Posts: 112
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation:
6
Same same but different!
FMs use the NAV method because clients subscribe at different dates i.e. different NAV.
For individual investors, XIRR is the most convenient method. You don't even need to value the portfolio when you inject/withdraw cash. (or at the most annually to break down the year on year returns) 
Posts: 670
Threads: 9
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
15
(03-01-2014, 06:01 PM)grubb Wrote: Same same but different!
FMs use the NAV method because clients subscribe at different dates i.e. different NAV.
For individual investors, XIRR is the most convenient method. You don't even need to value the portfolio when you inject/withdraw cash. (or at the most annually to break down the year on year returns)
Sure didn't know about that!
So will both method lead to the same result?
"Criticism is the fertilizer of learning." - Sir John Templeton
Posts: 819
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
7
(03-01-2014, 06:01 PM)grubb Wrote: Same same but different!
FMs use the NAV method because clients subscribe at different dates i.e. different NAV.
For individual investors, XIRR is the most convenient method. You don't even need to value the portfolio when you inject/withdraw cash. (or at the most annually to break down the year on year returns)
For people like me who did not record the stock prices when capital was injected, it would be difficult to use the NAV method since I'm not sure where to find historical prices of those stocks that have been since delisted...anyone knows wea to find?
Posts: 1,767
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation:
15
(03-01-2014, 06:43 PM)dzwm87 Wrote: (03-01-2014, 06:01 PM)grubb Wrote: Same same but different!
FMs use the NAV method because clients subscribe at different dates i.e. different NAV.
For individual investors, XIRR is the most convenient method. You don't even need to value the portfolio when you inject/withdraw cash. (or at the most annually to break down the year on year returns)
Sure didn't know about that!
So will both method lead to the same result?
I have tested XIRR and after simulating various results against actual profits and time frame. It s logical to me. Some people often confuse XIRR with IRR method for investments. They are similar but not the same. Avoid IRR. Yet attempt on NAV since XIRR meets my need.
Posts: 9,841
Threads: 711
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
64
(03-01-2014, 07:33 PM)corydorus Wrote: (03-01-2014, 06:43 PM)dzwm87 Wrote: (03-01-2014, 06:01 PM)grubb Wrote: Same same but different!
FMs use the NAV method because clients subscribe at different dates i.e. different NAV.
For individual investors, XIRR is the most convenient method. You don't even need to value the portfolio when you inject/withdraw cash. (or at the most annually to break down the year on year returns)
Sure didn't know about that!
So will both method lead to the same result?
I have tested XIRR and after simulating various results against actual profits and time frame. It s logical to me. Some people often confuse XIRR with IRR method for investments. They are similar but not the same. Avoid IRR. Yet attempt on NAV since XIRR meets my need.
IRR is Internal Rate of Return for returns at a fixed interval, while XIRR similar but for irregular interval. XIRR is more suitable for most of us.
“夏则资皮，冬则资纱，旱则资船，水则资车” - 范蠡
Posts: 112
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation:
6
(03-01-2014, 06:43 PM)dzwm87 Wrote: (03-01-2014, 06:01 PM)grubb Wrote: Same same but different!
FMs use the NAV method because clients subscribe at different dates i.e. different NAV.
For individual investors, XIRR is the most convenient method. You don't even need to value the portfolio when you inject/withdraw cash. (or at the most annually to break down the year on year returns)
Sure didn't know about that!
So will both method lead to the same result?
Yup both method will lead to the same result. or the difference is so small that it is insignificant (i suspect might be some quirk in the excel formulas  )
Posts: 9,841
Threads: 711
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
64
(31-12-2013, 04:31 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: (26-12-2013, 05:01 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: YTD, the XIRR result is close to 30%. YTD STI return is 2.4% (assumed dividend yield of 3.4%, and growth of -1%), so it is about 27% above STI.
I am yet to complete the review. Preliminary review shows that Challenger helped quite a lot. So did M1 and YZJ. None of my portfolio lost money this year. The recent acquired MemstarT also helped a bit.
Other in this forum might have better result, with a good run up of stocks like Kingsmen, Silverlake and Boustead etc.
The year is closed. The final result are
XIRR result is 32%, including dividends. STI is flat at 0%, and +3.4% (estimation) with dividend. The last few day of market make a few % difference.
Not too bad a year for me. Wish you all Happy New Year 2014.
The STI 2013 performance is announced. The actual one is 3.26%, instead of the estimated 3.4%.
"Stock market capitalisation declined 0.6% to S$940 billion. On a total return basis, including dividends, the Straits Times Index was up 3.26%."
Ref: http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/20140106...eID=269814
“夏则资皮，冬则资纱，旱则资船，水则资车” - 范蠡
Posts: 1,767
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation:
15
(07-01-2014, 11:19 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: (31-12-2013, 04:31 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: (26-12-2013, 05:01 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: YTD, the XIRR result is close to 30%. YTD STI return is 2.4% (assumed dividend yield of 3.4%, and growth of -1%), so it is about 27% above STI.
I am yet to complete the review. Preliminary review shows that Challenger helped quite a lot. So did M1 and YZJ. None of my portfolio lost money this year. The recent acquired MemstarT also helped a bit.
Other in this forum might have better result, with a good run up of stocks like Kingsmen, Silverlake and Boustead etc.
The year is closed. The final result are
XIRR result is 32%, including dividends. STI is flat at 0%, and +3.4% (estimation) with dividend. The last few day of market make a few % difference.
Not too bad a year for me. Wish you all Happy New Year 2014.
The STI 2013 performance is announced. The actual one is 3.26%, instead of the estimated 3.4%.
"Stock market capitalisation declined 0.6% to S$940 billion. On a total return basis, including dividends, the Straits Times Index was up 3.26%."
Ref: http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/20140106...eID=269814
Yup. This is about what i got in my STI calculation. Quite amaze forumers are getting 15%-30% XIRR 2013.
Posts: 2,743
Threads: 23
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
25
Should get 2005-2013 annualized returns. One full cycle.
If calc returns starting from 4Q 2008, returns will look better than
investment gods.
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster
Posts: 819
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
7
Ok, finally convinced myself to go and find out the prices to do the computations (have never computed year on year before).
For 2013:
Conservative Rate 39.94%
XIRR (with idle cash) 41.42%
XIRR (no idle cash) 51.64%
From 23 Jul 2003 till end 2013 (10.44 years):
XIRR (with idle cash) 18.18%
The conservative rate is computed using end portfolio value divided by start portfolio value plus total injected capital over the period. Juz for counter checking the values from XIRR.
|
Homepage
PR Newswire
