happening below the surface.”
[ad_2]
-
Stock news for investors: Cenovus boosts MEG Energy stake to 9.8% – MoneySense
[ad_1]
The Cenovus offer values MEG at $8.6 billion, including assumed debt, and is made up of half cash and half stock. MEG shareholders are set to vote on the proposal on Oct. 22.
Cenovus and MEG have neighbouring oilsands properties at Christina Lake, south of Fort McMurray, Alta.
Source Google MEG
Source Google CVE
Parkland-Sunoco deal receives Investment Canada Act approval
U.S. fuel distributor Sunoco LP’s proposed takeover of Calgary-based fuel retailer and refiner Parkland Corp. (TSX:PKI) has cleared a key regulatory milestone with Ottawa’s approval under the Investment Canada Act. The transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter of this year, subject to remaining regulatory approvals and the satisfaction or waiver of customary closing conditions, Parkland said in a release Tuesday. A review under the Investment Canada Act considers whether foreign investments would be a net benefit to the country or cause potential harm to national security.
The Parkland-Sunoco deal was announced at a time of fraught Canada-U.S. relations and amped-up resource nationalism amid the onslaught of U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs. Earlier this year, Ottawa recently updated national security guidelines under the act to account for potential harms to Canada’s economic security. The government said it will consider the size of the Canadian business, its place in the innovation ecosystem and the impact on Canadian supply chains.
Parkland and Sunoco announced the friendly cash-and-stock deal valued at US$9.1 billion including assumed debt in May following a bitter proxy battle with investors in the Canadian company unhappy with its performance and strategy.
Parkland owns the Ultramar, Chevron and Pioneer gas station chains as well as several other brands in 26 countries. Sunoco outlets that had long operated in Canada were rebranded in 2009 under the Petro-Canada banner. Parkland also runs a refinery in Burnaby, B.C., which supplies nearly one-third of the region’s domestically supplied gasoline and jet fuel.
The deal cleared a key U.S. antitrust hurdle last month when the waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act expired. Shareholders approved the takeover in June.
Source Google
Cineplex selling Cineplex Digital Media to U.S. company Creative Realities for $70M
Cineplex Inc. (TSX:CGX) has signed a deal to sell its Cineplex Digital Media subsidiary to Creative Realities Inc., a U.S.-based digital signage company, for $70 million. CDM offers digital signage for a wide range businesses including retailers and banks as well as digital menu boards for restaurants.
As part of the deal, Cineplex has signed a long-term agreement to continue as CDM’s exclusive advertising sales agent for CDM operated digital-out-of-home networks across Canada.
Cineplex chief executive Ellis Jacob says the sale will provide the company with meaningful capital to continue to deliver value for shareholders. Cineplex says proceeds of the sale will be used to strengthen its balance sheet and provide cash for share buybacks, debt reduction, and general corporate purposes.
The deal is expected to close in the coming weeks, subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions.
Source Google
MoneySense’s ETF Screener Tool
Read more about investing:
[ad_2]
The Canadian Press
Source link -
Individual vs. joint investment accounts: What every couple should know – MoneySense
[ad_1]
The hidden snag in non-registered accounts
If a non-registered account is held individually, it doesn’t automatically pass to a surviving spouse. Instead, it becomes part of the estate and is subject to probate, the court-supervised process of validating the will and confirming the executor’s authority. Depending on the province, probate can take months or even over a year.
During that time, a surviving spouse may be locked out of the account—but the fees continue to add up. In Ontario, probate costs about 1.5% of an estate’s value. In British Columbia, it’s $14 per $1,000 of estate value above $50,000. On a $500,000 account, that means between $6,300 and $7,500 in fees alone.
A real-life example
Take John and Mary, a couple from Vancouver. John holds a $400,000 non-registered investment account; Mary has her own $300,000. When John dies suddenly in January, his account is frozen and Mary can’t access the funds.
The executor applies for probate, and in B.C. the process stretches until November—10 long months. Mary ends up paying household expenses from her own savings and even turns to a line of credit. More than $5,000 in probate fees are deducted from John’s estate. What should have been a straightforward transfer between spouses becomes a drawn-out ordeal.
Compare the best TFSA rates in Canada
Joint ownership: A simple fix
If John and Mary had held their account jointly with rights of survivorship, none of this would have happened. The account would have passed automatically to Mary with no freeze, no fees, and no waiting. She could continue covering expenses without interruption.
Many Canadians assume that converting an individual account to a joint account will trigger taxes. It doesn’t. The adjusted cost base and unrealized gains carry over. A deemed disposition only occurs when the assets are sold, or at death—when the spousal rollover allows the surviving spouse to inherit at the original cost base. It’s one of the most effective estate planning tools available to married couples.
Read more: Tax and estate planning for joint accounts
When one spouse is a U.S. citizen
For cross-border couples, joint ownership can still make sense—but with extra complexity. Here are the key considerations:
- No new cost basis: The original purchase price carries over. Moving assets into a joint account doesn’t reset it.
- No immediate tax hit: Simply transferring the account into joint ownership doesn’t create a taxable event in either Canada or the U.S.
- Attribution rules (Canada): The CRA continues to attribute income back to the original Canadian owner.
- IRS reporting headaches (U.S.): American tax slips (1099s) usually report 100% of income under one spouse’s name. If the couple doesn’t file jointly, an accountant must adjust the return to avoid IRS notices.
- Gift reporting: If the Canadian spouse effectively “gifts” more than $100,000 (USD) into the joint account, the U.S. spouse may need to file IRS Form 3520. While it isn’t a tax, penalties for missing the filing can be steep.
The bottom line: The transfer usually isn’t taxable, but it can trigger additional compliance costs. In Ontario, probate fees of 1.5% on a $1 million account amount to $15,000. If annual U.S. tax compliance costs are lower than that, joint ownership may still be worthwhile. Each couple should weigh probate savings against cross-border reporting obligations, ideally with guidance from a cross-border advisor and U.S. tax accountant.
Why children shouldn’t be added jointly
Some Canadians try to avoid probate by adding adult children as joint owners. On paper, it looks like an easy fix. In practice, though, it often creates bigger problems.
Adding a non-spouse is treated as an immediate deemed disposition. For example, Susan, a widowed mother in Ontario, holds a $300,000 non-registered account. She adds her daughter Emily as a joint owner. Tax law treats this as if Susan sold half the account at today’s value. Suddenly, she faces a $50,000 taxable capital gain—with no cash in hand.
The risks extend beyond taxes:
- Family conflict: Other children may feel excluded, sparking resentment or legal disputes.
- Loss of control: Once added, Emily legally owns half. If the relationship changes, Susan has given away more than she intended.
A safer option is to keep accounts in your name while using wills, trusts, and beneficiary designations on registered accounts and insurance. This preserves control, avoids immediate taxes, and reduces the risk of family disputes.
The takeaway
Individual non-registered accounts can leave families facing months of delays and thousands in probate fees. Joint accounts with a spouse can provide seamless transfer, immediate access, and tax deferral through the spousal rollover, though there are other considerations for cross-border couples and children.
A little planning today can save your loved ones months of stress and thousands of dollars tomorrow. In a time of grief, that peace of mind is priceless.
Get free MoneySense financial tips, news & advice in your inbox.
[ad_2]
Carson Hamill, BBA, CIM, CRPC, FCSI
Source link -
Interactive Brokers Logs Higher Profit, Revenue as Trading Volume Climbs
[ad_1]
Interactive Brokers Group IBKR -1.79%decrease; red down pointing triangle
The online brokerage platform said Thursday that client trading volumes in stocks and options climbed 67% and 27%, respectively, in the quarter. Futures volume, meanwhile, decreased 7%. Customer accounts increased by 32% to 4.1 million, with customer equity up 40% to $757.5 billion.
Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
[ad_2]
-
How to read your investment statements – MoneySense
[ad_1]
This guide breaks down exactly what to look for so you can quickly assess your investments and make informed decisions.
Why review your investment statement?
Regularly reviewing your investment statement allows you to:
- Confirm that transactions are accurate
- See whether your portfolio value is performing as expected
- Understand what you own and how much it’s worth
- Make sure your investments align with your goals and risk tolerance
Developing the habit of looking at your statement helps reduce uncertainty, strengthens your financial awareness, and ensures there are no surprises down the road.
Compare the best TFSA rates in Canada
Why investment statements are often overlooked
Investment statements often go unread because they can seem long and complicated. The numbers and financial terms are not always easy to make sense of, which can make the whole document feel intimidating. Some common challenges include:
- Too much information: With multiple pages of data in fine print, it is hard to know where to start and what to look at.
- Not sure what matters: Certain sections are more important than others, but that isn’t always clear.
- Mixing up values: The difference between book value and market value is often assumed to be the return, which is not always correct.
Once you know what to focus on, the statement becomes much easier to read. Instead of feeling stressed, it can be a helpful tool to check your progress and confirm your investments are on track.
Reviewing an investment statement doesn’t need to take much time. By focusing on a few key areas—like total value, transactions, and performance—you can quickly gain a clear understanding of how your portfolio is doing.
Treating this as a regular financial check-in, much like reviewing a budget or tracking monthly expenses, helps build familiarity and confidence. Over time, the process becomes easier, and what once felt complicated turns into a simple habit that keeps you feeling in control.
Think of it as a monthly check-in with your future self. The more familiar you become with your statements, the easier and more natural the process will feel.
Key areas to focus on
When you start reviewing your statement, here’s where to direct your attention.
1. Total portfolio value
Start with the big picture. Look at the total value of your portfolio and compare it with the previous month’s figure. This indicates whether the overall value has increased or decreased. While market changes are normal, this quick comparison helps you track your progress over time.
2. Transactions
Next, review the activity in your account. Did you make a deposit or a withdrawal? Did you purchase a new investment? What fees were charged?
Every transaction should line up with your expectations. If you notice something that doesn’t make sense or if a transaction appears to be missing, it’s important to follow up with your financial advisor.
3. Portfolio holdings
The holdings section shows what you own and the value associated with each investment. Here, you’ll typically see:
- Book value: Also referred to as “adjusted cost base” or “ACB” is the price you paid for the investment, adjusted for tax purposes to reflect any dividends reinvested or other cost adjustments to ensure you don’t double pay taxes when you sell.
- Market value: What that investment is worth today if you were to sell it.
It’s important to know that the difference between book value and market value doesn’t always show your real return. For example, if dividends are automatically reinvested back into an investment, your book value goes up even though you didn’t put in extra money yourself.
4. Asset allocation
Your statement will also display your allocation to categories such as stocks, bonds, and cash. This breakdown should reflect your risk tolerance and long-term goals. If your allocation has shifted significantly due to market performance, it may be time to rebalance to get back on track.
5. Performance and fees
Finally, look at your overall performance and the fees charged. Some statements include your rate of return, though not all do. If yours does not, you can request a performance summary from your advisor.
[ad_2]
Sybil Verch
Source link -
What’s behind the retreat in responsible investing? – MoneySense
[ad_1]
The decline in RI usage was driven by fewer new advisors offering RI to clients, the 2025 Advisor RI Insights Study said. The proportion of clients using a responsible methodology was roughly steady at 18%, however, compared to 19% recorded two years ago. Increasingly, it is clients initiating conversations about responsible strategies (41%) over advisors (28%). Still, nearly half of advisors (46%) agree that questions about RI should be included in Know Your Client forms used with new clients.
“While adoption has steadied, investor demand for RI remains strong and advisors remain open to closing the service gap,” Patricia Fletcher, CEO of the RIA, said in a release. “Mobilizing wholesalers and equipping advisors with tools and training, we can empower advisors to align portfolios with their clients’ values.”
Compare the best TFSA rates in Canada
The reasons for the RI pullback could be related to economic headwinds, the backlash against environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria in the U.S., or the maturation of the RI niche, with fewer new investment products coming on the market, the study’s authors speculated.
This reversal is consistent with public attitudes reflected in President Donald Trump’s recent dismissal of climate change as a “con job” and Canada’s withdrawal of carbon taxes and electric vehicle subsidies.
But it may also be rooted in the relatively poor performance of RI investments in recent years.
In the early years of what was then called “ethical investing”—in the 1990s and early 2000s—many RI funds could boast superior returns to broad index funds. RI advocates pointed to the way ESG criteria served as a force for risk mitigation, steering clients away from potentially unsustainable industries (tobacco, coal) and companies at greater risk of lawsuits and increased regulation.
The last decade, by contrast, has been marked by strong performance of major indices like the S&P 500 and underperformance by sectors commonly overweighted in RI portfolios, such as renewable energy. In the RIA survey, “Concerns about returns” ranked as the second most common reason advisors cited for not including RI in client portfolios (47%), after “Lack of client interest/demand” (61%).
Other factors possibly contributing to the RI pause include the rising market share of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) over mutual funds—76% of advisors offering RI said they predominantly use mutual funds, compared to just 8% using ETFs—and skepticism fed by so-called “greenwashing.” Thirty-five percent of advisors polled by RIA cited “Concerns about the validity of ESG benefits” among their reasons for not offering RI portfolios.
Get free MoneySense financial tips, news & advice in your inbox.
Read more about investing:
[ad_2]
Jessica Barrett
Source link
