<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Financial Advisor, Consultant and Financial Planning &#187; Stocks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.finance-review.com/category/stocks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.finance-review.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 21:16:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Lower Your Mutual Fund Fees</title>
		<link>http://www.finance-review.com/stocks/lower-your-mutual-fund-fees/</link>
		<comments>http://www.finance-review.com/stocks/lower-your-mutual-fund-fees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 19:49:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Stocks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.finance-review.com/?p=26</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For starters, you can’t project the past into the future. A fund that makes you 18% this year might lose you 2% next year. Past performance is a lousy predictor of future performance. Burton Malkiel, shows in his great book A Random Walk Down Wall Street that the best funds in the 1970s lagged behind [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For starters, you can’t project the past into the future. A fund that makes  you 18% this year might lose you 2% next year. Past performance is a lousy  predictor of future performance.</p>
<p>Burton Malkiel, shows in his great book  <em>A Random Walk Down Wall Street</em> that the best funds in the 1970s lagged  behind in the ’80s, just as the best funds of the 1980s failed to keep up in the  ’90s. In fact, Malkiel finds that the top mutual funds from any long period usually end  up under performing in the next. John Bogle, founder of The Vanguard Group, came  to the same conclusion when he looked at the top 10 mutual funds leading up to the  dot-com boom. Between 1996 and 1999 the funds produced an average annual return  of 55%. Over the next three years, they lost 34% a year.</p>
<p>You can’t rely on past performance to predict a fund’s future returns, but  how much it charges in fees can provide you with an important clue. Expensive  funds perform worse over the long term than funds with lower fees. As strange as  it seems, the less you pay, the more you get.</p>
<p>Surprised? Most people think that funds with higher fees have more money to spend on research and managers, so  they should perform better. But that’s not the case.</p>
<p>Bogle showed this by splitting U.S. funds into four groups ranging from the  cheapest to the most expensive. He found that the gross returns before fees were  actually pretty even across all four groups  the pricey funds didn’t perform  any better than the cheap ones. So the net return that investors got depended on  how much they lost to fees. The more money that went to the managers, the less  there was left for investors.</p>
<p>Study after study has confirmed this effect, including a Canadian survey done  by Gene Hochachka, a former quantitative analyst for the Vancouver mutual fund  company Phillips, Hager &amp; North. He found a straight one-for-one correlation  between fees and returns. For every percentage point your fund company charges  you in fees, your return goes down by one percentage point.</p>
<p>How to pick it</p>
<p>Given that, your best bet is to reduce your fees by investing in a low-cost  portfolio of index funds<a href="/2006/04/05/couch-potato-portfolio-introduction/" target="_blank"></a>.</p>
<p>If you’re more comfortable with prepackaged investments, you might prefer a low-cost balanced fund. Suzane Abboud, our mutual fund specialist, recommends the CIBC Monthly Income Fund, TD Monthly Income Fund or the RBC Monthly Income Fund as decent choices. Nothing is guaranteed, but by reducing your fees you’re improving your odds  and that’s what smart investing is all about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.finance-review.com/stocks/lower-your-mutual-fund-fees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Great Stocks From the Great Depression</title>
		<link>http://www.finance-review.com/stocks/great-stocks-from-the-great-depression/</link>
		<comments>http://www.finance-review.com/stocks/great-stocks-from-the-great-depression/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 23:49:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Stocks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.finance-review.com/?p=14</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression has investors everywhere wondering if to purchase, hold or bail. Though there is no telling if the current world recession will turn into a sepia toned, soup lined sequel to that historic calamity, it did get us thinking: If the whole point of stocks is to purchase [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression has investors  everywhere wondering if to purchase, hold    or bail. Though there is no  telling if the current world recession will turn into a sepia toned,  soup lined sequel to that historic calamity, it did get us thinking: If  the whole point of stocks is to purchase low and sell high, then the  Great Depression must <strong>Offered</strong> Many pretty good purchasing opportunities.</p>
<p>But what were they? SmartMoney.Com went in search of the Great  Depression’s best buys, with help from the Center for Research in  Security Prices at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business.  The CRSP crunched numbers to find the 50 best performing stocks from  1932 to 1954 by accumulative total return. The result: A dream portfolio  for the greatest investors of the Greatest Generation.</p>
<p><strong> More from SmartMoney.Com:</strong></p>
<p>•,  Five world Stocks for Bargain Hunters</p>
<p>•  The Patriotic Investor: eight Stocks to Lift the USA</p>
<p>•,  Think Your Money’s Safe?</p>
<p>We started with 1932 because, while the famous market crash occurred  in 1929, it did not hit rock bottom till nearly three years afterward.   Uglier, the Dow Jones Industrial Average did not regain its precrash  level till 1954, meaning it took more than a couple of decades to make  investors whole.</p>
<p>Looking over the list is a reminder of days gone by    and a time  when company names were straightforward and  mundane. No Navistars or  Altiras here. Fans of “The Simpsons” may recall that Mr. Burns had put  money into the fictional Amalgamated Spats, but in real life he should <strong>Doubled</strong> Down on Electric ship and National Acme Co. The former, which still  makes submarines to this day as a unit of General Dynamics, returned a  whopping 55,000 over those 22 years. National Acme it made machine  tools, not giant slingshots for perpetually irritated cartoon coyotes  returned more than 10,000.</p>
<p>We’ve taken the complete list of 50 top investments and selected 15  of the most telling. One thing many of them share    and a factor that  may resonate with investors today, given the Obama administration’s  stimulus plans    is the affect of big shortage spending. New Deal,  World War II and Cold War outlays fueled many of these stocks. Here,  then, is our look at many of the greatest Great Depression stocks.</p>
<p><strong>1. Electric Boat: Unsinkable Submarine Maker</strong></p>
<p>Cumulative Total Return 1932 to 1954: 55,000 Rank in Top 50: 1<br />
Where is it now? A unit of General Dynamics<br />
Churning out hundreds of PT boats and submarines throughout WWII as  well as building the U.S.S. Nautilus, the world’s 1st nuclear sub,  throughout the Cold War more than kept this stock afloat.</p>
<p><strong>2. International Paper &amp;amp, Power: Paper, Not Plastic</strong></p>
<p>Cumulative Total Return 1932 to 1954: 30,503 Rank in Top 50: 4<br />
Where is it now? International Paper<br />
Long before plastic packaging or the digital age, for that matter, paper <strong>Ked</strong> When it came to communication and containers. Indeed, four of the 50  best stocks from 1932 to 1954 were in businesses that made paper, paper  bags and corrugated cardboard.</p>
<p>&amp;bull, How to Prepare Your Finances for the Obama Era</p>
<p>&amp;bull, Banks Make Rewards Plans Less Rewarding</p>
<p>&amp;bull, What a Penny Saved Costs<br />
<strong>Visit the Banking &amp;amp, Budgeting Center</strong> <strong>3. Zenith Radio: Tuned In</strong></p>
<p>Cumulative Total Return 1932 to 1954: 24,146 Rank in Top 50: 7<br />
Where is it now? Part of LG Electronics<br />
Once upon a time radios were so big they were not personal buyer  electronic devices, they were furniture. Back then American, not Asian,  manufacturers dominated the market for civilian and military use.</p>
<p><strong>4. Douglas Aircraft: Bombs Away</strong></p>
<p>Cumulative Total Return 1932 to 1954: 23,586 Rank in Top 50: 8<br />
Where is it now? Bloodline leads to Boeing<br />
It is little wonder a military freelancer that helped make the B 17  bomber as well as iconic civilian planes like the DC 3 and DC 9, could  fare well throughout WWII and the Cold War. North American Aviation P 51  fighter, B 25 bomber also made the list.</p>
<p><strong>5. Minneapolis Honeywell Regulator: Thermostats Were Hot</strong></p>
<p>Cumulative Total Return 1932 to 1954: 21,608 Rank in Top 50: 9<br />
Where is it now? Honeywell International<br />
Central heating is taken for granted these days, but only thanks to  pioneering advances like the company’s original Butz Thermo Electric  Regulator “damper flapper,” which helped keep offices and factories at  just the right temperature.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.finance-review.com/stocks/great-stocks-from-the-great-depression/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.222 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-01-29 01:59:55 -->

