Building Wealth

For the first 30 or so years of working, saving and investing, you’ll be first in the mode of getting out of the hole (paying down debt), and then building your net worth (that’s wealth accumulation.). But don’t forget, wealth accumulation isn’t the ultimate goal. Decumulation is! (a separate category here at the Hub).

Can you retire on a million dollars?

Posted By |

In your 20s and 30s, retirement is so far away that you can barely see it on the horizon. The best way to get there is to save what you can afford – say 10 per cent of your income – and then readjust your financial compass as you get closer and have more information.

You might start the journey with the idea that you need a million dollars or more once you reach your destination. To get to one million by age 65, a 30-year-old would need to save $8,500 per year for 35 years, assuming a 6 per cent annual return.

Saving for Retirement

It’s not easy to save $700+ per month in your thirties. Competing priorities like a mortgage, car payments, and raising children often means that retirement savings are put on hold.  Put off saving until you reach 40 and you’re now faced with the daunting task of saving more than $1,400 per month for the next 25 years to reach that million dollar mark.

Some might feel it’s prudent to pay off the mortgage and max out children’s RESPs before ramping up their own retirement savings. By age 50, most of those obligations should be taken care of which should now free up significant cash flow to save for retirement. It’ll need to be significant to reach a million. With only 15 years to go now, compound interest is not on your side, and so you’ll need to save nearly $3,400 per month – or $40,000 per year – to get to your retirement goal.

A tempting alternative at this point is to adjust your expected rate of return. After all, with an 8 per cent return you’d only need to save $2,800 per month, and at 10 per cent you’d need to put away less than $2,400 per month.

But the more realistic approach would be to adjust your expected retirement age and then figure out if a million dollars is really the amount you need to enjoy a comfortable retirement. You’d be surprised to learn you can live off much less.

Related: Have you considered a permanent retirement overseas? Read this:

Continue Reading…

Low future returns? The coming bull market in advice

Posted By |

A bull market in advice? This novel idea is the basis of my latest Motley Fool blog, which came out of the 2017 Vanguard Investment Symposium held this Tuesday.

Hopefully, the title is self-explanatory. Click on the highlighted text to access the whole blog: Lower future returns from balanced portfolios means a bull market in advice.

Click through to get Vanguard’s forecasts for future returns. Suffice it to say that they don’t believe the next five years will be as good as the last five years have been for balanced investors.

All of which means good financial advice will be at a premium.  Naturally, Vanguard believes that the lower expected future investment returns are, the more important it is to reduce costs and taxes, which of course its low-cost index funds and ETFs facilitate. But it also believes advisors can help investors by addressing the so-called  “behaviour gap.” It’s been well documented that poor investing behaviour (buying high, selling low) are destructive to returns, which is why a good financial advisor can more than recoup his/her fees.

Advisors can add 3% value per a year

Many fee-based advisors use the kind of investment funds Vanguard provides and Vanguard believes good advice can “add value” of roughly 3% per year to clients’ investment returns.

Behavioural coaching is the single biggest value-add: 150 basis points (1.5%). “Staying the course is difficult,” but “a balanced diversified investor has fared relatively well,” said one Vanguard presenter quoted in the Motley Fool piece, Fran Kinniry.

Behavioural coaching is followed closely by 131 beeps for cost-effective product implementation (using low expense ratios). This alone can add 1 to 2 percentage points of value, Vanguard says, attributing the finding to “numerous studies.” Rebalancing accounts for another 47 beeps, and Asset Location between 0 and 42 beeps (as opposed to Asset Allocation, which it says adds “more than 0 beeps.”)

A proper spending strategy (identifying the order of withdrawals in the decumulation stage) accounts for another 0 to 41 beeps. All told, the potential value added comes to “about 3%,” Kinniry says.

Vanguard says a “strong move to fee-based” compensation is accelerating. In 2015, 65% of advisors’ compensation came from asset-based fees, while wealthier investors are “most willing to pay AUM-based fees.” Gradually this will ‘flow down” to less well-heeled clients, “as smaller balances can now be well-served” in a fee-based model because of scale and technology.

Using Cerulli data from 2015, Vanguard estimates the median asset-weighted advisory fee is 1.39% for the mass market ($100,000 assets), 1.28% for the middle market ($300,000), 1.09% for the mass-affluent market ($750,000), 0.92% for the affluent market ($1.5 million to $5 million) and 0.70% for the High Net Worth market ($10 million or more).

On average across all clients, the median fee is 1.07%.

 

Mid-year review of Aman Raina’s Robo Advisor portfolio

Posted By |

By Aman Raina, SageInvestors

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Aman Raina

As we cross the mid-pole mark in 2017, it seems like a good time to check in on my Robo Portfolio that I created two and half years ago.  For those jumping on for the first time, I wanted to try to find out if this new type of investment service which was taking the industry by storm a few years ago does any better job of creating wealth for investors compared to the traditional methods of investing (i.e. Do-It-Yourself or having a professional manage your money on your behalf).

I chose one Robo Advisor company here in Canada and invested $5,000 of my own money. When I set up the account I answered a series of questions about my financial literacy and risk tolerance. ROBO took my responses and crafted a portfolio that it felt reflected my profile.

As I am pretty experienced with investing and have a long-term investment horizon, ROBO determined that a portfolio mix of 85 per cent stocks and 15 per cent bonds would work for me. From there ROBO carved out allocations to a variety of equity and bond assets using ETFs to provide the appropriate exposure.

The objective of this exercise is to observe and blog about the whole experience and share with you any unique insights about the service. Most importantly I wanted to see what kind of returns this type of portfolio can generate. My experiment is by no means scientific but I think there is a lot that we can learn about this service if we go beyond the slick websites and marketing to truly look underneath the hood to see how these portfolios are managed.

Performance still reasonable

When we last checked in with my ROBO portfolio in late January, it was chugging along rather nicely, generating somewhat decent returns. It appears to be continuing the trend. Since the start of the year, the ROBO portfolio is up 5.5 per cent. Since I set up the account, the portfolio is up 14.2 per cent. The portfolio is up $298.71 this year, of which $53.59 was in dividend payments. Again, pretty reasonable for me. When you look at portfolio breakdown most of the returns have come from US stocks, Foreign stocks, and Emerging Market stocks.

ROBO Portfolio - 6 month performance chart

ROBO Portfolio – 6 month performance chart

ROBO portfolio - Asset Allocation breakdown - July 3, 2017

ROBO portfolio – Asset Allocation breakdown – July 3, 2017

Asset Allocation: Breaking News! 

It all seems decent enough; however, shortly after I posted my report in February, the portfolio has gone through some changes. Continue Reading…

Opinion: Morneau rings death knell for entrepreneurial spirit in name of “fairness”

Posted By |
Finance Minister Bill Morneau

By Trevor Parry

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Liberals are majestic creatures, always knowing what is better for the masses, and careful never to swallow a dose of their own medicine.  One can conjure up the Hogwartsian image of the Little Prince and “Red” Billy Morneau stumbling hand and hand through the torch-lit catacombs of the Department of Finance, where, to their great joy, hidden behind the cobweb-covered portrait of Alan MacEachen they find a secret passage to Chamber of the Knights of the Just Society.

For it can only be a long forgotten cell of Birkenstock-wearing discredited ideologues, clutching fervently to their well-worn copies of the Carter Commission Report that have vomited forth Tuesday’s discussion paper decrying the apparent abuses perpetrated by the shareholders of private corporations.

Mr. Trudeau likely can’t spell dividend, and Mr. Morneau dare not ask his father how his tuition to the LSE (coincidentally, founded by the Fabian Socialist Society) might have been funded. For these two, along with a good portion of the Liberal caucus, are completely unaware of the sacrifices that are made to create a successful business, or create a professional carreer, and who frankly shake hands with the Holy Spirit of Hypocrisy on a daily basis.

Entrepreneurialism is a plague to Liberals

No, to the Liberal Party of Canada entrepreneurialism is a plague to be eradicated, replaced by a compliant corporate oligopoly working in symbiosis with a burgeoning civil service, and of course legions of ravenous consultants.

The  Department of Finance Paper seeks to target corporate tax planning strategies that have been in place for over 30  years. Paying dividends to adult children, parents and other family members in lower tax brackets, often as a measure of generosity or as a means to pay for higher education (something Mr. Trudeau aspired to but could not achieve), multiplication of the capital gains exemption to preserve a life’s work, and realizing deferral as a means to create capital are apparently at odds with the omniscient and ubiquitous Liberal goal of “fairness.”

Tax fairness should be holding all to the lowest possible measure of taxation, not subjecting everyone to the highest. For in Trudeau’s lexicon fairness is synonymous with mediocrity.    For it is an unassailable lesson of history that the fundamental precondition for the creation of economic dynamism is the creation of surplus savings and capital by the entrepreneurial class. The tax strategies that Mr. Morneau and his Office of the Five Year Plan (formerly known as the Department of Finance) targeted on Tuesday had in some tiny measure allowed for that.

In Liberal Canada economic results must be ordained, not by a higher power, or by the ability or drive of the individual but by a collection of over-entitled, mentally ossified Liberal politburo. By every measure possible; some of which arguably violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in that they directly and unabashedly discriminate against familial relationships, anyone who dare exceed the rigid definition of “middle class” (which for most of the country is “lower” middle class at best) will be assaulted by the great level of an over-50% tax rate. The product of this fairness will be the corpulent rewarding of Liberal sacred cows without even the pretence of accountability.

Continue Reading…

Canadian ETF growth continues in 2017 but still early innings

Posted By |
Source: Strategic Insight data as of December 31 of each year. As of April 30th for 2017.


By Atul Tiwari 

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

With summer in full swing, along with warmer weather and blooming gardens, it got me thinking about cycles in investing. In particular ETFs, which have been taking root in Canada over the past few years.

When Vanguard entered the Canadian market in December 2011, we were one of only eight ETF providers. Our own evolution illustrates how much has changed in just over five years: We started with six index-based ETFs and currently offer a lineup of 33 ETFs, including four actively managed equity factor-based ETFs launched in June 2016.

Industry-wide more than 500 ETFs now vie for the attention of investors and advisors. And it’s not just products that have proliferated; new ETF providers enter the industry every month. More than $130 billion in Canada-domiciled ETF assets is now divided among 24 ETF providers. And there’s room to grow. ETFs make up only 8% of Canadian investable assets while capturing 25% of industry flows for the first quarter.1

Investors have clearly grown more comfortable adding ETFs to their portfolios. While I’m not one to make predictions about whether the pace of expansion will continue, I do see three trends that tend to favour it.

1.)  Greater fee transparency

Thanks to the second phase of Canada’s Client Relationship Model reforms (CRM2), investors are starting to see — in dollar terms on their account statements — what they’re paying their advisory firms. Canadian regulators are also considering a potential ban on embedded trailing commissions. This will surely generate discussion and shine an even brighter light on investment fees.

No less an expert than billionaire investor Warren Buffett extolled the long-term benefits of low-cost investing in his 2016 letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders. Cost plays a critical role in total investment return. The less investors pay in fees, the more of the potential returns they can keep. This is true whether you are investing in an ETF, mutual fund or any other investment vehicle.

2.)  Fee-based advisors are on the rise

Driven partly by regulatory changes and heightened awareness of investment fees, many financial advisors are moving to fee-based business practices. We favour this transition as we believe it better aligns advisors with the needs of investors and creates full transparency. Continue Reading…