View Full Version : kiwisaver worth a punt?
Stranger_Danger
18-02-2010, 12:42 PM
I have no aims when it comes to your behaviour. The nature of the beast is that I would find it impossible to change your values, such as they are, because I exist only to subsidise your existence. You've actually been very honest about that.
I'm just expressing an opinion.
I realise that you won't enjoy that, figuring that other citizens and taxpayers are merely there to submissively send you money.
Case in point. The Labour Government spent 9 years handing out lollies - which the masses loved - but were promptly voted out for expressing a view (ie don't hit your kids).
People like you have no interest in the views of others, the impacts of your actions on others, or the overall effect on society. You're just there to take - and we're not even debating that, because you openly admit it. (I do, at least, respect your honesty)
It's not like I NEED kiwisaver to keep me afloat. I don't NEED the government contribution. I probably would still have joined if it was just an employer contribution and not the government one too.
I have other investments outside of kiwisaver, about 10% of my total investments are tied up in kiwisaver.
I just thought, if the $$ incentives are there from the government, then why not take them.... Basically is all I'm saying. :confused:
Stranger_Danger
18-02-2010, 12:59 PM
Gotta dash, I'm just off to the hospital to get a heart transplant.
I don't have any heart problems, but I figure heart transplants must cost a fortune and if I don't ensure I get my entitlement, someone else will.
Year of the Tiger
18-02-2010, 01:33 PM
http://nz.biz.yahoo.com/100217/3/hbcd.html
IRD records prove headache for KiwiSaver providers
Thursday February 18, 08:18 AM
Print This Story (http://au.rd.yahoo.com/nz/headlines/print/*http://nz.biz.yahoo.com/100217/3/p/hbcd.html) http://l.yimg.com/ao/i/life/portal/btn_rss_2_1.gif (http://nz.rss.biz.yahoo.com/)
http://news.aunz.yimg.com/xp/nzpa/20100218/10/181173885.jpg
Click to enlarge photo (http://news.aunz.yimg.com/xp/nzpa/20100218/10/578714661.jpg)
Problems with Inland Revenue records mean hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders are in the dark over their KiwiSaver funds, say providers.
They may not receive the letter telling them who their KiwiSaver provider is or the annual statement on their KiwiSaver balance and annual report explaining the returns of their fund.
The problem is most acute for people who are auto-enrolled in the Government's default schemes -- where the Inland Revenue randomly allocates new employees to one of six schemes and their details are then sent to the provider, the New Zealand Herald (http://nz.search.yahoo.com/search?p=new%20zealand%20herald&fr=sfy_cl_nz) reported.
At a meeting of KiwiSaver providers in Auckland yesterday, Investment Savings and Insurance Association ISI chief executive Vance Arkinstall said it appeared as many as 30 percent, or about 200,000, of those in the default schemes could not be contacted because of wrong information.
"The information being provided by the Inland Revenue is not up to scratch and it looks like there is a problem with them getting information."
A spokesman for Inland Revenue said it was compulsory for employers to provide contact information for any staff that joined KiwiSaver and it then passed on that information to the provider. But it was then up to individuals to keep their provider up to date.
Up to 5 percent of the largest default scheme (http://nz.search.yahoo.com/search?p=default%20scheme&fr=sfy_cl_nz), ASB Group Investment, which has more than 200,000 members, could not be contacted, said its head of wholesale distribution Greg McAllister (http://nz.search.yahoo.com/search?p=greg%20mcallister&fr=sfy_cl_nz).
Tower head of investments Sam Stubbs said providers should be allowed to contact employers to get contact information about their members.
AMP head of marketing Blair Vernon said providers had to respect the privacy of individuals, despite the company being forced to put large-scale resources into tracking people down.
"The key thing is if you haven't received correspondence and you think you are with a scheme, call and ask."
____________________________
This would have to be one of the main reasons why I'm not in Kiwisaver. I have had enough interaction with financial institutions (in fact many businesses) in this country to know that their administrations systems are absolute $hite.
You will probably find that most problems people have with insurance companies, banks, govt departments is not that they are trying deliberately to put one across you, its just that their record keeping and people responsible for doing the work are way way below what you would expect to find. So there is no way I am prepared to put any of my hard earned dosh into something where I don't keep my finger on the pulse at every turn. I'm sure many people will never ever see the handouts that the govt are giving them as they'll just get swallowed up in the great bureaucratic bungle that is the financial industry.
YOTT
I just thought, if the $$ incentives are there from the government, then why not take them.... Basically is all I'm saying. :confused:Ok. I agree. it is not like you are manipulating your income to get WfF. The Government made a decision that people should invest in Kiwisaver and you have taken the incentive they have used. You are the exactly the person they are targeting so why not.
Next question - is this the best use of government money or should it be used for something else (lower taxes is the easy example but if could be higher social welfare if you are so inclined).
minimoke
18-02-2010, 06:39 PM
Next question - is this the best use of government money ....
Erm .... Its not government money. Its tax payer money.
Thats the point ENP has missed in his post at #244. If 10 potential kiwisavers want a $1,000 incentive the governement has to collect $10,000 from tax payers. But if there were only 9 who wanted the incentive the governement would only need to find $9,000. That means an extra $1,000 in the tax payer pockets.
But to get to your question - its not good use of tax payer money. Not only does the government have to collect $10,000 it has to collect $xx to pay IRD to administer the system. Thats plainly inefficient when the taxpayer could send funds directly to a super provider.
Its not good use because its not teacheing investment values - its clearly teaching the idea that governement will hand out. So its a crutch.
Its not a good use because its not governement guaranteed. Its essentially play money for the finance houses. Take for example ALF. Now its got into the index fund managers have to put their money into it. No skin off their nose if it doesn't perform - there will be someone new on the index next year to place their funds - but in the meantime the investor has lost.
Its not a good use because its taking cash permanently out of the system (or at least until the kiwsaver retires) as its essentially going ot fund managers. So that means no GST revenue churn. Less GST means more PAYE or corporate tax
Stranger_Danger
19-02-2010, 08:41 AM
minimoke hits the nail on the head - KiwiSaver does not teach people about savings, self reliance and long term thinking - it teaches Government handouts and entitlement.
I remember when Cullen was "selling" KiwiSaver and was talking about needing to change the culture and specifically changing savings habits.
I know of a large (surprise surprise!) Government employer where basically everyone is in KiwiSaver. These are mainly high income earners and, incidentally, most seemed to be saving already using the rental property tax rort (handouts and subsidies ALWAYS attract people of this ilk).
If you ask them who their provider is, or what the performance is, not a single one can tell you.
If you ask them how much money the Government or their employer has contributed, they know, generally to the nearest dollar.
At best, KiwiSaver has made a small change to savings habits, but, it has actually reinforced the bludger culture that the Government will look after things for you.
Ayrton
19-02-2010, 10:37 AM
I remember back some time in the NZ herald a survey that found something like 80% of people had next to no understanding of finannce (interest etc). Most people do not know how to save, they spend it all and end up on the benefit. I think kiwisaver will help to reduce people who need support when they are older, as they have savings locked in. But I think people should make more informed decisions and not just jump in because of the $1000.
Its concerning how little most people think about saving; Some friends of mine where talking about kiwisaver the other night, He asked if he earns interest on it :confused: and after he found out it was and investment and their are some high risk fund choices, he said: "It doesnt matter if it loses value, Its like you dont even have the money as it gets taken out automatically". Most of them also did not know what provider or investment fund they had, and some didnt know when they could get it out!
NZ has a "Oh ill get the benefit" culture. If they are getting minimum wage for working all day, most of them would rather be on the dole.
It does show NZ's attuitude to saving as you have to give out $1000 handouts or people wont save.
Im not on kiwisaver, I would much rather have control over my money.
One concern I have is at age 65 the amount that some savers pick up will be like a Lotto win to them. How long do you think it will last in their hands?
beacon
19-02-2010, 06:31 PM
One concern I have is at age 65 the amount that some savers pick up will be like a Lotto win to them. How long do you think it will last in their hands?
Gee, you have far-sight 777
Ayrton
19-02-2010, 11:24 PM
even if they do spend it to fast, it wont matter, the govt. will give them a hand out, worse yet, they would expect the govt. to help them out.
One concern I have is at age 65 the amount that some savers pick up will be like a Lotto win to them. How long do you think it will last in their hands?My guess is that annuities will become popular which will be perfect for the financially illiterate.
Annuities may be come compulsory. You would not want Kiwisaver as your only superannuation scheme.
Annuities may be come compulsory. You would not want Kiwisaver as your only superannuation scheme.I hope they dont become compulsory.
That is one of my issues with Kiwisaver. While they keep saying it is your money, in your account in your name, it would be very easy with the stroke of a pen to make this change.
minimoke
24-02-2010, 02:38 PM
Does anyone see a similarity between Kiwsaver (Huljitch) being fronted by famous faces such as Don Brash And John Banks and associated in a loose way with Millie Holmes. Compared with Finance Companies like Hanover and Richard Long?
Lets not forget Gareth Morgan jumped on the Global Warming bandwagon - and look how good his analysts were there.
Theres Mike Pero - and he wasn't quite on the button with Aviation Simulators.
minimoke
04-03-2010, 11:37 AM
Peter Huljich has now fallen on his sword and resigned as Managing Director of his Kiwsaver scheme. Am I alone in thinking that perhaps his replacement on the Board should be someone who is the best in their field, someone who can add value based on merit which comes from experincand proven skill in governance. Is our pool of financial talent so pathetically small that the very best they can do is appoint his Father Chris as a replacement? Clearly that pool is very small and incestuous. Investors should be asking how far does an apple fall from a tree.
It is a change without a change. It makes it 'look' like he has done the right thing but do you really think the day to day operations will change. Kind of like with Marc Ellis resigned as director of Charlies.
minimoke
04-03-2010, 12:26 PM
It is a change without a change.
And I bet they are all still dining at Clooneys at their KiwiSaver depositers expence.
minimoke
05-03-2010, 10:38 AM
And heres a reason why Kiwsaver is so iffy. You have Unite and Mike Pero spruiking their Members to Hulich
Unite and Huljich want to help everyone into their own home
Join KiwiSaver and you get a free $1000 to start.
Both your employer and the government will give you 2% of your
income.
You contribute 2% of your wages.
That makes $3 saved for every $1 you put in.
Invest $20 a week and you’ll make $4,000 (including the start up gift) within the first year.
Investment returns are additional.
After 5 years you get an another $5000 free for your first home deposit.
No other savings plan is better value.
Now sionce when have Unite been financial Advisors (in terms of the recent FA changes) and how can they be so assured that $20 a week = $4,000 in the first year. Huljich's key investment in NEW has just dropped 25%.
And once again we see the vulnerable being exploited. Unite Members work in Starbucks and Wendy's and no doubt think they are getting a good deal from their Union. And where do they think they are going to get their mortgage from when they want to buy their hiome - i'm betting its off to Mike Pero Mortgages.
Mike Pero Saver and the Huljich KiwiSaver Scheme
Mike Pero and its franchisees act as distributors for the Huljich KiwiSaver Scheme (the Scheme). Mike Pero has permitted the use of the brand
"Mike Pero" by Huljich Wealth Management (Huljich) for use solely in connection with the Scheme.
Mike Pero and its franchisees do not provide investment advice but do provide promotional materials supplied by Huljich to potential investors as part of their role as distributors for Huljich.
The following information is extracted from the Huljich Investment Statement. Mike Pero has not prepared the Investment Statement and is not responsible for the accuracy of its contents (other than the statements attributed to it). Mike Pero is not a promoter for securities law purposes.
*Mike Pero Saver is the brand used to distribute the Huljich KiwiSaver Scheme through Mike Pero (New Zealand) Limited.So who owns Mike Pero - well NZ Finance Holding does, and who part owns NZF - Huljich.
And where do the cogs keep linking. You have Ted Burak as a part owner of NZF and Ed Burak as as the owner of EJB Limited. EJB's Director is Mr Sorenson who sold his NEW Shares to Huljich. And EJB are part owners of NEW.
Well although the first money you put in is doubled or tripled initially, but over the long haul it will be returns minus fees that make the difference.
the sorted website does some interesting calculations on how much you end up with and compares fees between schemes.
For someone with no income putting in the minimum $1000 a year in 20 years you might have $90 000. Bit of a no brainer at the lower incomes. Not till 18 though now the $40 a year fees aren't payed. If on $120 000 a year paying $2400 a year you end up with $200 000.
Fees are quite high many around 7%.
2.9% for superlife. However most of their funds are passive although you can do your own switching between shares & bonds & hedged etc. Maybe active management by Gareth Morgan could do better.
waikare
06-03-2010, 06:49 PM
One concern I have is at age 65 the amount that some savers pick up will be like a Lotto win to them. How long do you think it will last in their hands?
777, its' their money and theirs to do what they please with it.
To quote: Dandemis 1844-1898 "Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs
from your own. You may both be wrong."
Steve
07-03-2010, 07:45 PM
And once again we see the vulnerable being exploited. Unite Members work in Starbucks and Wendy's and no doubt think they are getting a good deal from their Union. And where do they think they are going to get their mortgage from when they want to buy their hiome - i'm betting its off to Mike Pero Mortgages.
So who owns Mike Pero - well NZ Finance Holding does, and who part owns NZF - Huljich.
Does Mike Pero disclose their association to HWM when promoting their kiwisaver?
minimoke
08-03-2010, 01:01 PM
Does Mike Pero disclose their association to HWM when promoting their kiwisaver?
With respect to HWM - yes they do. Its a HWM product afterall. What I don't see though is Mike Pero Mortgages disclosing their relationship with NZFH and then to Huljich
minimoke
09-03-2010, 12:00 PM
Does Mike Pero disclose their association to HWM when promoting their kiwisaver?
And while we are on the subject of declaring associations Kiwsavers might want to ask their provider where their money goes and are Directors associated with that investment.
For example Huljich was a Director of Diligent Board Books at the time of their IPO. He reckoned that this IPO was a great deal - and thats putting aside the Brian Henry issue. So what does Huljich do - he puts the Kiwisaver money into the DIL IPO and the rest is history (DIL SP plummeted from $0.90 to less than $0.10 15 months later).
But then I guess Investors aren't likely to read the investment statments of their provider - instead relying on the "expertise" of their Union or mortgage broker.
Look at what Huljich say about themsleves:
"Highly experienced professionals investing on your behalf" and if we get it wrong we'll use our own cash to top up your losses. Our Directors have time to focus on governance: running for Auckland SuperCity Mayor doesn't take much time and we are only interested in those really big numbers - not those irrelevant little transactions within the business. Oh - and we'll also invest on our own behalf if we reckon we can make a bob or two for ourselves.
"We’re 100% Kiwi-owned and operated and we manage money on behalf of 70,000 New Zealanders." Lets put aside that our investors don't have much money and we actually manage the least amount per person.
"Your money is held in trust" but we'll still put it where we think is best - like our own companies we have other intersts in. And we know how trust worthy finance companies are.
"We do the hard work to help make the right investment decisions for you" Frankly you are too thick to catch us investing in IPO's we have intersts and companies that have virtually no liquidity.
"Open and honest communication so you are better informed" Except when it comes to making top ups to make sure our accounts don't show too big a loss. Oh and did we tell you about the $1.4m we put directly into the Unit Trusts? But don't worry, where we fail to inform you theres a really remote chance the media will get the message to you.
"Our KiwiSaver track record speaks for itself". Of course there is no regulator in NZ tracking our performance so we'll just tell you what we like. Dr Don will tell you we are still one of the best performing funds out there so you don't have to worry about those pesky MorningStar reports which say "But it is clear that without these payments, performance would have been considerably worse on an absolute basis,"
Minimoke, what do you invest in just out of interest.
Shares, property, etc?
minimoke
09-03-2010, 01:40 PM
Minimoke, what do you invest in just out of interest.
Shares, property, etc?
Not sure of the relevance of the question to the issue under discussion but you'd be right on both counts. But to stay on topic in todays news "Concerns over the management of KiwiSaver funds has led to Commerce Minister Simon Power fast-tracking work to ensure the integrity of the investments of the 1.3 million people who have $4.88 billion of their money invested in the scheme."
777, its' their money and theirs to do what they please with it.
To quote: Dandemis 1844-1898 "Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs
from your own. You may both be wrong."
Waikare what I was saying is that if those that have that right blow it, then I can see the lump sum option being changed to a pension type scheme. There is little point in the government (our money) being used to to encourage people to invest for their retirement if it only lasts 5 minutes and then they will want another handout.
Your quote is out of place.
minimoke
10-03-2010, 12:21 PM
minimoke hits the nail on the head - KiwiSaver does not teach people about savings, self reliance and long term thinking - it teaches Government handouts and entitlement.
Todays survey results confirm our concerns.
"A new survey shows many KiwiSaver members have a false sense of security about their investments, research company UMR says.
In its latest survey of 750 New Zealanders aged 18 and over, almost half of all KiwiSaver members wrongly thought their investments had a government guarantee and over one-third had no idea whether there was a guarantee or not, UMR said today.
The survey indicated 34 per cent of New Zealanders were signed up to KiwiSaver.Of those, 56 per cent said they did not know that much or hardly anything about the scheme they had invested in.
When asked if the KiwiSaver fund they had invested in had a government guarantee, 48 per cent said it had when in fact no such guarantee existed, UMR said.
A further 37 per cent said they were unsure whether there was a guarantee, while only 15 per cent correctly answered that there was no guarantee"
Clearly, when you give people "free" money there is no incentive to take ownership and responsibility for their investment decisons.
minimoke
12-03-2010, 10:11 AM
Kiwisavers may be about to find the hidden hooks in the fine print. According to Huljichs Kiwisaver docs there is no fee for exiting any of their Kiwisaver prodicts. Why then has Brash and Banks written to teh Securities Commision asking for their approval to write a letter to investors.
That approval is sought suggests Huljich don't have the internal skills to manage Kiwisaver according to the legislative requirments. Nor do they have the skill or confidence to make a decision on a simple letter.
Why would they be seeking approval to enable Investors to exit Huljich Kiwisaver without penalty. Don't they realise Kiwisavers are quite free to swap providers as they like - and without a Huljich fee?
Interesting questions Minimoke. It may just be that they are triple checking that the letter is completely by the book - they dont what another issue being picked up in the media. But I agree, this should be a simple letter and should have been sent my now.
minimoke
12-03-2010, 11:17 AM
It may just be that they are triple checking that the letter is completely by the book
Nice to know my taxes are now paying for a triple check. I htought that was got managers got paid to do - not governemtn departments. Wouldn't it be nice in the world outside finance if we have had a gvernemtn agency to checlk all outr work before it got sent out. I'd be voting for a spell check one for a star5t!
Nice to know my taxes are now paying for a triple check. I htought that was got managers got paid to do - not governemtn departments. Wouldn't it be nice in the world outside finance if we have had a gvernemtn agency to checlk all outr work before it got sent out. I'd be voting for a spell check one for a star5t! maybe that is why they haven't responded since 19 February. It is low priority behind all the thinks they actually get paid to do.
minimoke
17-03-2010, 04:03 PM
So today the Govt Super fund made 1.88% in February; it has a total pool of $15.94b and has made 17.24% so far this financial year.
Yet Kiwisaver providers have averaged (according to mornginstar) over the past 12 months
Default funds = 7.68% on $1,810m of funds
Conservative multi sector = 6.95% on $2,046m
Moderate multi sector = 9.89% on $504m
Balanced Multi sector = 12.78% on $819m
Growth Multi sector = 14.96% on $770m
Aggressive multi sector = 20.84% on $285m
Thats over $6,000m sucked out of taxpayer and shareholder pockets for a return less than what the Governement can achieve with its own fund. And thats only the MorningStar reported funds. Presumably the other fuunds aren't doing so well.
At least we can take some comfort in knowing the IRD workers have a job; the Information Pack printers have a job and the fund managers whose fees we pay have a Job.
winner69
17-03-2010, 04:22 PM
Those returns look great .... compared to what my Kiwisaver has done
Picked a pretty crap provider eh ..... GMK is on notice
So today the Govt Super fund made 1.88% in February; it has a total pool of $15.94b and has made 17.24% so far this financial year.
...
Thats over $6,000m sucked out of taxpayer and shareholder pockets for a return less than what the Governement can achieve with its own fund. And thats only the MorningStar reported funds. Presumably the other fuunds aren't doing so well..I have always wondered why the Govt super fund isn't one of the default providers and also an option people can choose to invest in.
Those returns look great .... compared to what my Kiwisaver has done
Picked a pretty crap provider eh ..... GMK is on noticeWhat do they benchmark against? At least you are beating whatever crappy thing the benchmark is.
winner69
17-03-2010, 05:57 PM
What do they benchmark against? At least you are beating whatever crappy thing the benchmark is.
CJ you got me wondering now .... maybe its a red dashed line that they draw just under the red line to make you feel happy ..... maybe, jsut maybe, that is what the benchmark is
Super fund is supposed to return 2.5% (?) over the "risk free rate of return" (treasuries). I'm guessing that red dotted line is the same?
It cant be can it? Is it possible for the risk free rate to be negative?? Bond performance can go negative but isn't risk free rate short term govt deposits??
I assume GMK is a growth portfolio so it should be against the NZX or similar index.
Given I am in Kiwisaver for the long term (at least 30 years) is there anything wrong with my strategy of just using the NZX smartkiwi (index fund with low fees). I know it is being dragged down by telecom at the moment but what are the odds my choice of an active growth manager will outperform the index over a 30 year period.
As peoples funds get bigger, it will be interesting to see if we get a self manage option like they do in Australia (seems to work for individual funds over $150k)
Arthur
18-03-2010, 09:43 AM
Nothing wrong at all CJ if you want a very high risk portfolio that potentially under performs by a big margin. You are leaving all your eggs in the NZ basket. If you choose to gamble only on exposure to the NZ market you will find that most NZ fund managers have a history of outperforming the index by some margin. If you cut through the waffle you will find even Brent Sheather shows that NZ fund managers have outperformed the NZ index. (End few paragraphs)
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/brent-sheather/news/article.cfm?a_id=34&objectid=10628701&pnum=3
There are recent articles suggesting global index funds seriously under performing the theoretical indices. Personally I am very happy with my Hunterhall and Platinum managers. I pay them whopping big fees for out performing, and long may it continue.
You may want to have a fund with low fees to begin with while you don't have much money in your kiwisaver investment then move into active funds with more fees which you think will outperform when you have a bit more of a nest egg built up.
For example, if you only have $5000 in your kiwisaver, perhaps go for the lower fees. When you have $20,000 or more, you can go for the larger fees. My logic in this is that if the fees are $200 per year, that's a 4% cut out of your returns if you only have $5000. But if you have $20,000 the $200 fees are only 1%
Just an example, I'm not an expert. I'm in the Gareth Morgan Growth Fund. I'm happy with my choice. I'm sure I'll stay there for many years to come.
Superlife world index funds are one you may want to look into, they have very low fees because it's all passive.
Nothing wrong at all CJ if you want a very high risk portfolio that potentially under performs by a big margin. You are leaving all your eggs in the NZ basket. If you choose to gamble only on exposure to the NZ market you will find that most NZ fund managers have a history of outperforming the index by some margin. If you cut through the waffle you will find even Brent Sheather shows that NZ fund managers have outperformed the NZ index. (End few paragraphs)Thanks. He explains it on three factors:
1 Telecom (I have already identified this and it will have a smaller effect in the future than in the past.
2 Australian shares - smartkiwi also includes part of an Australian index from memory so they are partly covered.
3 small caps - agree.
Compared with the likes of Huljich and GMK though, I dont think I am doing to bad. As my fund gets bigger, i will take more interest which may result in changing funds to chase the best managers (not the best returns).
I haven't heard of Hunterhall but I dont think Platinum do Kiwisaver (it would be good if they did as their managers do seem to be very competent.).
Maybe the question should be 'who are the good fund managers that also do Kiwisaver'.
has GMK just had a bad run? or do they spend too much time riding their bikes around the world.
minimoke
18-03-2010, 12:04 PM
Just an example, I'm not an expert. I'm in the Gareth Morgan Growth Fund. I'm happy with my choice. I'm sure I'll stay there for many years to come.
Intersting choice ENP. Why would you be happy with Gareth Morgan when his results (according to Morningstar) are 19th out of 20 over three months; 20th out of 20 over six months; 19th out of 20 over a year and 13th out of 20 over 2 years? And his fees aren't even the lowest.
I can't quite figure why you be happy with perhaps the worst performer in this category when you could easily switch to say AMP ING which is 2nd out of 20 over 3 months and 2nd over 2 years - and consistently in the top half of performers. Sure you'd be paying about 0.16% more in fees but wouldn't this be made up for in better fund performance.
winner69
18-03-2010, 01:14 PM
See my returns from GMK on previous page .... pathetic
minimoke
18-03-2010, 01:23 PM
See my returns from GMK on previous page .... pathetic
And I repeat the question : Why do you stay?
Intersting choice ENP. Why would you be happy with Gareth Morgan when his results (according to Morningstar) are 19th out of 20 over three months; 20th out of 20 over six months; 19th out of 20 over a year and 13th out of 20 over 2 years? And his fees aren't even the lowest.
I can't quite figure why you be happy with perhaps the worst performer in this category when you could easily switch to say AMP ING which is 2nd out of 20 over 3 months and 2nd over 2 years - and consistently in the top half of performers. Sure you'd be paying about 0.16% more in fees but wouldn't this be made up for in better fund performance.
I'm in for the long term. The sharemarket index has rebounded quite fast over the recovery. GMK hasn't invested heavily in "higher risk/return" stocks recently so that's why I'm assuming the not so flashy returns over the shorter term.
Investment for the long term – no big punts, no chasing the latest investment fad
Preserving the value of your savings is our first priority – diversification is key
Pursuing growth in the value of your savings – but only when satisfied that downside risk is controlled. No reward without risk is a truism, but limiting risk is the key to long-term survival Quote from GMK website
http://gmi.co.nz/Pages/KiwiSaver/ProviderPerformance.aspx
Play around with that. Growth funds, September 2007 --> Feb 2010, they aren't last, they are 3rd out of 9
winner69
18-03-2010, 03:53 PM
Put Feb09 in and jeez GMK is a loser big time
Gains that will not be repeated for many a year ..... so GMK future outperformance will be added to a lower figure than it should/could have been
Bloody expensive insurance policy that risk minimisation strategy
http://gmi.co.nz/Pages/KiwiSaver/ProviderPerformance.aspx
minimoke
18-03-2010, 05:26 PM
Play around with that. Growth funds, September 2007 --> Feb 2010, they aren't last, they are 3rd out of 9
And a GMK chart is an "independant " comparrison? Thats a clever move by GMK. Compare yourself with the worst performing funds to make yourself look good.
AMP is 17th on Morningstar, ASB is 12th, 16th or 19th depending which fund you look at - gareth is probablyu using the Tracker Growth; Ing was 10th; and Mercer was 15th. Westapc was 6th. Fisher and Tower aren't shown on the Morningstar "Growth" - perhasp he's referring to the "Aggressive" so I'm not sure if its Apples with apples. The Chartists here would probably describe GMK as a down trending fund.
And whats this:"Pursuing growth in the value of your investments"?? "Preserving the value of your savings"??? And he's admits he's loosing you 4.5% PA or 8.8% overall. When his "Safe Punts move they have to move a heck of a lot before you even break even again.
But thats OK because as we recall its not your money at risk - its the tax payers and your employers topped up a bit by your own loot. And you're happy to pay him low fees to loose your money for you as well. Cullens Kiwisaver vision sure aint working for some. I bet if it was all your hard earned cash at stake you'd be thinking that perhaps a long term play when there are bettter performers out there might.
Oh - my Conservative Kiwisaver alternative is returning me 5.75% PA (better than the average 4.13%) and my Growth is 13.2% - (better than teh -3.59%) - all with with no fees!
Yes, no doubt if it was my "own" money then I wouldn't be investing it in this fund. I wouldn't be putting it in a fund at all. But putting my kiwisaver money into individual stocks and property investment isn't exactly allowed.
Oh - my Conservative Kiwisaver alternative is returning me 5.75% PA (better than the average 4.13%) and my Growth is 13.2% - (better than teh -3.59%) - all with with no fees!
Is this term deposits and stocks?
If you were to be in kiwisaver Minimoke and choose a fund for 30+ years, which would be your top 3? I'm quite interested in your opionion on this one since you seem to know what you are talking about with these figures more than I do.
Thanks.
beacon
18-03-2010, 08:30 PM
CJ you got me wondering now .... maybe its a red dashed line that they draw just under the red line to make you feel happy ..... maybe, jsut maybe, that is what the benchmark is
Beauty. The fund managers are working on the premise that if you can't convince them, confuse them. The latter seems to be so much easier anyway.
winner69
18-03-2010, 08:39 PM
Beauty. The fund managers are working on the premise that if you can't convince them, confuse them. The latter seems to be so much easier anyway.
I am beginning to wonder if that is what they actually do
Lot easier than explaining whether the benchmark is based on fully hedged returns or partially hedged returns .... or just on plain degrees of stupidity
It's all a big rort anyway
minimoke
19-03-2010, 07:14 AM
I
If you were to be in kiwisaver Minimoke and choose a fund for 30+ years, which would be your top 3?
I can't tell you which ones I'd go for because I can't be bothered analysing the myriad of diffferent funds out there.
But I did put my whanau into Aonsaver and my tax special dividend went into the Russell Conservative Fund (which is returning +9.3%) and the Milford Agreesive Fund (which is returning +32.2%)
Of the providers I wouldn't put my money into right off are: First off would be Forstthy Barr. Then would go Fisher Funds, Gareth Morgan and Huljich. I'd then take the likes of Professionals Group, Anglican Church, legal and credit unions off the list. From there the banks would probably come off so there goes ANZ, National and Westpac. That leaves enough providers to have a poke around.
beacon
19-03-2010, 09:44 AM
Of the providers I wouldn't put my money into right off are: First off would be Forstthy Barr. Then would go Fisher Funds, Gareth Morgan and Huljich. I'd then take the likes of Professionals Group, Anglican Church, legal and credit unions off the list. From there the banks would probably come off so there goes ANZ, National and Westpac. That leaves enough providers to have a poke around.
Second that elimination list.
Why is everyone not so keen on Gareth Morgan Funds?
The growth fund is doing better than the MSCI world index which is what I would compare it to.
minimoke
19-03-2010, 10:46 AM
Why is everyone not so keen on Gareth Morgan Funds?
I was either going to choose them or superlife or smart shares.
Why Smart Shares - isn't that just the taxpayer and employer propping up NZX? Superlife? - Who are Michael Chambelrain (he's a trustee of the superscheme and gets to choose his remuneration you'll be paying him) and Owen Nash? Clealry you know since you are looking at trusing them with 30 years of investments.
Best I don't comment on Gareth. I was the first poster here to be in the slightest bit negative and I could hear other posters putting the tar on to boil and the chickens were running scared.
Why are you making it all sound like so much hard work to choose a provider? Just get one that matches up with your long term expectations out of an investment and go with them. Gareth Morgan invests in well established blue chip stocks around the world in various sectors and countries for long term growth of wealth. This includes Nike, McDonalds, Apple, BHP, etc for example. I wouldn't be able to access a variety of well known world stocks by myself in the near future if I wans't with this fund. I don't see anything wrong with this...
But I presume you will Minimoke, as everything has to be an argument.
minimoke
19-03-2010, 11:40 AM
Why are you making it all sound like so much hard work to choose a provider? ...
But I presume you will Minimoke, as everything has to be an argument.
I'm not trying to suggest its hard work choosing a provider. I'm suggesting that since someone is going ot put 30 years worth of cash with someone, some work is not only desireable but essential.
And no - not everything is an argument. I prefer rational fact based thought. But then if you are happy with your approach to investing in something thats making you a loss compared to my whanaus, which isn't, (and I pretty much threw a dart at a board on that one) so be it.
If I wasn't in GMK, I'd be in a fund which aims to follow the MSCI index. Since GMK is beating the index, for me, I'm happy with it.
I probably could have done better in another fund over what, two? Three years? But I'm not into chasing the lastest fund, plus all the entry/exit fees would eat up that extra return. I'm sure you are aware that the sharemarket has ups and downs, lately it's been downs. We will see how well all the funds go in the next 2-3 years, I could and most likely will be a completely different story.
Does it make sense to get into Kiwisaver for just 5 years, pay the 2% out of my wages ($800), top up to the $1040 each year to get the $5000 for the first home buyer, then go on a 'contributions holiday' for 40 years?
That way I'll put in only around $5200 of my own money, get around $4000 from my employer, recieve the $5000 first home buyer package from the government and still have $7000 odd in my Kiwisaver to leave in there until 65, which will compound for 40 years, which basically is all the governments money as I've taken all mine and my employers out to pay for my first home.
Does this make sense?
If you get $5k out of the government, then it does.
Dont forget you get all of your contributions (and your employers??) out when you get the home grant. Only the government $1k kickstart and $1042pa will be left in it. <- I just reread yours and you understand this point already.
Personally I dont see the home grant of $5k lasting that long. Why should the government subsidize that.
So if it lasts for 3-5 more years, I take my+employers contributions out, I can essentially take the "contributions holiday" for the rest of my working life. ie. 40 years?
minimoke
31-03-2010, 12:37 PM
So if it lasts for 3-5 more years, I take my+employers contributions out, I can essentially take the "contributions holiday" for the rest of my working life. ie. 40 years?
Theoretically yes - but practically no.
You can only take a contributions holiday for up to 5 years - which means you have to reapply every five years.
You also need to look at the trust deeds of your Kiwisaver provider. While you can get your $5,000 tax payer grant after five years you may not get much else from your Kiisaver providers. Bear in mind if you want to buy a house you have to buy a low value house in a low value area - that might not be the best decision to make when you start to pour money into property.
Also consider account fees. At the moment Providers are heavily reliant on getting bums on seats (so they can get the $1,000 into their accounts) and then regualr contributions so their funds can get some critical mass. Already they estimate it costs $50 to transfer between funds (a legal option for savers) so it won't be long before you will see this appearing as a fee (you have already lost the $40 tax payer fee contribution).
Consider what will happen if everyone takes a contribution holiday - Providers will have to put their fees up - and when this happens the fees wil come out of your savings. Your savings will be well gone by the time you are ready to retire. Consider also when you plan to retire - if you are thinking at the age of 65 think again. That aint going to happen - you'll be retiring when you're 75, so your money (or whatever is left of it) is locked in until then.
You can look forward to changes in legisaltion within the next five years whcih alters the field you are thinking of playing on.
I can't tell you which ones I'd go for because I can't be bothered analysing the myriad of diffferent funds out there.
But I did put my whanau into Aonsaver and my tax special dividend went into the Russell Conservative Fund (which is returning +9.3%) and the Milford Agreesive Fund (which is returning +32.2%)
Of the providers I wouldn't put my money into right off are: First off would be Forstthy Barr. Then would go Fisher Funds, Gareth Morgan and Huljich. I'd then take the likes of Professionals Group, Anglican Church, legal and credit unions off the list. From there the banks would probably come off so there goes ANZ, National and Westpac. That leaves enough providers to have a poke around.
So all you basically have left are the insurance companies. Wow, what a choice.
I am with Fishers and have no concerns at all.
http://www.sorted.org.nz/calculators/kiwisaver-decision-guide/?gclid=CJ6w8_jY4qACFSkYagodyT3TBg
Sorted has a good place to compare. Fisher & Gareth etc are active managed so if they can do the trick then their extra fees are worth it.
ASB is cheap fees but not active.
Super life is awesome I have found as you seem to be able to switch funds as often as you like within a day or so on the internet so
You might be NZ Bonds 30% and 70% hedged shares and a day or so later be 100% cash. Hard to beat for low fees.
Trustee
The trustee is SuperLife Trustee Limited. The
directors of the Trustee are independent of the
administration manager and investment managers.
They are:
Michael Raymond Littlewood
Co-director, Retirement Policy and Research Centre,
Auckland University
Grant David Niccol (Chairman)
Company Director
Brian Nowell
Company Director
Jill Spooner
Company Director
Administration Manager
SuperLife Limited
Directors: Michael Chamberlain and Owen Nash.
They do use For Barr a bit though ... and yes they will put some of your money in have money in PGW!
http://www.goodreturns.co.nz/article/976486353/all-money-should-be-invested-offshore.html
Micheal Chamberlain is an actuary. Into maths I think.
Steve
04-04-2010, 01:02 PM
I have been trying to reconcile my IRD KS deductions to my KS Provider account and guess what? It's not even close!
Current issues that I am trying to sort out include - my provider has not received my July 2007 deduction from IRD; IRD telling me that my provider has under-claimed my 2008 Member Tax Credit request and should re-submit it to obtain the full MTC; Some of my 2009 KS deductions still need to be processed by IRD before transferring to my Provider...
So far about 2 hours on the phone to IRD & Provider including waiting times. I'm really glad that I have kept a running spreadsheet that shows what the correct position should be. :)
waikare
05-04-2010, 05:26 PM
Steve if they have got yours wrong, how many others are unaware that they may be in the same situation.
To a lesser extent than yourself, I like to an eye on what’s going on, at least once a month I check my details on line, Tower gives a full breakdown of who has paid what.
minimoke
06-04-2010, 07:51 AM
I have been trying to reconcile my IRD KS deductions to my KS Provider account and guess what? It's not even close!
No surprise there really - its a complex labryinth your money has to go through. It could be that your 2007 deduction has gone to a default provider. Can't simply explain the MTC's but your 2009 deductions will be floating somewhere between your employer - IRD - your provider: it all depends on how often your employer sends in their tax schedule to IRD. This part can take 3 - 6 months to get from the time your payroll deduction occurs to it arriving in your account with your provider.
Its somehtign savers really need to keep an eye on - especially if htey are workgn for a SME with cash flow problems. We'll see some employers using their IRD / Kiwisaver accruals as a cash-flow prop even up until the time they go bust.
winner69
06-04-2010, 09:30 AM
Mines all OK but you have to wonder if there is an actual process
I know my employer passes on contributions promptly but things like May deductions getting transferred to Kiwisaver providor before April deductions seems to suggest things are bit ad hoc
Love the interest one gets credited .... it all adds up .... $80 over a couple of years ... ha ha
Brian Gaynor likes KS but says should be in growth or balances esp for tax reasons. I agree but would be times to get into cash for a while. I notice ASB returns for year till March was 60% in one case for a year, 30% often. Pretty decent.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501241&objectid=10640441
Should I top up my contributions with a one time payment to make it equal to the $1040 odd from the government or just leave it at $800-900 or so that it will be from my 2%
I'm basically using kiwisaver as a way to save for a first house deposit in the future rather than a long term retirement type of thing.
If you put in $800-900 then that is what the government will give you. Definately worth topping up to 1040 to get the full $1 for $ subsidy, especially if you will be getting it back soon for a house.
Agree with p2r - if your strategy is to make the most of Kiwisaver, then you should make the most of it and get the max govt top up.
Not sure that you will get the subsidy back if you withdraw for a house. It will just stay in the scheme. Stand to be corrected on that though.
ENP definitely top up to $1,042.86 by the end of June. Not sure when you joined KS but if it is since last June you will only get a proportion of the $1,042.86. Still money for jam though.
Not sure that you will get the subsidy back if you withdraw for a house. It will just stay in the scheme. Stand to be corrected on that though.No he wont but once he takes his money out, only the 'free' money will remain. This will obviously be larger if he maximizes his govt contributions.
ENP definitely top up to $1,042.86 by the end of June. Not sure when you joined KS but if it is since last June you will only get a proportion of the $1,042.86. Still money for jam though.
If I'm just going to withdraw it in 3 years time, what's the point of topping up the extra $242 odd, I'm just going to get it out of the fund to buy a first house anyway.
You get your $242 back but will leave $242 extra in that the Govt contributed to grow till you retire.
You get your $242 back but will leave $242 extra in that the Govt contributed to grow till you retire.
Ahh right I see. Ok I'll do that.
So I have to get my one off payment to IRD before June 30th right?
Stranger_Danger
29-04-2010, 11:00 AM
Does this thread about a welfare scheme for working people really belong on an investment forum?
minimoke
29-04-2010, 11:30 AM
Does this thread about a welfare scheme for working people really belong on an investment forum?I guess it does since we have a society, and consequently a government, who thinks that investment is about an individual being encouraged to take from one person to line their own pockets when there has been no exchange of goods involved nor reward for risk taken.
Its part of our cradle to grave mentaility where the tax payer will pay for people to have their babies (no need to save for your own childraising when the tax payer will), through the education system where a free education is expected and certainly if cash is availble it will be at zero interest. Then into employment where you can deprive your shareholders of some cash.
We are teaching people about investment - but those lessons revolve around how best to exploit a system and fellow taxpayers. And we wonder why we have dodgy directors and people falling for Nigerian scams.
Ahh right I see. Ok I'll do that.
So I have to get my one off payment to IRD before June 30th right?
Pay it direct to scheme provider. Remember it is the total the scheme receives for the June year. Delays in deductions from your pay being sent to IRD and delays from the money then being sent by the IRD to your provider need to be considered.
Does this thread about a welfare scheme for working people really belong on an investment forum?
Depends how you think of this forum. If it is a sharetrader forum then no, but if an investment forum with a focus on sharetrading then yes.
Investment is all about allocation of money, in return for gain while balancing risk and reward. Kiwisaver is one avenue to pursue and should be considered as part of a wider investment strategy. It is only once people are fully informed that they can make the best decisions for their person situation.
NOte: there are also threads on property/forex/metals etc.
minimoke
14-06-2010, 09:54 AM
so all reported kiwisaver returns might not be 'kosha' ..... dreadful
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/3300366/Peter-Huljich-funds-under-fire/
Now they are a bit more Kosha the results don't look so flash.
Huljich "balanced" = bottom (5.14% growth) out of 43 Moderate / Balanced schemes and their "conservative" 5th from bottom. In the "growth" sector" they are bottom out of 35 providers @3.65% growth over the past year.
Pretty much all other providers managed double figure growth.
Morningstar indicate Aon Balance the biggest gain in the Balanced area with 16.48% and Fisher Fund Growth @ 22.65 in that sector.
10% of net returns in excess of the "cash Rate" - the percentage change in the NZX 90 Bank Bill Index. This fee is calculated daily and paid twice yearly - June and DecemberWith the cash rate so low, and the share index recording good gains recently, FF would be getting a good payday at the moment.
If it was 10% of returns above the share index that would be acceptable but above the cash rate!!!
Well my Superlife Kiwisaver is $8000 $2500 from me, $2500 from my employer $2500 from the govt and $500 earnings. I'm happy with that and quite like the Gemino funds holdings now Lynas, Cue, Oceania Gold... but can switch to cash on i net if needed.
shasta
21-09-2010, 06:51 PM
Well my Superlife Kiwisaver is $8000 $2500 from me, $2500 from my employer $2500 from the govt and $500 earnings. I'm happy with that and quite like the Gemino funds holdings now Lynas, Cue, Oceania Gold... but can switch to cash on i net if needed.
Can anyone point me to a particular kiwisaver company that has a growth fund in stocks based in the Asia/Pacific region (incl Australia ).
Thanks in advance
shasta
22-09-2010, 04:59 PM
Can anyone point me to a particular kiwisaver company that has a growth fund in stocks based in the Asia/Pacific region (incl Australia ).
Thanks in advance
Would also like to hear from those already in kiwisaver using growth funds, & how have they performed for you?
Would also like to hear from those already in kiwisaver using growth funds, & how have they performed for you?
Superlife have an Aussie fund.Or an NZ fund. Gemino seems to be the Growth fund with on NZ and aus but not asia. With my mix you can have 1-100%
http://www.superlife.co.nz/PDFs/Investment%20portfolios/Gemino.pdf
My ASB balanced has lost money but may be back to zero now
shasta
22-09-2010, 06:35 PM
Superlife have an Aussie fund.Or an NZ fund. Gemino seems to be the Growth fund with on NZ and aus but not asia. With my mix you can have 1-100%
http://www.superlife.co.nz/PDFs/Investment%20portfolios/Gemino.pdf
My ASB balanced has lost money but may be back to zero now
Cheers for that link, i'm looking at China & India in particular as a direct exposure to there growth, Australia's growth in the mining sector is coming largely from the Chinese buying in, there has to be a growth fund looking at those asian countries, else i should start a kiwisaver fund myself!
Aon looks tempting and you can choose russell who are into emerging markets and milford have performed fantastically but nz only. But they are pretty hands off. It is pretty good to be able to switch multiple times between funds within a day or so on the internet. Don't know if that is common in the funds. I know it would be good to have some asian equities there. Fisher international has quite a few asian companies. In the past when equities go up the nz dollar goes up but not happeninng at the moment which is great for returns.
RazorX
23-09-2010, 03:07 PM
Has anyone been in (Or is in) Craigs Investment Partners or Gareth Morgan Kiwisaver scheme? I'm thinking of going into one of them I just can't make up my mind of which one so a little bit of advice/opinion wouldn't go amiss.
Thanks
Razor
Has anyone been in (Or is in) Craigs Investment Partners or Gareth Morgan Kiwisaver scheme? I'm thinking of going into one of them I just can't make up my mind of which one so a little bit of advice/opinion wouldn't go amiss.
Thanks
Razor
I've been with Gareth Morgan in the past. His fund is hopeless. High fees for poor returns. The only thing that they do differently from other funds is show you which companies they invest in and send you a monthly report statement of how the months went investment wise.
I didn't really care about the monthly statement as 90% of the time they were losing me money, but didn't lose as much as their "benchmark" so were harping on about how good they were... LOL what a joke.
I'm with Superlife now, it's great, I can choose my % of different investments, eg. 50% NZ Stocks, 25% Aus Stocks, 25% World Stocks, can also choose property, bonds, overseas bonds, cash, etc.
If I was you I'd really look into Superlife too. Their fees are about 1/3 of Gareth Morgan and their performances are better generally because it's a more passive type fund as opposed to active. Lower fees = more returns in my back pocket so can't really complain about making more money.
You can change your % make up of your portfolio anytime and aren't stuck to the 3 options of conservative, balanced and growth like Gareth Morgan has.
Just my 2 cents from my past experiences.
shasta
27-09-2010, 09:45 AM
I've been with Gareth Morgan in the past. His fund is hopeless. High fees for poor returns. The only thing that they do differently from other funds is show you which companies they invest in and send you a monthly report statement of how the months went investment wise.
I didn't really care about the monthly statement as 90% of the time they were losing me money, but didn't lose as much as their "benchmark" so were harping on about how good they were... LOL what a joke.
I'm with Superlife now, it's great, I can choose my % of different investments, eg. 50% NZ Stocks, 25% Aus Stocks, 25% World Stocks, can also choose property, bonds, overseas bonds, cash, etc.
If I was you I'd really look into Superlife too. Their fees are about 1/3 of Gareth Morgan and their performances are better generally because it's a more passive type fund as opposed to active. Lower fees = more returns in my back pocket so can't really complain about making more money.
You can change your % make up of your portfolio anytime and aren't stuck to the 3 options of conservative, balanced and growth like Gareth Morgan has.
Just my 2 cents from my past experiences.
Thanks for your input ENP, i'd like something close to an 80% Asia (split between China, Japan, India, Hong Kong), & 20% Australian split
The fee isn't my main consideration, the absolute returns from a growth fund are
fungus pudding
27-09-2010, 09:56 AM
Has anyone been in (Or is in) Craigs Investment Partners or Gareth Morgan Kiwisaver scheme? I'm thinking of going into one of them I just can't make up my mind of which one so a little bit of advice/opinion wouldn't go amiss.
Thanks
Razor
I'm in Garreth Morgan's fund. It's pretty useless, but I only contribute minimum $100 per month to get the govt. 1k per year tax credit and the unitial 1k. I'm so near drop out age of 65 so don't care much. He doesn't seem to beat any others, but I suspect he's not likely to lose as much if it all gloes tits-up.
Traderx
04-10-2010, 04:35 PM
I think you're all bit unfair to Gareth, His 1% fee covers everything (except fees for funds in which they invest as opposed to direct securities holdings). So includes brokerage, investment management, trustee, admin fees etc etc that all the others split out or take from fund assets.
And performance wise they've done ok if you look from inception, they hardly lost any money though 08/09 when most others were down 20-40% (growth funds). However since then have underperformed, initially due to high cash allocation (which is what saved them earlier) and then when they did invest they were slow to hedge back into NZD and when it appreciated that wiped most gains from rising markets. So over 3 odd years they are pretty even with those who more followed the index and hedged fully to NZD. So not great but not bad either.
The reporting you get each month is excellent.
I don't work for them or anything but do have my Kiwisaver with them (Growth) and will keep it there for now. They are a pretty upfront bunch and regularly run sessions where they talk about the market, what they got wrong and right and you can grill them.
They have some holdings of things I really like, like the Platinum funds out of aussie, MSFT, YUM, GLD, CSCO, GOOG, AAPL etc etc. They just need to get their currency management sorted. I'm watching closely.
Superlife doesn't look too bad though, just not sure how long they will survive though.. their website is slightly amateurish (not unusual for NZ funds mgmt business though)
Milford is worth a look as well
www.milfordasset.co.nz
Milford is really well run but nz/aus only, I can't find a fund that is not diversified so all you know is that you are international shares but specific countries or shares is hard to find in most cases.
shasta
05-10-2010, 02:24 PM
Milford is really well run but nz/aus only, I can't find a fund that is not diversified so all you know is that you are international shares but specific countries or shares is hard to find in most cases.
Is Milford the fund run by Brian Gaynor?
Yeah it is - looks like a near duplicate to Fishers local portfolio..
minimoke
05-10-2010, 02:28 PM
I think you're all bit unfair to Gareth,
TraderX, you'll see throughout this thread I'm not a huge supporter of Gareth - my tolerance evaporated when he entered the Global warming debate. However, each person needs to do their own research and invest accordingly.
I will make one point though - over the past few years we have seen billions and billions of investor money lost on the back of "personality" funds.
A while back we had guru Doug Edgar Somers and look how much money Money Mangers lost. We've had Jock Hobbs, Pine tree Mead and Richard long all spruiking someone else's asset destroying investment vehicles. More recently we have seen Timaru Grannies loose their knitting in the cult that was Alan Hubbard.
We can each take our lessons from the last few years. One I will be taking is to NEVER give my money to a fund back by an individual personality. There is a whole lot more work that needs to be done when drilling down into the investment offerings. Given the amount of work this takes I'll just take off the list of potential vehicles anything with a backers name as part of the marketing collateral.
And one last word on Gareth - would you trust an Economist?
Traderx
05-10-2010, 02:54 PM
TraderX, you'll see throughout this thread I'm not a huge supporter of Gareth - my tolerance evaporated when he entered the Global warming debate. However, each person needs to do their own research and invest accordingly.
I will make one point though - over the past few years we have seen billions and billions of investor money lost on the back of "personality" funds.
A while back we had guru Doug Edgar Somers and look how much money Money Mangers lost. We've had Jock Hobbs, Pine tree Mead and Richard long all spruiking someone else's asset destroying investment vehicles. More recently we have seen Timaru Grannies loose their knitting in the cult that was Alan Hubbard.
We can each take our lessons from the last few years. One I will be taking is to NEVER give my money to a fund back by an individual personality. There is a whole lot more work that needs to be done when drilling down into the investment offerings. Given the amount of work this takes I'll just take off the list of potential vehicles anything with a backers name as part of the marketing collateral.
And one last word on Gareth - would you trust an Economist?
Fair enough thats a reasonable critique, and I've had the same thought myself about personalities running funds. Theres no doubt that he is pretty prominent, though you could say the same about Gaynor at Milford, Carmel F at Fisher funds and previously Botherway at Brook etc.
But not really the same as the hubbard/meads/DSE situation i think.
GMI/GMK is investing in platinum funds, vanguard/blackrock/others ETFs and individual stocks like GOOG, MSFT, AAPL, YUM etc etc
Check out platinum if you are interested
www.platinum.com.au
What I'm saying is its harder for a personality (or any one person) to fraudulently or incompetently stuff that up than it is a finance company because the investments are known and the performance is verifiable. Sure the assets might under perform or whatever but not the same kind of situation as some of the names you mentioned.
Cheers
GMI/GMK is investing in platinum funds, ...
Check out platinum if you are interested
www.platinum.com.auThe platinum funds do very well from what I hear but isn't it a bit of a coop out from a fund managers perspective to invest in this, especially one who charges high fees to invest in a high fee fund.
Note: I cant wait till self managed kiwisaver funds are avaliable and I can invest into platinum without paying the middleman.
Traderx
05-10-2010, 03:58 PM
The platinum funds do very well from what I hear but isn't it a bit of a coop out from a fund managers perspective to invest in this, especially one who charges high fees to invest in a high fee fund.
Note: I cant wait till self managed kiwisaver funds are avaliable and I can invest into platinum without paying the middleman.
Yeah it is a bit I agree, and the double fee dipping annoys me. Gareth says they do that to get more diversification and expertise in areas that they don't have, i.e asia and emerging markets.
However still good to get the exposure, currently on my portfolio have about 20% of my total kiwisaver funds in 2 platinum funds (asia and international funds), normal minimum investment for joe average in those funds direct to platinum is 20k AUD so 50k NZD min to take a positions in those whereas Gareth obviously has a wholesale arrangement.
Platinum do have an outstanding long term record. As an indication PMC (their close ended exchange listed version of the international fund) trades at a good 5-10% premium to NTA, which is surprising when you can just invest in the unit trust for NTA (or just a bit less). So must be related to the minimum investments required in the unit trusts.. and people still wanting their exposure to it (seems silly to me to pay over NTA on an listed fund...
Aaron
05-10-2010, 09:13 PM
Just thought I would chip in re Gareth Morgan. I am in the GMK growth fund and the reports show what companies, cash, funds that they are invested in quite a lot of detail. Admittedly you don't know exactly how the other funds invest but I compare that to the ASB Kiwisaver reports which are less informative. I went with GMK because of the personalty and the fact he kept banging on at how crappy the funds management industries reporting is. Comparing the GMK and ASB they stand by what they say. Better to lose 10% knowing why than being with a top performer like Hulijich not knowing how they achieved such great results and not knowing when it will end.
Personally I don't like managed funds because after fees you often might be better off with money on term deposit. the Kiwisaver incentives make up for this though.
Better to lose 10% knowing why than being with a top performer like Hulijich not knowing how they achieved such great results and not knowing when it will end.
You would rather lose money than make money as long as you knew where you lost it??? :confused:
JayPe
06-10-2010, 03:51 PM
You would rather lose money than make money as long as you knew where you lost it??? :confused:
I would suggest that the sentiment there is that it is better to place money in an institution that you understand (even if it has underperformed recently) rather than one that you don't (even if it has overperformed recently).
Fairly standard investor principle that Buffett, always the gold standard!, also adheres to (his Acquisition Principle #5 states that it needs to be "simple businesses (if there's lots of technology we won't understand it")
Aaron
06-10-2010, 03:55 PM
I would rather make money but I also like to know how my money is being invested. Huljich's Kiwisaver top performance was a good example. Apparently their reporting was quite secretive as they didn't want competitors to know how/where they invested. Don Brash, John Banks real top blokes who know about finance and investment attached their name to it as well.
Obviously superlife is making better investment decisions are the companies they invest in much different to GMK?
minimoke
06-10-2010, 05:07 PM
You would rather lose money than make money as long as you knew where you lost it??? :confused:
Huljitch return was based on smoke and mirrors which exaggerated the returns - huljitch put his own money in to lift returns. This hid the real return / loss from investors.
Although they have set funds where you can leave them to diversify I like the choice so I can switch or check how it is going on a daily basis (so far as i can tell though that would be extreme) via the internet from 100% cash or bonds or property to 100% international shares hedged or unhedged, or Australasia growth (Gemino) with the likes of Lynas & Cue or any proportion to the nearest 1%. The latter has never done very well in the last year or so but with the exchange rate and some shares going well it is soaring the last month or two.
It is this control and low fees (though Gemino is performance based ) that is the benefit of superlife as well as being more transparent eg compared to my ASB where I can make only 1 switch a year between 3 funds and it takes a week or 2 to happen and I never know how it is going or whare it is invested except every 3 months or so. I agree their website is a bit uncool really but they have obviously been doing super for a while not just since Kiwisaver came in.
"The generous taxpayer-funded subsidies to KiwiSaver should now be reduced. It makes sense to keep the $1000 taxpayer-funded opening contribution as an incentive but drop the annual government contribution of $1046 to those who save that amount at minimum."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=10681661
So if this happens is it still worth a punt with your money tied up until retirement?
Thats what I don't like about it...always the possibility that the next govt will change the rules....its an easy target
So if this happens is it still worth a punt with your money tied up until retirement?
Thats what I don't like about it...always the possibility that the next govt will change the rules....its an easy targetAgree. If that happens I wills stop paying in (contributions holiday). But the money already in there is no different to the locked in super scheme my dad always contributed to.
I also have the option to take out the money by way of first house purchase (just need to ensure my previous house purchases (company and trust) don't count).
Traderx
21-10-2010, 11:19 AM
"The generous taxpayer-funded subsidies to KiwiSaver should now be reduced. It makes sense to keep the $1000 taxpayer-funded opening contribution as an incentive but drop the annual government contribution of $1046 to those who save that amount at minimum."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=10681661
So if this happens is it still worth a punt with your money tied up until retirement?
Thats what I don't like about it...always the possibility that the next govt will change the rules....its an easy target
Think this pretty unlikely, both Nats and Labour seem committed to it in it's current form (or even extending benefits further)
If you're not in CAM you are missing out big time (and you are paying for it in your tax)
Sorry but I don't trust politicians.
You could have said the same thing about an increase in GST 5 years ago.
And who says they won't cut the benefits and make it compulsory for everyone???...no chance for a contributions holiday then.
I am not in it but I am in a work scheme where my 6% is matched by 6% from my employer.
Maybe I am losing out ...not sure havn't done the maths on the best option.....but I like the flexibility of it.
When / if I leave I can take the money out if I like or leave it in.
If its locked in until retirement...well who knows what age that will be eventually at....
Perhaps I should look at diverting some 2%? to Kiwisaver
I have my kids in Kiwisaver though....but they are only 1 & 3 !!
CJ - would be interested to know if your dads locked in scheme actually afforded him a better retirement.
cheers
Traderx
21-10-2010, 01:07 PM
Sorry but I don't trust politicians.
You could have said the same thing about an increase in GST 5 years ago.
And who says they won't cut the benefits and make it compulsory for everyone???...no chance for a contributions holiday then.
I am not in it but I am in a work scheme where my 6% is matched by 6% from my employer.
Maybe I am losing out ...not sure havn't done the maths on the best option.....but I like the flexibility of it.
When / if I leave I can take the money out if I like or leave it in.
If its locked in until retirement...well who knows what age that will be eventually at....
Perhaps I should look at diverting some 2%? to Kiwisaver
I have my kids in Kiwisaver though....but they are only 1 & 3 !!
CJ - would be interested to know if your dads locked in scheme actually afforded him a better retirement.
cheers
CAM it's not about trusting politicians, the money in your account is yours... Even if in 10 years time the $1042/year is taken away then you've had it up till then.
For example my account is about double what I personally have put in (in 3 years). Thats with negative earnings (I'm in a growth fund).
The employer and govt contributions add up to a lot.
I do not think you will regret doing the 2%.
waikare
22-10-2010, 07:54 AM
Sorry but I don't trust politicians.
You could have said the same thing about an increase in GST 5 years ago.
And who says they won't cut the benefits and make it compulsory for everyone???...no chance for a contributions holiday then.
I am not in it but I am in a work scheme where my 6% is matched by 6% from my employer.
Maybe I am losing out ...not sure havn't done the maths on the best option.....but I like the flexibility of it.
When / if I leave I can take the money out if I like or leave it in.
If its locked in until retirement...well who knows what age that will be eventually at....
Perhaps I should look at diverting some 2%? to Kiwisaver
I have my kids in Kiwisaver though....but they are only 1 & 3 !!
CJ - would be interested to know if your dads locked in scheme actually afforded him a better retirement.
cheers
Kiwisaver has a lot going for it in it's current setup, not too many downsides.
Cam you should join up and make your 2% contribution, but you may not receive the same from your employer, as they are already paying into your work scheme. All you need to do is invest $1042 annually and the Govt. will do the same, hard to find that sort of return elsewhere.
Okay you guys are starting to get me interested in signing up.
Would I HAVE to put 2% in or can I just put in the $1042?
I am pretty sure that work will match the 2% but just reduce the amount into the other scheme ie. 2% kiwisaver 4% other
Thanks all for the advice so far........
From the 6% your company pays 33c/$ will be deducted so you only get 67% of that. If they pay 2% of the 6% to a Kiwisaver Scheme then you will get the whole 2%.
Okay you guys are starting to get me interested in signing up.
Would I HAVE to put 2% in or can I just put in the $1042?
I am pretty sure that work will match the 2% but just reduce the amount into the other scheme ie. 2% kiwisaver 4% other
Thanks all for the advice so far........
Ask your company - my guess is they have gone through the exercise for someone else (depends on your company size) so they may already have worked out the ins and outs. Each company is different re what they will contribute, salary sacrifice, passing on tax savings etc.
I did just the same last last July-2% kiwisaver(no tax deducted from your contribution) + 4% other superannuation(33% tax deducted from your contribution). My contribution to Kiwisaver so far is $3500 and now have $9300 in my account. Best performing investment for me, thanks to employer and government contribution. I wont say no to free money from my employer and the government!!
I did just the same last last July-2% kiwisaver(no tax deducted from your contribution) + 4% other superannuation(33% tax deducted from your contribution). My contribution to Kiwisaver so far is $3500 and now have $9300 in my account. Best performing investment for me, thanks to employer and government contribution. I wont say no to free money from my employer and the government!!
It is from the employers contribution that the 33% is deducted from as what you contribute is from tax paid income.
It is from the employers contribution that the 33% is deducted from as what you contribute is from tax paid income.
Thanks for correcting me.
http://www.superlife.co.nz/PDFs/KiwiSaver/KiwiSaver%20-%20who%20will%20be%20the%20best%20scheme%20in%2020 17.pdf
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10693458 I think BrianGaynor has a kiwisaver!
Traderx
14-12-2010, 10:01 AM
Hi P2r thanks for keeping this thread going I think it's a really important debate to have.
Just out of interest are there any other websites where people are talking about and reviewing different kiwisaver schemes? Seems like most people are sleepwalking with their kiwisaver investments. It will become much more important in the next few years.
On the subject of fees I can't believe some of the fees some of the large institutions are charging of up to 1.5% for balanced funds (once you include all the extras), this will have a major impact on the wealth of this country due to the compounding effect of earnings over time.
As an example in the US you have great low cost providors of funds like vanguard. (www.vanguard.com)
Their target retirement funds have costs of about 0.20% pa (https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/vanguard/TargetRetirementList#targetAnchor)
AMP for example charge around 1.5% pa (on say a 10k fund) for an equivalent asset allocation.
What difference would this seemingly small difference make over time?
Using sorted calculator of $400 per month contributions at 5% real rate of return and $10k start over 30 years we get to $544k. At a 4% real rate of return (representing a high fee provider) you get $447k so almost $100k. In reality the difference will be much more as with inflation and salary growth over time your contributions will likely grow.
But just goes to show the power of compounding over a long time a small difference in fees.
With that in mind I'm definately coming round to the idea of moving to superlife who clearly have the lowest fees by far.
I wish vanguard would set up in NZ though. Their VTI ETF has fees of only 0.07% pa. Which is pretty amazing and will be worth literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra returns over say investing with AMP over a lifetime.
shasta
14-12-2010, 02:45 PM
Hi P2r thanks for keeping this thread going I think it's a really important debate to have.
Just out of interest are there any other websites where people are talking about and reviewing different kiwisaver schemes? Seems like most people are sleepwalking with their kiwisaver investments. It will become much more important in the next few years.
On the subject of fees I can't believe some of the fees some of the large institutions are charging of up to 1.5% for balanced funds (once you include all the extras), this will have a major impact on the wealth of this country due to the compounding effect of earnings over time.
As an example in the US you have great low cost providors of funds like vanguard. (www.vanguard.com)
Their target retirement funds have costs of about 0.20% pa (https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/vanguard/TargetRetirementList#targetAnchor)
AMP for example charge around 1.5% pa (on say a 10k fund) for an equivalent asset allocation.
What difference would this seemingly small difference make over time?
Using sorted calculator of $400 per month contributions at 5% real rate of return and $10k start over 30 years we get to $544k. At a 4% real rate of return (representing a high fee provider) you get $447k so almost $100k. In reality the difference will be much more as with inflation and salary growth over time your contributions will likely grow.
But just goes to show the power of compounding over a long time a small difference in fees.
With that in mind I'm definately coming round to the idea of moving to superlife who clearly have the lowest fees by far.
I wish vanguard would set up in NZ though. Their VTI ETF has fees of only 0.07% pa. Which is pretty amazing and will be worth literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra returns over say investing with AMP over a lifetime.
I'd like to see a real comparison of actual returns v fees, to see if the extra fees are warranted by the "performance" of the funds, i'd be more inclined to reward the funds with "performance bonuses" but with lower standard management fees, so there incentive is to beat certain set criteria
I'll only go into a kiwisaver scheme in my next job if i can select up to 75 - 80% in Asian stocks (China, India, in particular, maybe Hong Kong & Japan) & the balance into Australian resources.
Might speak to my local MP, Peter Dunne about bringing in Self Managed Super Funds into NZ, as its pretty obvious that compulsory super schemes are on the way, we cant afford Superannuation once the baby boomers retire (ive got 30 odd years to go, so i wont see a cent of Super!) & id rather manage my own, maybe even setup a Shasta fund ;)
Might speak to my local MP, Peter Dunne about bringing in Self Managed Super Funds into NZ, how much admin would be required for this. Separate entity so separate tax return. plus an audit to prove you aren't using the superfund as a bank account.
Does anyone know how this works in Australia. I had a quick look at the magazines last time I was over there and it looked like you had to use a trust fund (like all super funds have to) and the admin costs seemed to be quite high (I assume due to admin involved with dealing with small numbers).
another website but easily accessable information is lacking.
[url]http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/dumb-excuses-not-joining-kiwisaver
shasta
14-12-2010, 10:48 PM
how much admin would be required for this. Separate entity so separate tax return. plus an audit to prove you aren't using the superfund as a bank account.
Does anyone know how this works in Australia. I had a quick look at the magazines last time I was over there and it looked like you had to use a trust fund (like all super funds have to) and the admin costs seemed to be quite high (I assume due to admin involved with dealing with small numbers).
I have a CA background, im sure it wouldnt be too difficult, i've done plenty of auditing in the past too, & i think the effort to save on fees could well be worth the extra hassle.
I'd be happy to set up shop & administer others SMSF if it ever got traction here
Corporate
14-12-2010, 10:58 PM
I'd be happy to set up shop & administer others SMSF if it ever got traction here
shasta, I can really see the benefits of this. I would definitely be keen on getting involved if this was to kick off.
I have a CA background, im sure it wouldnt be too difficult, i've done plenty of auditing in the past too, & i think the effort to save on fees could well be worth the extra hassle.
I'd be happy to set up shop & administer others SMSF if it ever got traction herebut you cant audit your own work so you would need to pay an external auditor. For an individual fund, that may not be worth it.
How much would you charge to administer other SMSF? If you say $100pa per fund (which seems cheap if you need to get an audit), at 0.1%, then you require a minimum fund size of $100k per person. I think Kiwisaver is just to young to have many individual funds of this size. If they bring in compulsion of more than 2%, then you may find yourself in business.
How much would Guardian Trust (or the like) charge to just administer small funds (not advise). As an indicator, ASB charges $250pa for its nominee services unless you incur more than $800pa in margin lending interest.
I wonder what changes JK & JE have coming up for kiwisaver?
I wonder what changes JK & JE have coming up for kiwisaver?My guess is that they will announce but not take effect until after the election (seek a mandate).
They will stop the govt contribution. There is no reason for it to be their other than a bribe. Why pay out $ now when they can save up and just pay (means tested) superannuation in many years time. Likewise, my guess is the intial contribution will go as well or maybe only give it to under 20's (ie. you get one chance to get it when you first enter the workforce).
minimoke
11-05-2011, 04:57 PM
Back in 2006 I made this prediction.
Look forward to Stage Two – which will be the introduction of compulsory employer contributions. Stage One KiwiSaver will put in place all the infrastructure that is necessary – a simple piece of legislative change is all that will follow. Stage Three will be compulsory employee contributions.
Since then we have seen the introduction of compulsory employer contributions. We are shortly going to see those employer contributions go up and employee contributions will go up as the government removes itself from the funding equation. we aren't far away from Stage three.
Sideshow Bob
11-05-2011, 09:24 PM
Little point in the Govt borrowing heavily to encourage personal saving, especially as more and more join. I would have thought that most people would see a $1 for every $2 from employers as a reasonable attraction?
minimoke
11-05-2011, 09:36 PM
Little point in the Govt borrowing heavily to encourage personal saving, There was never any point at all and that was obvious from the beginning. It was simply a tax redistribution system which lined the pockets of kiwisaver providers and kept inland revenue people employed. Having a government borrowing so a worker can save highlights Labours economic nouse - as does the do nothing and get $1,000 for "free"
Seems this is now sorted.
While my employer doesn't do a salary sacrifice, I will keep on going. If they change it to salary sacrifice (which I understand they are allowed to do), I will go on an indefinate holiday. Paying down the mortgage will be a better investment.
Just taking stock of kiwisaver apart from what me & my employer put in it has been about $1500/yr the govt have given me including tax savings (etc or something). This will drop to $500/yr which is still worth it, as good as any other scheme. It will be just the same as the ssrss was 3% with just the extra money from govt. Makes me realise what a generous deal it was, and only cost my lunch money. It will not be enough alone, just one aspect of a diverse portfolio.
winner69
13-01-2012, 06:31 AM
From my latest GMK Kiwisaver report ..... Contributions $44,210 Your Balance $44,231
Wow a profit of $21 .... but then again their credo is 'Don't lose the punters money' ... so met that target ... well done
The nice chart that comes with says that the Govt gave me $1,000 as kickstart and the government has given me $3,869 in tax credits since I joined .... so at least some return on what me and my employer have put in .... and I should be grateful that GMK have not lost that eh
Suppose Kiwisaver has a place .... but in this case obvious whose making the money out of it
fungus pudding
13-01-2012, 08:09 AM
From my latest GMK Kiwisaver report ..... Contributions $44,210 Your Balance $44,231
Wow a profit of $21 .... but then again their credo is 'Don't lose the punters money' ... so met that target ... well done
The nice chart that comes with says that the Govt gave me $1,000 as kickstart and the government has given me $3,869 in tax credits since I joined .... so at least some return on what me and my employer have put in .... and I should be grateful that GMK have not lost that eh
Suppose Kiwisaver has a place .... but in this case obvious whose making the money out of it
So overall it's a good result. Anything that gives you a tax relief is - unless you're a fan of what the gummint does with your dough.
Blendy
05-02-2012, 02:03 PM
ugh, Kiwisaver. I keep wondering if this is something i should do, or if i can invest better myself for the rest of my life. Or worrying that I might actually be missing out on this.
However, there seems to be so much mixed feeling from reading this thread, so I can only hope that as long as I am making an effort to invest in lieu of Kiwisaver that I will be fine.
One question - is there any actual point in kiwisaver if i am self employed?
Mary Holm has some good articles on KS in the NZ herald website.
It has been an amazing deal.
April it becomes not so brilliant as the tax free employer contibution goes.
For self employed I think the first year is good as they give you $1521 but maybe just put it on hold after that.
I think will switch back to ssrss(for govt employees pre 2008 or so) in April as will get 3% from the employer instead of 2% with KS.
I think I can still pay $1000 into KS and get the $521.
Aaron
05-02-2012, 10:03 PM
ugh, Kiwisaver. I keep wondering if this is something i should do, or if i can invest better myself for the rest of my life. Or worrying that I might actually be missing out on this.
However, there seems to be so much mixed feeling from reading this thread, so I can only hope that as long as I am making an effort to invest in lieu of Kiwisaver that I will be fine.
One question - is there any actual point in kiwisaver if i am self employed?
self-employed can contribute $1,042 annually and get the $521 "tax credit" annually from the govt as well as the one off $1,000 kickstart. On top of that the return your kiwisaver provider can achieve less their fee. Downside is not knowing how future govt might change the rules (probably an annuity rather than lump sum in future years) and limits on how its invested until your 65yrs. Worth it as it currently stands IMHO.
ugh, Kiwisaver. I keep wondering if this is something i should do, or if i can invest better myself for the rest of my life. Or worrying that I might actually be missing out on this.
However, there seems to be so much mixed feeling from reading this thread, so I can only hope that as long as I am making an effort to invest in lieu of Kiwisaver that I will be fine.
One question - is there any actual point in kiwisaver if i am self employed?
A couple of the Kiwisaver providers allow you to select your mix of assets. I am with superlife they are fantastic. I can change my allocation online and it will be actioned withing 24hours.
I am also looking at Craigs Kiwisaver Select. Apparently you can choose from 100 nominated securities in your portfolio.
OutToLunch
07-03-2012, 11:37 AM
A couple of the Kiwisaver providers allow you to select your mix of assets. I am with superlife they are fantastic. I can change my allocation online and it will be actioned withing 24hours.
I am also looking at Craigs Kiwisaver Select. Apparently you can choose from 100 nominated securities in your portfolio.
I am also considering Craigs self-selected portfolio for my non-Kiwisaver work super. As far as I can tell, this self-selected approach is broadly similar to SMSFs in Australia, but with higher fees (a disincentive: 2.5% entry and exit fees!). On the plus side, it gives the individual saver quite a bit of control over their returns. Does anyone know where I can see their list of "approved" securities online?
Fudosan
10-09-2012, 11:07 AM
In a nutshell, for someone who is self employed or a housewife:
If you contribute the very minimum of $1,042 per year, you can enjoy the $1,000 kickstart as well as the $521 tax credit per year. You'll get them back when you retire at 65.
Do I understand it correctly? I'm totally ignorant when it comes to Kiwisaver, as I always prefer investing by myself.
Yes you are right. Also anyone else can do the same but they must contribute from their wages for the first year. Then they can go on a contributions holiday and then be the same as you have described
All this is under the current rules. Future changes may alter things.
Fudosan
10-09-2012, 12:11 PM
Thanks 777 for the confirmation. Based on the recommendation on this forum, I think I'll pick SuperLife for their low fees. (I never like funds, so a no-frill, low-fee service will suit me well.)
karen1
19-09-2012, 07:12 AM
New help for kiwisavers in the form of a one stop ratings site
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10834884
and http://www.canstar.co.nz/images/star_ratings_reports/nz-kiwisaver-sep-2012.pdf
best I've seen to date.
Happy to be with Superlife. Very low MER. Wish they had a NZ index fund though to lower the growth MER even more. ironically their active fund has a lower MER that NZX's Smartkiwi which is an index fund (0.65% for over $30k, no fixed fee - not on the Cannex chart). No wonder Kiwis dont do index funds.
Yes their NZ Shares and Gemino funds are going ballistic lately about 8% in a few weeks. Plenty of FPA & PEB in both funds. I wonder if it is purely Kiwisaver & NZ super fund driving the NZX or maybe a few Australian funds are looking this way.
ASB Growth is index NZ & Australian but with property and international shares as well. The super fund (not kiwisaver) I have with them is quite low fees but not many switches allowed between funds.
Do index funds pay less tax than managed funds?
Thanks 777 for the confirmation. Based on the recommendation on this forum, I think I'll pick SuperLife for their low fees. (I never like funds, so a no-frill, low-fee service will suit me well.)
The only thing no frills about Superlife is they don't seem to spend much on marketing and they are non profit. Their service is light years ahead of say ASB if you can log in on the internet you can see your funds daily changes and switch as you like, choose exactly your own pick of funds and their web site is looking more modern now.
stoploss
22-09-2012, 03:32 PM
Milford Asset Management Growth/aggressive fund just keeps on giving the goods.
The Fund had a 18% return for the year ended 31st of august.
Am I happy with my fund choice.
Yes
AA
Thanks for this , yes 5 years into the scheme long overdue to review my choice of manager. The Gareth Morgan Kiwisaver (Growth fund) tells me basically for every dollar in- that I have a dollar ( this includes govt subsidy,tax credit and employer input ) Apparently the benchmark is - 23 % and I have a simple return of - 8 %. I should have done something about this years ago...I think the only real winner here is maybe Gareth Morgan with the $ 50 Mio odd he pocketed from the sale of the Kiwisaver scheme ......!!!!!
jpware
24-09-2012, 10:25 AM
Initially I allocated my Kiwisaver funds to Fisher Funds which is overseen by Carmel Fisher; she well respected amongst her industry peers. I remained with them for roughly a year and a half and they did quite well, at one point up 38 ish % around mid-2011. When Fisher Funds purchased Huljich I decided it was time for me to go. My preference is for a smaller boutique like Investment Company with smaller FUM. Fisher Funds had grown its FUM to an astonishing amount which the purchase of Huljich. I was quite curious to see how they would unwind (if at all) the current Huljich investments and whether they would be required to sell any of their investments at a loss. At this point, I did some research and came to the conclusion that I would place my Kiwisaver funds with Milford Asset Management. Again, Brian Gaynor is a very well respected individual amongst his peers with a highly skilled team behind him (quite a few are CFA holders). Fees are ok; 1.05% management fee; $36 per annum admin fee; and performance high watermark fee of 15% if they achieve their target benchmark of 10%. So far Milford has managed to do quite well for me and I love their Investment methodology. They’ve won quite a few awards too.
Are there just 2 options with Milford?
jpware
24-09-2012, 04:31 PM
Are there just 2 options with Milford?
At this point yes. However, based on their investment statement they are introducing a conservative fund from the 1st October 2012.
It is nice to be able to switch to a cash fund in times of crisis...
It is nice to be able to switch to a cash fund in times of crisis...
The biggest challenge is deciding when. It is usually too late when you do and then the same when you need to return to a more aggressive stance. Personally, unless you are intending to cash it up in the short term, I would ride out the lows.
Well I reckon if you have made 25% in the last year in the Superlife NZ Shares might be time to switch to more cash & bonds. Although NZ share market might still go OK I don't think it can repeat the effort in the coming year. Or time to try the Gaynor conservative fund - is it open? ASB master trust is doing a good job too in it's passive way, I see it can now get longer term investments in it's cash fund, so that should improve things.
I wonder what effect going to 3% next year in March will have on KS. Probably more money looking for a home in the NZ share market? Has the NZ Share, property and bond market ever had a teat like this to suck on before...?
I wonder what effect going to 3% next year in March will have on KS. Probably more money looking for a home in the NZ share market? Has the NZ Share, property and bond market ever had a teat like this to suck on before...?I have often wondered that. Is there a 'kiwisaver' effect of the NZX now. More so in July (or is it August??) when the govn gives everyone their $500 odd dollars. That must create a huge amount of buying pressure.
2m in kiwisaver but assume only 50% qualify for full govt top up. Assume 15% goes into NZX
1m x $500 x 15% = $75m
Plus probably 40% going into bonds and fixed interest (lots in default funds ) so $200m.
Sure that is probably only the daily turn over on the NZX but that is on top of the regular funds flowing in every pay day!
Well I reckon if you have made 25% in the last year in the Superlife NZ Shares might be time to switch to more cash & bonds. Although NZ share market might still go OK I don't think it can repeat the effort in the coming year. Or time to try the Gaynor conservative fund - is it open? ASB master trust is doing a good job too in it's passive way, I see it can now get longer term investments in it's cash fund, so that should improve things.
I wonder what effect going to 3% next year in March will have on KS. Probably more money looking for a home in the NZ share market? Has the NZ Share, property and bond market ever had a teat like this to suck on before...?
The conservative fund is now up and running FYI.
http://milfordkiwisaver.rtrk.com.au/?scid=131070&kw=5846595&pub_cr_id=25089403065
minimoke
21-02-2013, 08:36 PM
Inland revenue now proving to be as efficient at Kiwisaver as Nova pay is for the other state beneficiaries. A week ago my whanua each got three identical kiwisaver letters in the mail. That was the mailbox full. A few days later they each got another four identical letters. Blow me down they got five letters each today. I've organised a container out the front that the postie can put next weeks deliveries in.
The IRD seem to be slow at times to move the funds from the themselves to your provider - a couple of months go by and no increae in your balance, then a sudden rise.
Aaron
30-01-2014, 11:55 AM
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/9663155/Healthy-returns-for-growth-Kiwisaver-funds
Personally I have recently switched to all cash. My growth fund didn't do so well over 2007-2009 and the value of the fund only recently exceeded the contributions. I guess the article is a statement on how well equities have done over fixed interest.
All the common sense says you can't time the market but no one can see the future so I will be looking to compare all cash versus growth performance this time next year.
I should just take the balanced option and forget about it.
Valuegrowth
01-02-2014, 06:18 PM
Different fund mangers could outperform market at different times depend on how they pick stocks. We all make mistakes in the markets. In some period we could miss the biggest gain in our portfolio if we are in 100% cash. Investment is an art and is continues process. In my view is we should be in the market all the time. Because we could find some bull stocks and attractive dividend champions, even during period of bear market. I made use of my kiwi saver savings to buy my first home. Currently I am looking forward to select my next best kiwi saver option. Do you have any idea about fund managers that you like? If so why do you like your fund manger so much?Can you list fund mangers that allow us to select all types of individual stocks to our kiwi saver? Thanks.
My ideas are not a recommendation to either buy or sell any security, commodity or currency. Please do your own research prior to making any investment decisions.
My wife's kiwisaver is interesting as she has never had a salary and is in cash fund now but has put on about 30% in a year in Superlife Gemino thanks to peb. So in ks from the start just paying the minimum for the tax credit total is $18800. Of that we paid $7000 the govt $6000 and earnings $6000. tax $220 fees $140. My kids are $1600 now. Hard to dislike that. My own is not as flash but OK but my own choices of funds. I like it.
couta1
07-02-2014, 08:53 PM
For the self employed like myself its well worth just putting in the minimum amount just to get the tax credit,thats a 50% return on your money,in this case i don't really think it matters which option you choose,I just switched from cash to conservative with Mercer,have enough risk going on in the share market without adding more with kiwisaver
Point of this article is that free money becomes less of a factor over time. Returns and I would add flexibility, tax and fees become more important. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11202579
blackcap
08-03-2014, 04:32 PM
For Kiwisaver has anyone considered "smartshares" as their provider? They operate the NZ and Australian ETF's with a mixture of FNZ, TNZ and MDZ amoungst others. I like them in NZ for the simple fact they are passive and thus their fees reflect this status and you will always have a fund that performs the market with a possibility of some Australian exposure. I just do not trust the NZ "active" managers enough to provide a positive alpha after fees etc and am happy with what smartshares provide.
Harvey Specter
08-03-2014, 05:43 PM
Given they are EFT, I thought their fees were expensive.
My calcs on my wifes KS all generated by the superlife KS website which is pretty useful.
Following article makes sense re big funds.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/funds/10682448/Isa-tips-Why-investors-should-stop-buying-the-biggest-funds.html
blackcap
09-03-2014, 04:43 PM
Given they are EFT, I thought their fees were expensive.
Why would that make their fees expensive Harvey?
Harvey Specter
09-03-2014, 05:25 PM
Why would that make their fees expensive Harvey?Opposite. They should be cheaper but they aren't (compare the smartshares to the iShares overseas - last time I looked they were very different (i assume due to economies of scale)). With an index fund, you get the market return less fees 9you can never beat the marekt) so low fees are key. With an active fund, you hope to beat the market after fees.
stoploss
10-05-2014, 01:21 PM
Was just checking out my Kiwisaver . I am happy to be with Milford .
http://www.morningstar.co.nz/s/documents/kiwisaver_surveyQ12014.pdf
minimoke
13-06-2014, 05:26 PM
RMB
There is really only one rule for kids. And that is "get your kids in it today"!
This is known as the Governments “Working For Families Special Dividend”
People may fret over what will happen when the kids turn 18 blah blah but anyone who thinks that Kiwisaver will in five or more years time look like it does today is dreaming.
So lock that dividend in today, reap the rewards of compound growth, sit back and enjoy a painless wee nest egg for the kids in the future. Don’t think they will end up wealthy from it because there is always the risk their fund may go bust but what the heck, its a no brainer really.
I took my own advice and today I have to admit (and its a rare day - probably attributable to the black Friday) that I was wrong. Signed the whanau up from day one and get them into Kiwisaver with the $1,000 kickstart. I always saw it as my own special tax reduction - shifting my tax for that year into their funds. Anyway, all these years later we get the Statements yesterday and their individual balances are now at $1,125. So who has won - as I originally predicted, the Kiwisaver providers who have happily skimmed off their fees each year. I guess though also the whanau have learnt along the way about fees, reading statements, taxes and how managed funds go up and down.
Yes minimioke but if someone started today they would only have the $1,000.
artemis
14-06-2014, 07:37 AM
I put two littlies into Fisher Funds back in the day when Kiwisaver started, but have made no deposits since. Both accounts now sit at over $1500. Not fantastic but cost me nothing and better than the proverbial ...
Mista_Trix
07-07-2014, 12:50 PM
Hey I am just after some of your thoughts around this.
I am in one of the Growth funds, I have about 30k, its doing pretty well.
The crash (more than just a correction) is coming ... at some point, nobody knows when.
My question is, does anyone think its worth it to change the investment type during this time from Growth to Conservative (or similar), to avoid the decrease that will come as a result from dramatically dropping shareprices (which the growth portfolios are predominantly made up of)? Then change it back to growth in about 1 1/2 years time (or whenever) when the market appears to have reached bottom and start again - changing back to a Growth portfolio. I am doing the same with my shares - moving more to cash than holding, over the past few months and will continue to as exit points on each of them arise.
Any thoughts or considerations appreciated :)
Thanks in advance.
winner69
07-07-2014, 01:43 PM
Hey I am just after some of your thoughts around this.
I am in one of the Growth funds, I have about 30k, its doing pretty well.
The crash (more than just a correction) is coming ... at some point, nobody knows when.
My question is, does anyone think its worth it to change the investment type during this time from Growth to Conservative (or similar), to avoid the decrease that will come as a result from dramatically dropping shareprices (which the growth portfolios are predominantly made up of)? Then change it back to growth in about 1 1/2 years time (or whenever) when the market appears to have reached bottom and start again - changing back to a Growth portfolio. I am doing the same with my shares - moving more to cash than holding, over the past few months and will continue to as exit points on each of them arise.
Any thoughts or considerations appreciated :)
Thanks in advance.
Master investor Peter Lynch (often quoted here on Sharetrader) once said "Far more money has been lost by investors preparing for corrections, or trying to anticipate corrections, than has been lost in corrections themselves."
You told us the other day that you are 31 so your kiwisaver got 30 plus years to run. Nobody will time the ups and downs correctly.
However what you are saying s really a little bit of reallocation of asset classes. By going conservative a lower %age shares than in a Growth fund. But even a conservative fund will show losses if there is a collapse.
If you can switch easily do what you think is best but reading between the lines maybe you should have been in a conservative fund all along?
Good you actively managing your own investments ....but that is a different game to investing in a long term kiwisaver fund.
Last word from Peter Lynch - "I can't recall ever once having seen the name of a market timer on Forbes' annual list of the richest people in the world. If it were truly possible to predict corrections, you'd think somebody would have made billions by doing it."
But only you can decide what's best
PS - I taking my 6 figure kiwisaver funds out in 3 months time to look after myself.....hope the market don't collapse by then eh. But that's he difference in approach by us old guys compared to you young ones.
Mista_Trix
07-07-2014, 05:14 PM
Master investor Peter Lynch ....
Cheers mate, appreciated. Food for thought.
I guess in my mind all I'm after is capital protection. I don't want to see it wiped out when I know I could have tinkered, but then again, I guess gains I miss out on would be lost as well.
So maybe it is just a case of' set and forget'. I want the gains of the Growth, but am hesitant on the losses. I guess having not been through a downturn (with money in - we all saw the GFC, but I wasn't 'in' it) I'm still trying to intellectualise how this works, and how I can make good decisions to ride through it as strong as I possibly can.
Do you mean; look after yourself - as in the funds will take care of you, or look after 'yourself' - in that you will actively manage them??
A very smart move by ASB. They have made it possible to contribute to Kiwisaver from their credit card reward scheme (true rewards). I just made $45 contribution from my accumulated asb true rewards to the kiwisaver. No fees for the transaction. If you are using it for consumption they charge $4 for each redemption.
A very smart move by ASB. They have made it possible to contribute to Kiwisaver from their credit card reward scheme (true rewards). I just made $45 contribution from my accumulated asb true rewards to the kiwisaver. No fees for the transaction. If you are using it for consumption they charge $4 for each redemption.
Yes I like it... look after the cents and the dollars look after themselves. Low fees ASB too.
Cheers mate, appreciated. Food for thought.
I guess in my mind all I'm after is capital protection. I don't want to see it wiped out when I know I could have tinkered, but then again, I guess gains I miss out on would be lost as well.
So maybe it is just a case of' set and forget'. I want the gains of the Growth, but am hesitant on the losses. I guess having not been through a downturn (with money in - we all saw the GFC, but I wasn't 'in' it) I'm still trying to intellectualise how this works, and how I can make good decisions to ride through it as strong as I possibly can.
Do you mean; look after yourself - as in the funds will take care of you, or look after 'yourself' - in that you will actively manage them??
Nothing wrong with capital protection!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/personal-finance/news/article.cfm?c_id=12&objectid=11340682
Kiwisaver stats. I learned it is not untouchable if bankrupt.
rayonline
25-10-2014, 05:36 PM
I think around 2008-09 my growth plan Kiwisaver (Gareth Morgan) had a 5-10% lost on the balance for the year. I switched it to a 100% balanced. I was re training for my career and I didn't even put the $1000 to get the govt's $500 bonus, nor was there any employer or govt contribution. That said the money that in their by itself untouched grew 10% after fees and tax - month to same month the year after. If you account for govt and employer contributions, even in the bad times with a 100% growth the loss didn't wipe out the free money from the employer / govt. For me, it's been a positive one.
Since 2007 my wife has had no income and just paid in the minimum $1042 a year. Balance is 18 300, contributions $7800 Govt paid $6700 investment earnings $4000 fees $160 tax $190. My kids $1000 is $1600. As they turn 18 I am trying to pay in at least $600 a year cos then after 5 years they can get the housing subsidy.
NZX buying superlife, gee what happens if NZX goes broke...
Harvey Specter
09-12-2014, 09:32 AM
NZX buying superlife, gee what happens if NZX goes broke...
The Kiwisaver funds are still held by a trustee. The different is NZX gets the management fees.
Will be interesting to see if NZX increases the currently very low fees offered by Superlife or uses the scale to decrease the fees on its expensive SmartKiwi range.
Stumpynuts
02-04-2015, 12:49 PM
Does anybody know if this news today affects Milford's Kiwisaver management?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11427048
Harvey Specter
03-04-2015, 06:50 PM
Does anybody know if this news today affects Milford's Kiwisaver management?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11427048no impact at all. Milford ran a private fund for the govt owned superfund. That is the only one cancelled. They still run all their other funds.
Baa_Baa
30-08-2015, 12:48 PM
There has been a quite dramatic reduction in returns over the past 3-6 months on the various higher risk Kiwisaver portfolio fund allocations (Westpac managed), albeit returns are still positive they are now barely above CPI even on the growth fund. While returns have been good during the sustained bull markets, the risk appears that they revert to negative returns. I have moved my and my children Kiwisaver allocations to 100% cash for the meantime until the market exposed funds returns stabilise.
Sounds wise. Personally, being a 30 year old, I have shifted from Growth to Balanced. Since my KS has a 50% FX hedge (for the growth portion), so there is still considerable upside if the NZD were to crush. So assuming equities stay I high will wait for this before moving to Conservative or Cash.
My concern is that both bonds and equities will be crushed at the same time. Has this ever happened before?
twotic
31-08-2015, 10:59 AM
There has been a quite dramatic reduction in returns over the past 3-6 months on the various higher risk Kiwisaver portfolio fund allocations (Westpac managed), albeit returns are still positive they are now barely above CPI even on the growth fund. While returns have been good during the sustained bull markets, the risk appears that they revert to negative returns. I have moved my and my children Kiwisaver allocations to 100% cash for the meantime until the market exposed funds returns stabilise.
I switched all our Kiwisavers to cash a while back. I figure anyone with a horizon of 15+ years would do well to ride the bull markets for a reasonable (low risk) length of time, switch to cash, wait for the next 40%+ crash and then switch back to growth once you see the up trend start again. Repeat, repeat, repeat and I would have thought you would do pretty well. You have to accept you will miss out on some of the bull run, and you have to have the ballz to get in again when stocks are down, but I think thats the best option.
You need to consider dividends here, look at a total return discount to understand the opportunity cost. Also what does your provider do with currency hedging for the growth assets? You might find you will be buying the NZD at a low with such ^ a strategy.
twotic
31-08-2015, 11:38 AM
You need to consider dividends here, look at a total return discount to understand the opportunity cost. Also what does your provider do with currency hedging for the growth assets? You might find you will be buying the NZD at a low with such ^ a strategy.
Sorry, was that post to me or someone else?
Aaron
31-08-2015, 01:19 PM
I switched all our Kiwisavers to cash a while back. I figure anyone with a horizon of 15+ years would do well to ride the bull markets for a reasonable (low risk) length of time, switch to cash, wait for the next 40%+ crash and then switch back to growth once you see the up trend start again. Repeat, repeat, repeat and I would have thought you would do pretty well. You have to accept you will miss out on some of the bull run, and you have to have the ballz to get in again when stocks are down, but I think thats the best option. Amen to that I switched to 100% cash some time ago and am still waiting for the 40%+ crash. If it happens I am a genius, if it doesn't I will continue to look silly. The kids are still in balanced funds as the amount of capital isn't large and there may be some truth to diversify and hold for the long term, specially as I am wrong a lot of the time.
twotic
31-08-2015, 02:50 PM
Amen to that I switched to 100% cash some time ago and am still waiting for the 40%+ crash. If it happens I am a genius, if it doesn't I will continue to look silly. The kids are still in balanced funds as the amount of capital isn't large and there may be some truth to diversify and hold for the long term, specially as I am wrong a lot of the time.
There will be a crash mate, don't worry about that. The key is to have patience! I;m pretty sure China will be the catalyst for the next one, but when that will happen is anyones guess.
macduffy
31-08-2015, 03:44 PM
There will be a crash mate, don't worry about that. The key is to have patience! I;m pretty sure China will be the catalyst for the next one, but when that will happen is anyones guess.
Reminds me of the classic 1940's novel, The Tartar Steppe, about the young officer who spent his life in a border outpost, waiting for an enemy who never arrived - that is, they didn't appear until he was terminally ill and unable to do anything about defending the fort...........
Nothing to do with investing longterm, of course.
:cool:
Baa_Baa
01-09-2015, 06:57 PM
Surprises me how little, or few people have anything to say about their Kiwisaver allocations in the face of a potential bear market. I wonder if that will change when they recieve their infrequent performance reports and find that they are going backwards rapidly.
macduffy
01-09-2015, 08:53 PM
Surprises me how little, or few people have anything to say about their Kiwisaver allocations in the face of a potential bear market. I wonder if that will change when they recieve their infrequent performance reports and find that they are going backwards rapidly.
Would it be crediting the average Kiwisaver investor with too much savvy for realising that their investment is a longterm proposition that will experience multiple bull and bear markets before they get to retirement?
Zaphod
04-09-2015, 09:28 AM
Would it be crediting the average Kiwisaver investor with too much savvy for realising that their investment is a longterm proposition that will experience multiple bull and bear markets before they get to retirement?
I'm still quite often told that Kiwisaver is a government guaranteed scheme with a 100% rate of return. Perhaps that puts financial knowledge of the average Kiwisaver investor in perspective? Very concerning.
iceman
04-09-2015, 09:15 PM
I'm still quite often told that Kiwisaver is a government guaranteed scheme with a 100% rate of return. Perhaps that puts financial knowledge of the average Kiwisaver investor in perspective? Very concerning.
Yes it is sad how many people have no idea how it works. I had a discussion a few months ago with 8 young people, 18-20 year olds. None of them understood that for the first $1028 dollars you put in each year the Government will match it 50c for every $1 they put in. I am glad that all of them topped up their Kiwisavers before end of June to maximise the subsidy and I´m sure they will do so in future years. It will make a huge difference to their savings over the decades of retirment savings they have in front of them.
I think Universities and Polytechs should have a short compulsory course on Kiwisaver and retirment planning in general, for 1st year Uni/Polytech students.
everything you wanted to know about ks, well fees are too high...https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2426589/treasurykiwisaver.pdf
Superlife just put another 20 options on the my mix... heaps of etfs, us, aussie etc. Decisions decisions. http://www.superlife.co.nz/investment-portfolios.html
GRADS
31-10-2015, 07:53 PM
I am so glad I found this website forum.. that is how I found out about superlife in another thread.. Recently I took my KS fund (been invested since KW began) from my high cost providers growth fund to superlife. The fact you can choose your own portfolio mix is a winner for me.. In december they are adding even more ETF choices to their many options! Thanks alot!! :)
Yes, I like they way you can see the movements daily, different tax etc and low fees. Interestingly the NZX ones have just caught up with the bonds and cash again after last months issues but Auzzie are back 5% still and emerging market type ones 10% even with the bounce.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.