This data may be on the boards somewhere, but I can't easily find it. I'm interested in the results for the RP4 portfolio for 1999 when applied to the TSE35 stocks. The 1999 TSE35 returns would be appreciated as well.From south of the border,Ethan Haskel
Ethan, you should be able to dig up your data with a bout a 1/2 hours worth of work.The 1999 TSE-35 RP4 stocks were DFS, TRP, TA and A. You can get quotes and dividend information from Yahoo!, just add a .TO to the symbol.brant...PS: I think that the returns sucked last year, TRP basically killed the portfolio, DFS and A did OK, but totally lagged on the index due to Nortels huge weighting.
<but totally lagged on the index due to Nortels huge weighting.>I agree. Nortel is currently up to about a 34% weighting on the TSE. Consequently, I no longer look to "beat the index", as such, using a high-yield approach. At least, in the current investment climate. A slump in Nortel will take the index down hard and fast, but such a drop will actually say nothing about the other stocks that make up the index. The "index" has ceased to be representative of the Canadian stock market as a whole. But that just means that the typical yardstick (for everyone born after about 1970, I mean a metre stick) we use to measure returns in Canada is, in a sense, "broken". I continue to look for the high-yield approach to deliver, over time, typically better results than a more representative large cap index.The rise of Nortel also points out a hole in the high-yield approach. The approach is not a be-all-and-end-all, one decision only, approach; but I don't think anybody ever said it was. As another example, the approach also missed (and continues to miss) Bombardier's more than ten-fold rise during the 1990s. Even so, I do argue that it is a worthwhile component of an investment plan.Don
have you heard about a new index. It is called right now "nbthti"What is it?It will take the technology stock and wieght them in order of the revenue and remix them in order to avoid having NT to be so huge.You can follow it at www.silvan.comI believe that it is a more acurate way to look at Canada.firstname.lastname@example.org
I've calculated the RP4 for the TSE35 for 1999 at minus 1.6%, compared with a return of +31.7% for the TSE300.Here's the rather ugly details:DFS +51.6%TRP -40.8%TA -34.0%A +21.6For the life of me, I can't find the return for the TSE35 for 1999. If anyone has access to this number, please post. Also, it would be helpful to find the return for 1998 for the TSE300.Ethan Haskel
Hi Ethan,I got these numbers from www.globeinvestor.com which compares funds to indexes etc.TSE 300 return - 1998: -1.6TSE 35 - 1999: 36.42TSE 35 - 1998: -2.05The TSE 35/100 indexes have now been replaced with a S&P/TSE 60 index. That is now the large-cap benchmark for Candian stocks.Hope this helps,Andrew.
Ethan:Probably the best source, though not online, for the TSE index returns is the publication "TSE Review", published monthly by the Toronto Stock Exchange. It publishes both a total return figure and the mere index level return figure.Don Moir
<<I got these numbers from www.globeinvestor.com which compares funds to indexes etc.>>Thanks to all who've helped to educate this Yankee!I'm heading off to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia this weekend for a short tour with my family. I've taken a few trips to Quebec, including Quebec City area and the Gaspe over the past few summers, and enjoy the cool weather and Canadian hospitality.Since I write a weekly Foolish Four column, I thought my next one would have a little Northern flavor, about F4 investing with Canadian stocks. I've learned a lot about Canadian investing from these boards in a short amount of time, and if anyone else has any words of wisdom on this topic, feel free to chime in!Ethan Haskel
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |