Navrainvest Fund Performance (Calender Year)

[Sim]

But in the world of managed Aust. share funds, during the last 12 mths, the Navra performance is not all that great

...

Sim you could've been in this fund:

You're completely missing the point that both myself and TryHard were making here Beach Bum.

Playing "could have" does not achieve anything.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. 20/20 vision and all those cliches.

Could you have guaranteed the return on that fund you mentioned ? No. You couldn't even have predicted the return (the same way that I can't predict the return or make any guarantees about the Navra fund).

Anyone thinking they can tell you what the market is going to do at any point in the future is a fool and should be ignored.

My point has nothing to do with maximising returns by choosing the "best" investment, and then sitting around afterwards comparing the size of your p****, err... Ferrari (Sorry Peter ). This is not a competition I am in with you. I do not care at all about your returns, I don't care if you make 100 times as much as I do, or if you go broke. Really, I don't.

The point that we were trying to make is that you have to be in it.

You have to be doing something - even if it is an active decision to do nothing - this is still better than not making a decision at all (or "jeering from the sidelines" as TryHard put it). That's all - nothing more, nothing less.

 

[keithj]

Tryhard I understand what your trying to say.
But in the world of managed Aust. share funds, during the last 12 mths, the Navra performance is not all that great, infact reading back Steve's own criteria it aint that great either. Also judging a managed fund (especially a share fund) by a 1 yr performance is something a noob would do, or the person selling the fund (as it is their job).
---
Acey, here's my "secret" strategy:
1. Put the share certificate in the draw (right down the bottom).
2. make sure it gets lost in among a whole stack of other papers

The principle though is simple: "rising tides lifts all boats"

BB, I gotta agree with you. One of my "secret" strategies is LICs (see ARG and AFI for more info). Advantages that I see are -

• you don't have to learn about shares or trading or investing
• 14% average annual return over 20 years (after fees)
• 5% dividend yield (after franking) consistently increasing
• holds diversified blue chip Australian shares
• marginable to 60-70%
• professionally managed by well respected managers
• low management fees < 0.2%
• liquid – buy & sell on ASX with minimal spread
• long verifiable track record
• large asset base > $1B
• relatively low risk & low volatility

I hope this broadens some peoples knowledge of share investing.

 

[TryHard]

Happy Easter to you too

If you can't accept this your just ignorant.

Actually Beach Bum I believe spelling you're without the apostrophe shows more ignorance than my lack of knowledge of the sharemarket

My understanding is the Navra fund is a reasonably conservative investment vehicle in which to park funds that are liquid when you need them, and earn way better than bank interest, while making returns to help fund the next property purchase (either through increased income and serviceability, or available cash). It can potentially make money in a rising or declining market as it trades on volatility. I have seen Steve's presentations more than once and I have traded in the fund. I made some reasonable returns (in fact bloody good compared to my expectations of it), and the Sleep At Night Factor was high. I trust Steve, regardless of the fact he is 'selling' the concept. I believe that a large part of his motivation is his passion to grow that business based on his NavTrade system, and at this point everything he has predicted in his 'sales' presentations has been spot on (his predictions of the property market, his expected returns). As with any investment, I do not expect guarantees.

I also invested direct in the sharemarket with a broker's advice through our SMSF into blue chip aussie stocks. Two of the shares in our portfolio blitzed it (GTP and TAB) - the other 8 went sideways of marginally upward. bottom line we doubled our money in 15 months. If I'd only had the 8 poorer performers I would have been lucky to break even. I ain't gonna see the Super fund dough for 30 years so I'm not stressed, but if I had the funds for my next property purchase in there, I would be losing some sleep, because a declining sharemarket would crucify me short term.

I like the idea of a system like NavraInvest as it gives me a low risk place to earn something while I accumulate for the next IP, managed by someone who knows what they are doing. And Navra was the first "sharemarket" person I have heard speak intelligently about the role of property (NOT shares) in building wealth.

So does that make me ignorant when I make a decision to invest in Navra based on the above ? I think not. Certainly not as ignorant as quoting historical returns and trying to belittle my decisions.

No one is trying to say you're not a genius, or knock how wonderfully you've done over the last 5 years ... yadda yadda yadda. Maybe if you had proposed your strategy 5 years ago with a sound argument, we would have all followed and enjoyed your raging success. Hell, I might have even paid you a commission.

My comment about jeering from the sidelines was that stupid badgering of Steve by another forum member, when Steve was trying to be helpful in previous posts about Living On Equity.

Have a good Easter. I predict chocolate will be cheaper next week than it was last week. (See, easy to plan for the future )

TryHard

 

[TryHard]

BB, I gotta agree with you. One of my "secret" strategies is LICs (see ARG and AFI for more info).

Keithj, can I ask what you perceive to be different between NavraInvest and the LICs you quoted ? I realise NavraInvest has not been around as long, and the funds managed not as large, but outside of that your post seems to describe the benefits Sim and I and others have enjoyed from Navra Invest to a tee. One thing I liked about Navra was the management fees being charged only on performance, and having a minimum holding of only $1,000, to let smaller investors play too.

I'm sure if you have experience with them and have been prepared to post links to their websites, they are fine upstanding companies with excellent returns, but I guess the blunt questions I'm trying to ask is why you believe their returns (say next year for example) would be better or worse than NavraInvest ?

Cheers and Hoppy Easter
TryHard

 

[keithj]

can I ask what you perceive to be different between NavraInvest and the LICs you quoted ? One thing I liked about Navra was the management fees being charged only on performance, and having a minimum holding of only $1,000, to let smaller investors play too.

Hi Tryhard,

I think the similarities and differences are obvious - re-read the websites & PDS if they aren't. I think LICs can be put in the same basket as the Jan Somers 'slow & steady' low risk method of investing. Min holding for any ASX stock is $500.

I'm sure if you have experience with them and have been prepared to post links to their websites, they are fine upstanding companies with excellent returns, but I guess the blunt questions I'm trying to ask is why you believe their returns (say next year for example) would be better or worse than NavraInvest ?

They are considered conservative share investments. I didn't say I believe their returns will be better or worse than any other investment. However, I do believe they are a low risk investment that is likely to produce above average returns over the next 20 yrs.

I don't mention LICs in order to compare them to any other strategy - I mention them because this forum appears to be v. blinkered in it's knowledge of share investing and trading.

As previous posters mentioned, most people here are dedicated IPers and have no interest in learning about shares and are overwhelmed by it (this is understandable & not necessarily a bad thing).

One mentioned they spent a couple of hours reading a PDS & getting advice before committing to a fund. Spending 2 minutes reading my previous post has at least doubled their knowledge. LICs aren't well publicised - they don't advertise and consequently have v. low management fees. I'm just trying to broaden peoples knowledge of low risk share investments.

My understanding is the Navra fund is a reasonably conservative investment vehicle in which to park funds that are liquid when you need them, and earn way better than bank interest, while making returns to help fund the next property purchase (either through increased income and serviceability, or available cash).

This is NOT my understanding. Reread the PDS - a previous poster mentioned the recommended timeframe for investment is minimum 5 yrs. Just because it is liquid doesn't mean it's a good place to 'park' short term funds. Have you considered what price you'd get if you wanted to redeem your units today as opposed to last Monday ? (Hint: the market has fallen 3% this week). I don't know if this is a good example, but you should understand what I'm getting at.

And what gave you the understanding it is 'reasonably conservative' ?

Cheers,

Keith

 

[TryHard]

Do "LICs" "Suk" ??

Hi Keith

I'll just address your queries in general 'cos the whole quotes thing is dragging the page length out

DOES THE SHAREMARKET RELATE TO PROPERTY ?

I freely admit to being one of the sharemarket newbies and till today I thought lics had something to do with really cool guitar solos. I am labouring the point of understanding Navra Invest because they are the only sharemarket focussed firm I have found who suggest property is an essential part of any wealth creation. Their strategies include leveraging the benefits of shares and property, and avoiding the negatives of 'normal' long term share trading. Steve's presentations make perfect sense to me - I haven't seen presentations from any LICs and as you say they don't advertise, so that's probably why.

DIFFERENCE NAVRAINVEST and LICS

Maybe the differences and similarities are obvious - I was just hoping to understand from someone's point of view who has a lot more experience than me. Like, what happens to the LIC's you mentioned when the market drops 20% ?

Navra uses the Dollar Cost Trading method which can feasibly provide returns even in a falling market. So maybe 'conservative' is the wrong word. "Relatively" safe maybe better.

INVERSE RELATIONSHIP SHARES vs PROPERTY

Personally, I can't see how investing in a "slow and steady" fund that relies solely on long term growth in equities could COMPLEMENT a property portfolio, because to me you are either a share person or a property person, and as some posts here have described their peaks and troughs happen somewhat 'inversely'.

If I had say $500K in property and $500K in shares (maybe via LICs or direct) to me the troughs in one would eat some of the profit earned in the peaks of the other. If I concentrate on property, rely on buy and hold, and use available equity to make some returns from DCT in the sharemarket, that makes a lot more sense (to me) in complementing my property investment strategy. I aim to have the whole $1M in property, and as small amounts become available, grow them in NavraInvest, to help me add to the $1M in property when I'm able. If the property market goes down, my equity is already deployed in the DCT. If the sharemarket does down, I may still make money from NavraInvest, because they will be buying the some good quality stocks on their way down). I would certainly have more chance of making money from the downturn than a simple direct investment in shares.

I like to think I'm a 'property' person, and can use a managed service like Navra to have some exposure to reasonable returns from the sharemarket while I wait to afford another property. I don't have to rely on the sharemarket rising, I rely on their expertise to profit from volatility in the a fairly 'safe' portfolio of shares.

IS ANY SHARE TRADING 'CONSERVATIVE' ?

What gave me the understanding that the Navra Invest fund is 'reasonably conservative' ? The fact they narrow down the top Aust blue chips using their fundamentals to ensure they are only dealing with companies that are extremely unlikely to go belly up, have a proven history, and avoid firms that make nonsensical decisions. An example I can think of is that they don't deal in Telstra, as Telstra arguably sometimes makes decisions that have nothing to do with shareholder returns.

REDEEMING UNITS

Using your example, IF I bought some units in Navra Invest at $1.165 on 21 March and for some idiotic reason (idiotic even by my standards) chose to redeem them after 3 days trading, my price would be $1.139, so I'd have lost money. Mind you if I'd bought them on 1 July at $1.00 I could have redeemed them at $1.165 on 21 March and made 16.5% gain in addition to the 6.59% dividends I would have received (http://www.navrainvest.com.au/index.asp?content=fund_perf).

Sim kindly shared in another post his returns with specific examples.

LIQUIDITY

When I say I want liquidity, I can't think of any reason that would make me rely on 3-day investment windows. I want to be able to access funds to pay deposits, fund reno's, whatever ... I usually have a few months to plan where the dough needs to come from.

I assume most funds have additional charges for the admin involved in moving sums in and out and I believe Navra covers that in part in the minor difference between the unit and redemption price which they publicise on their website
http://www.navrainvest.com.au/index.asp?content=unit_prices

THANKS

Thanks for sharing your knowledge of the LICs, I know a lot more about them than I did yesterday.

Have a good Easter, don't LIC too much chocolate

TryHard

 

[GreatPig]

TryHard,

avoiding the negatives of 'normal' long term share trading

What are the negatives of 'normal' long term trading? And, for that matter, what is 'normal' long term trading?

to me the troughs in one would eat some of the profit earned in the peaks of the other

That's because you're taking the pessimist's view . You should be thinking that the profits earned in the peak of one will help smooth over the troughs in the other, providing a more consistent return.

An example I can think of is that they don't deal in Telstra, as Telstra arguably sometimes makes decisions that have nothing to do with shareholder returns.

But they do deal in NAB, which sometimes makes decisions that cause millions to be squandered on the foreign exchange markets .

GP

 

[keithj]

Hi TH,

DOES THE SHAREMARKET RELATE TO PROPERTY ?

Yes - in lots of ways, and no in others.

I freely admit to being one of the sharemarket newbies and till today I thought lics had something to do with really cool guitar solos. I am labouring the point of understanding Navra Invest because they are the only sharemarket focussed firm I have found who suggest property is an essential part of any wealth creation. Their strategies include leveraging the benefits of shares and property, and avoiding the negatives of 'normal' long term share trading. Steve's presentations make perfect sense to me - I haven't seen presentations from any LICs and as you say they don't advertise, so that's probably why.

LIC stands for Licenced Investment Company - see ASX for more info. Presentations and PDSs should give a good explanation of the risks. Bill.L. posted a link to a major risk & his post got nuked - I don't want to go down that route.

DIFFERENCE NAVRAINVEST and LICS

Maybe the differences and similarities are obvious - I was just hoping to understand from someone's point of view who has a lot more experience than me. Like, what happens to the LIC's you mentioned when the market drops 20% ?

That's a v. interesting Q. LICs are funds containing (often) blue chip shares quoted on ASX. So their NTA can be easily calculated and you'd expect their share price should reflect this exactly. However, it doesn't usually!. When the market drops 20% LICs usually trade at a premium (ie more than their constituent shares are worth), and when the market has just had a good run (ie now), they usually trade at a discount. ARG & AFI are currently at about 3-5% discount to their NTA. So in answer to your v. good Q, they don't drop as far, but the downside is that during a bull market they don't rise as far. So they produce above average returns, with lower volatility & therefore lower risk.

Navra uses the Dollar Cost Trading method which can feasibly provide returns even in a falling market. So maybe 'conservative' is the wrong word. "Relatively" safe maybe better.

The returns that DCT provide are income based because of volatility. The units are usually worth less because the market has dropped, so your capital is worth less.

INVERSE RELATIONSHIP SHARES vs PROPERTY

Personally, I can't see how investing in a "slow and steady" fund that relies solely on long term growth in equities could COMPLEMENTa property portfolio, because to me you are either a share person or a property person, and as some posts here have described their peaks and troughs happen somewhat 'inversely'.

That's the 'timing/time in' debate - see elsewhere on this forum. I'm a 50% shares & 50% IP person, and a further 5% speculative.

IS ANY SHARE TRADING 'CONSERVATIVE' ?

What gave me the understanding that the Navra Invest fund is 'reasonably conservative' ? The fact they narrow down the top Aust blue chips using their fundamentals to ensure they are only dealing with companies that are extremely unlikely to go belly up, have a proven history, and avoid firms that make nonsensical decisions. An example I can think of is that they don't deal in Telstra, as Telstra arguably sometimes makes decisions that have nothing to do with shareholder returns.

Telstra and Southcorp were on the list before the fundamentals changed. Back to your Q - is any trading conservative ? Trading is by nature a short term proposition. The sharemarket is volatile over short periods. Volatility is closely correlated to risk. Draw your own conclusions. I'd put LICs in the same basket as the Somers approach - in the long term (> 5-10 yrs) you'll get an above average return with a below average risk.

REDEEMING UNITS

Using your example, IF I bought some units in Navra Invest at $1.165 on 21 March and for some idiotic reason (idiotic even by my standards) chose to redeem them after 3 days trading, my price would be $1.139, so I'd have lost money. Mind you if I'd bought them on 1 July at $1.00 I could have redeemed them at $1.165 on 21 March and made 16.5% gain in addition to the 6.59% dividends I would have received

So you understand my point about it being a bad place to 'park' short term funds. Volatility and risk are closely related. In contrast an bank a/c has low volatility & therefore low risk. A good book about risk is Against the Gods by Bernstein.

LIQUIDITY

When I say I want liquidity, I can't think of any reason that would make me rely on 3-day investment windows. I want to be able to access funds to pay deposits, fund reno's, whatever ... I usually have a few months to plan where the dough needs to come from.

I assume most funds have additional charges for the admin involved in moving sums in and out and I believe Navra covers that in part in the minor difference between the unit and redemption price.

That's right & normal. It costs any fund a bit of handling to redeem units, so they recoup that in the bid/offer spread. Many funds have a >2%(!!!) spread. Some LICs (eg ARG & AFI) usually have a 1c spread, others are much less liquid (eg CHO, MLT) and have a larger spread.

Have a good Easter, don't LIC too much chocolate

My kids usually get to do the interesting LICing, I get stuck with the boring sort of LICing.

Cheers,

Keith

All this is my opinion - seek advice from a professional.

 

[Sim]

I suggest that, while interesting, keeping this thread going in a comparison of the NavraInvest fund with other investments is not really a fair thing to do without Steve's continued involvement here. Feel free to start a new thread in the Coffee Lounge to talk about LICs and investment strategies and such - but I think this current thread has got a long way off topic now - I'm going to close it.

Thanks for your info on LICs Keith - has been interesting (I'm not closing the thread because of you or anyone else )

(and just for the record, I believe that Telstra have never been on NavraInvest's traded shares list because of the 51% government ownership)