ValueBuddies.com : Value Investing Forum - Singapore, Hong Kong, U.S.

Retire in 30 years and only need 3K per month ?
Seems too little if we have include inflation.

(06-01-2013, 10:15 AM)corydorus Wrote: [ -> ]Retire in 30 years and only need 3K per month ?
Seems too little if we have include inflation.

Yes, should take into account inflation. More like 3k of present value of money. If add 3% inflation" the equi amt will be 7k.

And if he plan his Retirement plan on the expectation of more than 20% Capital Growth through investment, chances of failure is 100%.

Now I see the trend.
SGX has announced the winners for StockWhiz 2012. There is no lack of interviewees for the next few months of "me & my money"
http://www.sgx.com/wps/wcm/connect/sgx_e..._newsflash


On a serious note, I would be interested in the "best risk managed portfolio" category, specifically, what was the judging criteria used, what are the stocks in such a portfolio, and not how much the guy charge to his credit cards every month.

In another thread, hyom has pointed out that Musicwhiz and cory had good risk adjusted 2012 performance. Perhaps we can start our learning journey from them?

Hi bros, reading this week’s invest guy compare his 1 year 45% return to the average annual return of his HDB over 5 years does not seem fair since I’m sure a lot of people with just a few stocks can fluctuate wildly from year to year. He sounds just like a complete newbie like me, but quite good at

Might be going off-topic and dumb question since I am still new to stocks. When we measure our annual compounded returns, how many years minimum do you all think the period should be before the so called average returns can be considered a more “stable” measurement?

(07-01-2013, 10:26 AM)mobo Wrote: [ -> ]Hi bros, reading this week’s invest guy compare his 1 year 45% return to the average annual return of his HDB over 5 years does not seem fair since I’m sure a lot of people with just a few stocks can fluctuate wildly from year to year. He sounds just like a complete newbie like me, but quite good at

Might be going off-topic and dumb question since I am still new to stocks. When we measure our annual compounded returns, how many years minimum do you all think the period should be before the so called average returns can be considered a more “stable” measurement?

Just my view - but I think at least one full bull/bear cycle.

And yes he is a newbie, he said so in the interview that he has only been investing for a year or so.

(07-01-2013, 10:34 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-01-2013, 10:26 AM)mobo Wrote: [ -> ]Hi bros, reading this week’s invest guy compare his 1 year 45% return to the average annual return of his HDB over 5 years does not seem fair since I’m sure a lot of people with just a few stocks can fluctuate wildly from year to year. He sounds just like a complete newbie like me, but quite good at

Might be going off-topic and dumb question since I am still new to stocks. When we measure our annual compounded returns, how many years minimum do you all think the period should be before the so called average returns can be considered a more “stable” measurement?

Just my view - but I think at least one full bull/bear cycle.

And yes he is a newbie, he said so in the interview that he has only been investing for a year or so.

Hi musicwhiz, thanks for your comments. In this case the latest bull-bear cycle will be from 2003 to 2011 (9 years!) - that's real long...

I know he just start stock investment 1 year ago, when I say he sound like newbie I mean like real newbie maybe start playing stocks last week. How this kind of standard can be a winner of a investment competition is really strange....

I would count the last bull/bear cycle as starting from 2006/2007 and ending around 2010-2011 period. It's not an exact science but it would suffice.

People do take unnatural risks in a competition as they have absolutely nothing to lose. You don't have to be surprised.

Also, a lot of competitions are designed to generate hype and trading commissions for the brokerage/organizers. Hence, there is a vested interest.

He invest in stocks for a few years already, it is only a year ago that he started this 'portfolio' after his course that made money.
Seriously, anything said with agenda and vested interest should be take with a huge spoon of salt...

When i am his age(29) i am saving 50% + bonus. How much can you save if you only earn a few k when you just starting out? save a few hundred? He expect his portfolio to grow compound 45% for the next 30 years? Absolute rubbish!
Usually those people who earn their return fast will lost back doubly fast because they have this mentality that it is ok to lose the money because it is win money not their principal capital.

I don't understand why a young man like him, with only one year of reasonable return to boast, will even agree to such an interview.