精华 canadian banks
- 主题发起人 挺傻
- 开始时间
- 注册
- 2002-04-16
- 消息
- 7,217
- 荣誉分数
- 1,637
- 声望点数
- 393
Canadian Bank Fire Sale
Gavin Graham, The Canada Report 03.14.08, 11:39 AM ET
Canadian banks, asset managers and life insurers have been thrown over the side in what can only be described as an indiscriminate sell-off.
How bad is it? Well, ridiculous as it may seem, three of the six big Canadian banks are now yielding over 5%. They are Bank of Montreal (nyse: BMO - news - people ), which is yielding 6.5% based on the closing price on March 7; CIBC (nyse: CM - news - people ), yielding 5.6%; and National Bank of Canada (other-otc: NTIOF - news - people ) at 5.1%. That means their dividend yields are anywhere from 1.5 to 2.8 percentage points above the yield on 10-year Government of Canada bonds (3.65% at time of writing).
All the bank stocks, including Royal Bank (nyse: RY - news - people ), Bank of Nova Scotia (nyse: BNS - news - people ) and Toronto Dominion (nyse: RD - news - people ) are down at least 15% from this time a year ago. Other financial sector mainstays such as Power Financial (Toronto: PWF) and Sun Life Financial (nyse: SLF - news - people ) are hitting 52-week lows. (Sun Life is my pick for this issue.) The best performing Canadian asset management company (Jovian), according to a table compiled by the Globe and Mail, is down 25% from its high while the worst (Mavrix) is off 69%.
Frankly, I'm awed at the market's ability to misprice businesses. The reason for the major sell-off is easily understood. The housing crisis in the U.S. has led to the implosion of numerous structured financial products based on mortgages secured against overpriced homes that were given to borrowers who were simply not credit-worthy and who should never have been granted a loan in the first place. Banks and other lenders were underwriting loans to people who were not required to verify the information they put down on their applications.
Everyone is now well aware of the subprime mortgages that have led to the severity of the downturn, but it is still appalling to realize that this all happened because of rules so lax that some borrowers were not even required to show proof of income or put any money down. These folks are now referred to as NINJAs, an acronym for No Income, No Job or Assets. Add that one to the alphabet soup of ABCP (asset-backed commercial paper), SIV (special investment vehicle), CDO (collateralized debt obligation) and VIE (variable interest entity).
The major factor to be aware of as far as Canadian financial stocks are concerned is that the overwhelming majority of their assets are Canadian. As a result, the severe sell-off occurring in the U.S. property market has far less effect on Canadian balance sheets. The majority of the mortgages held by Canadian banks are Canadian mortgages, and the conservative nature of the banks and the regulators in Canada prevented the types of excesses seen in the U.S.
Until two years ago, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. (nasdaq: CMHC - news - people ), the equivalent of Fannie Mae (nyse: FNM - news - people ) or Freddie Mac (nyse: FRE - news - people ), would not insure mortgages that had maturities longer than 30 years or down payments of less than 10%. When the authorities changed the rules to permit 35- and 40-year mortgages and 5% down payments, the then governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge, wrote to them publicly, warning that they were encouraging borrowers to over-reach themselves to buy houses they could not afford. Contrast this with the U.S. housing market, where no money down and 110% to 120% mortgages were common, and where the Federal Reserve Board chairman encouraged borrowers to take out adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) with short-term interest rates at 45-year lows.
hat's a neat summary of the difference between the two countries and their financial systems. As a result, Canadian banks only have limited exposure to toxic subprime mortgages in the U.S. Even their U.S. subsidiaries, such as TD BankNorth and RBC Centura, did not offer the more aggressive types of mortgages.
Our banks have a very strong Canadian asset base. For example, the average Canadian house price rose 15% in the year ending Jan. 31 compared with a decline of 9% for the average U.S. house. The comfortable oligopoly enjoyed by the six large Canadian banks ensures that their return on equity is consistently in the mid to high teens (and in some cases over 20%). That's a position U.S. banks would love to be in.
The principal problem the banks have faced in Canada has been what to do with the excess cash they generate. Dividend payout ratios have risen from 30% to 40% just five years ago to 40% to 50% now and stock has been repurchased. But, with only two exceptions, Canadian banks generally have more cash than they can usefully employ, as the federal government has twice (1998 and 2002) blocked potential mergers between banks. (The exceptions are TD, which has built a consumer franchise in the U.S. Northeast that will soon be crowned by the takeover of Commerce Bancorp (nyse: CBH - news - people ) of New Jersey, and my recommendation from mid-2007, Scotiabank, which has one-third of its income coming from the Caribbean and Latin America.)
The weakening U.S. dollar does result in a drag on earnings for those financial institutions with large U.S. operations, but this is purely a reporting issue, as the assets in the U.S. have a natural hedge in the borrowings, which are denominated in the same currency. The three Canadian banks which reported specific write-offs for their year-ends (CIBC, National and the Bank of Montreal, of which GGOF is a wholly owned subsidiary) saw their prices decline 28.2%, 20.6% and 18.4%, respectively, in calendar year 2007. The better performing Royal, Scotia and TD were off 8.6%, 3.5% and 0.3%, respectively, during the period.
Looking at other stocks in the financial sector, Manulife, the largest life insurer, was up 3.1%, Power Financial was up 8.2%, and Sun Life was ahead 13%. All ran counter to the S&P/TSX Financial Index, which was down 4.6% for the year. After a 3% dividend is taken into account, the total return for the financial sector in 2007 was -1.6% vs. +9.8% for the S&P/TSX Composite Index, an underperformance of 11.4 percentage points. An analysis by Kevin Choquette of Scotia Capital Markets found that was the third-worst year in terms of financials lagging the composite index in the last 40 years. By comparison, in 2006 financials outperformed the composite by 19.2% vs. 17.2%, a reflection of the fact that interest rates in both Canada and the U.S., although they began rising in 2004, take some time to work through the system.
It's worthwhile noting that so far in 2008, financial stocks have declined despite larger than expected cuts in interest rates (rates have now fallen 2.25 points in the U.S. and one percentage point in Canada, to 3% and 3.5%, respectively). Normally, we expect lower rates to boost the price of financials while rising rates have a negative effect by squeezing bank lending margins and the sale of market-linked life policies. However, we have not seen this effect so far.
As noted, the dividend yield on three of the six banks is over 5%. This indicates investors are ignoring the fact that bank dividends have been raised on at least an annual basis for the last decade and that no Canadian bank has cut its dividend in 25 years. The yield on Power Financial is 3.8%, on Sun Life 3.2% and Manulife's yield is approaching 2.8%. Any reasonable observer would conclude, looking at this massive underperformance and the valuations of the companies, that investors were tarring all North American financials with the same brush and ignoring the much stronger fundamentals of the Canadian economy.
The total losses of the Canadian banks (excepting CIBC's $4.2 billion on its exposure to CDOs) on ABCP, SIVs, CDOs, trading and ordinary credit losses amount to $2.6 billion to date. Even if one was very pessimistic and doubled that number, the total would still amount to less than 20% of Merrill Lynch's (nyse: MER - news - people ) losses thus far. Canadian banks have simply been far more conservatively managed than their U.S. counterparts over the last few years and the evidence is readily apparent in their results.
Investors with a time horizon longer than six to nine months should be buying Canadian financials now. Even if the stocks do not appreciate over the next two years, the income is very attractive and is higher than any other "lower risk" alternatives such as government bonds, CDs or savings accounts.
Gavin Graham is chief investment officer for Guardian Group of Funds (GGOF), a money-management company based in Toronto.
Gavin Graham, The Canada Report 03.14.08, 11:39 AM ET
Canadian banks, asset managers and life insurers have been thrown over the side in what can only be described as an indiscriminate sell-off.
How bad is it? Well, ridiculous as it may seem, three of the six big Canadian banks are now yielding over 5%. They are Bank of Montreal (nyse: BMO - news - people ), which is yielding 6.5% based on the closing price on March 7; CIBC (nyse: CM - news - people ), yielding 5.6%; and National Bank of Canada (other-otc: NTIOF - news - people ) at 5.1%. That means their dividend yields are anywhere from 1.5 to 2.8 percentage points above the yield on 10-year Government of Canada bonds (3.65% at time of writing).
All the bank stocks, including Royal Bank (nyse: RY - news - people ), Bank of Nova Scotia (nyse: BNS - news - people ) and Toronto Dominion (nyse: RD - news - people ) are down at least 15% from this time a year ago. Other financial sector mainstays such as Power Financial (Toronto: PWF) and Sun Life Financial (nyse: SLF - news - people ) are hitting 52-week lows. (Sun Life is my pick for this issue.) The best performing Canadian asset management company (Jovian), according to a table compiled by the Globe and Mail, is down 25% from its high while the worst (Mavrix) is off 69%.
Frankly, I'm awed at the market's ability to misprice businesses. The reason for the major sell-off is easily understood. The housing crisis in the U.S. has led to the implosion of numerous structured financial products based on mortgages secured against overpriced homes that were given to borrowers who were simply not credit-worthy and who should never have been granted a loan in the first place. Banks and other lenders were underwriting loans to people who were not required to verify the information they put down on their applications.
Everyone is now well aware of the subprime mortgages that have led to the severity of the downturn, but it is still appalling to realize that this all happened because of rules so lax that some borrowers were not even required to show proof of income or put any money down. These folks are now referred to as NINJAs, an acronym for No Income, No Job or Assets. Add that one to the alphabet soup of ABCP (asset-backed commercial paper), SIV (special investment vehicle), CDO (collateralized debt obligation) and VIE (variable interest entity).
The major factor to be aware of as far as Canadian financial stocks are concerned is that the overwhelming majority of their assets are Canadian. As a result, the severe sell-off occurring in the U.S. property market has far less effect on Canadian balance sheets. The majority of the mortgages held by Canadian banks are Canadian mortgages, and the conservative nature of the banks and the regulators in Canada prevented the types of excesses seen in the U.S.
Until two years ago, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. (nasdaq: CMHC - news - people ), the equivalent of Fannie Mae (nyse: FNM - news - people ) or Freddie Mac (nyse: FRE - news - people ), would not insure mortgages that had maturities longer than 30 years or down payments of less than 10%. When the authorities changed the rules to permit 35- and 40-year mortgages and 5% down payments, the then governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge, wrote to them publicly, warning that they were encouraging borrowers to over-reach themselves to buy houses they could not afford. Contrast this with the U.S. housing market, where no money down and 110% to 120% mortgages were common, and where the Federal Reserve Board chairman encouraged borrowers to take out adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) with short-term interest rates at 45-year lows.
hat's a neat summary of the difference between the two countries and their financial systems. As a result, Canadian banks only have limited exposure to toxic subprime mortgages in the U.S. Even their U.S. subsidiaries, such as TD BankNorth and RBC Centura, did not offer the more aggressive types of mortgages.
Our banks have a very strong Canadian asset base. For example, the average Canadian house price rose 15% in the year ending Jan. 31 compared with a decline of 9% for the average U.S. house. The comfortable oligopoly enjoyed by the six large Canadian banks ensures that their return on equity is consistently in the mid to high teens (and in some cases over 20%). That's a position U.S. banks would love to be in.
The principal problem the banks have faced in Canada has been what to do with the excess cash they generate. Dividend payout ratios have risen from 30% to 40% just five years ago to 40% to 50% now and stock has been repurchased. But, with only two exceptions, Canadian banks generally have more cash than they can usefully employ, as the federal government has twice (1998 and 2002) blocked potential mergers between banks. (The exceptions are TD, which has built a consumer franchise in the U.S. Northeast that will soon be crowned by the takeover of Commerce Bancorp (nyse: CBH - news - people ) of New Jersey, and my recommendation from mid-2007, Scotiabank, which has one-third of its income coming from the Caribbean and Latin America.)
The weakening U.S. dollar does result in a drag on earnings for those financial institutions with large U.S. operations, but this is purely a reporting issue, as the assets in the U.S. have a natural hedge in the borrowings, which are denominated in the same currency. The three Canadian banks which reported specific write-offs for their year-ends (CIBC, National and the Bank of Montreal, of which GGOF is a wholly owned subsidiary) saw their prices decline 28.2%, 20.6% and 18.4%, respectively, in calendar year 2007. The better performing Royal, Scotia and TD were off 8.6%, 3.5% and 0.3%, respectively, during the period.
Looking at other stocks in the financial sector, Manulife, the largest life insurer, was up 3.1%, Power Financial was up 8.2%, and Sun Life was ahead 13%. All ran counter to the S&P/TSX Financial Index, which was down 4.6% for the year. After a 3% dividend is taken into account, the total return for the financial sector in 2007 was -1.6% vs. +9.8% for the S&P/TSX Composite Index, an underperformance of 11.4 percentage points. An analysis by Kevin Choquette of Scotia Capital Markets found that was the third-worst year in terms of financials lagging the composite index in the last 40 years. By comparison, in 2006 financials outperformed the composite by 19.2% vs. 17.2%, a reflection of the fact that interest rates in both Canada and the U.S., although they began rising in 2004, take some time to work through the system.
It's worthwhile noting that so far in 2008, financial stocks have declined despite larger than expected cuts in interest rates (rates have now fallen 2.25 points in the U.S. and one percentage point in Canada, to 3% and 3.5%, respectively). Normally, we expect lower rates to boost the price of financials while rising rates have a negative effect by squeezing bank lending margins and the sale of market-linked life policies. However, we have not seen this effect so far.
As noted, the dividend yield on three of the six banks is over 5%. This indicates investors are ignoring the fact that bank dividends have been raised on at least an annual basis for the last decade and that no Canadian bank has cut its dividend in 25 years. The yield on Power Financial is 3.8%, on Sun Life 3.2% and Manulife's yield is approaching 2.8%. Any reasonable observer would conclude, looking at this massive underperformance and the valuations of the companies, that investors were tarring all North American financials with the same brush and ignoring the much stronger fundamentals of the Canadian economy.
The total losses of the Canadian banks (excepting CIBC's $4.2 billion on its exposure to CDOs) on ABCP, SIVs, CDOs, trading and ordinary credit losses amount to $2.6 billion to date. Even if one was very pessimistic and doubled that number, the total would still amount to less than 20% of Merrill Lynch's (nyse: MER - news - people ) losses thus far. Canadian banks have simply been far more conservatively managed than their U.S. counterparts over the last few years and the evidence is readily apparent in their results.
Investors with a time horizon longer than six to nine months should be buying Canadian financials now. Even if the stocks do not appreciate over the next two years, the income is very attractive and is higher than any other "lower risk" alternatives such as government bonds, CDs or savings accounts.
Gavin Graham is chief investment officer for Guardian Group of Funds (GGOF), a money-management company based in Toronto.
- 注册
- 2003-03-09
- 消息
- 7,349
- 荣誉分数
- 1,027
- 声望点数
- 373
Thanks for the information
Have a couple of questions:
1. What's Net Inc stands for here? I saw CIBC is negative in this item, do you know why?
2. In this turnmoil period, what's your suggestion to put money with? GIC, stock, bond or whatever? Not sure if there is any possibility for any Canadian bank to go bankrupt?
3. I know term deposit are insured by CDIC, how about those money invested in stock, mutual fund etc?
Thanks.
- 注册
- 2002-04-16
- 消息
- 7,217
- 荣誉分数
- 1,637
- 声望点数
- 393
1. Net Inc stands for net income.
CIBC Q1 2008 results included the following pre-tax charges and losses:
A. a $2.28 billion ($1.54 billion after-tax or $4.51 per share) charge related to credit protection purchased on bond insurer ACA Financial Guaranty Corp;
B. a $626,000,000 ($422,000,000 after-tax or $1.24 per share) charge on credit protection purchased from other financial guarantors;
C. $473,000,000 ($316,000,000 after-tax or $0.93 per share) mark-to-market losses on collateralized debt obligations and residential mortgage-backed securities related to U.S. residential mortgage market;
D. $108,000,000 ($64,000,000 after-tax or $0.19 per share) loss on the sale of some of the bank's U.S. businesses to Oppenheimer Holdings Inc. as well as management changes and restructuring of other businesses.
But on the other side, the results for the quarter were positively impacted by $56,000,000 of tax-related items and $171,000,000 ($115,000,000 after-tax or $0.34 per share) from changes in credit spreads on the mark-to-market of credit derivatives on corporate loans
2. CASH IS THE KING.
Personally I believe capital preservation is the first priority in this typical bear market. If I want to play safe, I would prefer investment vehicles with high liquidity and capital guaranteed. For more experienced investors, I would suggest “Long And Short strategies”.
I won't bet bankruptcy issues here. But compared with U.S banks, all big Canadian banks are much better regulated and at least no news came out at this time.
3. Most brokers were insured by CIPF. You can check the attached link for more details.
Canadian Investor Protection Fund
Thanks.
- 注册
- 2002-04-16
- 消息
- 7,217
- 荣誉分数
- 1,637
- 声望点数
- 393
Pls refer to the attached link for all the open ended, no load dividend funds performance and details.
http://globefunddb.theglobeandmail....&pi_portfolio_id=&pi_fund_arr=&pi_manager_id=
I wouldn't buy any funds with front/back load or close ended. Liquidity is always a concern.
As you can see, in the long run, Royal, TD and Scotia's dividend funds have fairly good return. In the past 20 years, they have been providing annual return above 10%. That means, if you invested &10,000 20 years ago, you would have roughly $67,000 today without any hassles. Compared with the returns from equity market, it is nothing, but it is a pretty safe play.
You could also consider ETF which has more liquidities, less management fees and more chances for higher return.
Thanks.
- 注册
- 2002-04-16
- 消息
- 7,217
- 荣誉分数
- 1,637
- 声望点数
- 393
End of nearly each cycle is married with a financial crisis of some sort and we have one down south in the sub-prime mortgage area. While they claimed not to be involved, our banks are also implicated. Most bank stocks are dropping, as there seems to be little catalyst to take them higher. If, as advised, you took the price drop as an opportunity to buy the whole sector almost indiscriminately -- for high rates or not, merger or solo, banks are the best deal among Canadian companies -- you did well. The current dividend yield of 5% to 6% is near the high. If you bought this sector in the early nineties, you beat nearly all mutual funds.
CIBC
CIBC suffers the most in times of trouble among financial stocks. Just a few quarters ago, there was a shocker of a write-off to pay the Enron claimants and rather bad timing for the old management to retire. And now it has the biggest exposure among Canadian banks to toxic paper in the U.S. CIBC has a pattern of being out there but has fooled many in the past by surviving and doing better than expected. The only saving grace for shareholders is that investors have a short memory in this business. They forget good and bad news rather quickly.
Royal Bank
Results for fiscal 2008, were negatively impacted by a pre-tax write-down to fair value of $430,000,000 in the bank's capital markets segment related to U.S. subprime exposures ($288,000,000), investment portfolio supporting the bank's U.S. municipal guaranted investment certificates business ($92,000,000), U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities ($22,000,000) and U.S. auction rate securities ($28,000,000).
All bank debentures are direct unsecured and subordinated to deposits and other liabilities.
BNS
Fiscal 2008 results were impacted by turbulence in global financial markets, particularly credit markets. Higher net interest income from strong asset growth and lower non-interest expenses were offset by lower trading revenues and lower gains on non-trading securities. Other negative factors include foreign currency translation, a lower interest margin, a reduced contribution from Mexico and a higher provision for credit losses.
TD
Canadian personal and commercial banking net income grew 10% led by primarily by volume-driven net interest income growth and higher-fee related income. Wealth management net income increased 16% primarily due to TD Ameritrade's contribution to bank earnings due to strong underlying performance driven by revenue growth. U.S. personal and commercial banking net income was up 98% primarily due to the bank's increased TD Banknorth ownership related to the privatization in April 2007. Wealth banking net income decreased 17% primarily due to lower trading revenue and higher provisions for credit losses.
BMO
Included the fiscal 2008 results were pre-tax charges totaling $548,000,000 ($362,000,000 or $0.72 per share after-tax). Items in BMO Capital Markets group include a commodities losses on existing positions related to monoline insurer ACA Financial Guarantee Corporation ($158,000,000); trading and structured credit-related positions, preferred shares, third-party Canadian conduits and other mark-to-market losses ($177,000,000); the bank's investment in Apex/Stika Trust, a structured finance vehicle to which it has not provided backup liquidity ($130,000,000); and capital notes in the Links Finance Corporation and Parkland Finance Corporation structured investment vehicles (SIVs) ($25,000,000).Charges also include a $60,000,000 pre-tax increase to the bank's general allowance for credit losses. The fiscal 2007 results included $325,000,000 or $0.63 per share of after-tax charges.
CIBC
CIBC suffers the most in times of trouble among financial stocks. Just a few quarters ago, there was a shocker of a write-off to pay the Enron claimants and rather bad timing for the old management to retire. And now it has the biggest exposure among Canadian banks to toxic paper in the U.S. CIBC has a pattern of being out there but has fooled many in the past by surviving and doing better than expected. The only saving grace for shareholders is that investors have a short memory in this business. They forget good and bad news rather quickly.
Royal Bank
Results for fiscal 2008, were negatively impacted by a pre-tax write-down to fair value of $430,000,000 in the bank's capital markets segment related to U.S. subprime exposures ($288,000,000), investment portfolio supporting the bank's U.S. municipal guaranted investment certificates business ($92,000,000), U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities ($22,000,000) and U.S. auction rate securities ($28,000,000).
All bank debentures are direct unsecured and subordinated to deposits and other liabilities.
BNS
Fiscal 2008 results were impacted by turbulence in global financial markets, particularly credit markets. Higher net interest income from strong asset growth and lower non-interest expenses were offset by lower trading revenues and lower gains on non-trading securities. Other negative factors include foreign currency translation, a lower interest margin, a reduced contribution from Mexico and a higher provision for credit losses.
TD
Canadian personal and commercial banking net income grew 10% led by primarily by volume-driven net interest income growth and higher-fee related income. Wealth management net income increased 16% primarily due to TD Ameritrade's contribution to bank earnings due to strong underlying performance driven by revenue growth. U.S. personal and commercial banking net income was up 98% primarily due to the bank's increased TD Banknorth ownership related to the privatization in April 2007. Wealth banking net income decreased 17% primarily due to lower trading revenue and higher provisions for credit losses.
BMO
Included the fiscal 2008 results were pre-tax charges totaling $548,000,000 ($362,000,000 or $0.72 per share after-tax). Items in BMO Capital Markets group include a commodities losses on existing positions related to monoline insurer ACA Financial Guarantee Corporation ($158,000,000); trading and structured credit-related positions, preferred shares, third-party Canadian conduits and other mark-to-market losses ($177,000,000); the bank's investment in Apex/Stika Trust, a structured finance vehicle to which it has not provided backup liquidity ($130,000,000); and capital notes in the Links Finance Corporation and Parkland Finance Corporation structured investment vehicles (SIVs) ($25,000,000).Charges also include a $60,000,000 pre-tax increase to the bank's general allowance for credit losses. The fiscal 2007 results included $325,000,000 or $0.63 per share of after-tax charges.
- 注册
- 2002-04-16
- 消息
- 7,217
- 荣誉分数
- 1,637
- 声望点数
- 393
Tsx was beaten down because of the funds flowing away from commodities and resources sectors. Agricultural / Oil / Gold sectors were in big correction mood. Although we had a good opportunity to swing financial stocks, holding cash is always a safer play for most of the investors. We will have better chances when market has a clear trend. Wait until then, good luck.
- 注册
- 2003-03-09
- 消息
- 7,349
- 荣誉分数
- 1,027
- 声望点数
- 373
Tsx was beaten down because of the funds flowing away from commodities and resources sectors. Agricultural / Oil / Gold sectors were in big correction mood. Although we had a good opportunity to swing financial stocks, holding cash is always a safer play for most of the investors. We will have better chances when market has a clear trend. Wait until then, good luck.
Thanks, for the analysis in detail. That is realy useful information.
Now I really agree with your second claim in the following, but still not sure about the first claim. I guess it's irrelevant here anyway.
Thanks again and keep the good job in the downturn portion of economic cycle.
你不知道我过去是干什么的,你真的还嫩点.
我对论坛的贡献恐怕超出了你的想象极限.
- 注册
- 2005-08-24
- 消息
- 4,244
- 荣誉分数
- 1,530
- 声望点数
- 373
谢谢挺傻提供的信息。从来不上这个论坛发贴，因为买股票赔钱赔怕了。不过看了挺傻的贴，加上最近的变化，倒是有个想法请教大家。在３月１７日，几大银行都探到５２周最低。三天后基本涨回５%-１０%。是否可以说美国和加拿大银行和金融界的危机已经探到了底？最坏的结果已经过去了？我们知道美国联邦储备银行似乎下决心救市，尽可能避免银行倒闭。加央行也会步其后尘。
如果危机基本过去，或稳定，现在开始慢慢入市是好时候（１９２９-３３大危机时，１９３２年股市到底，当时入市的人，３年翻３倍，１０年长９倍）。
当然如果还会恶化，现在入市，会血本无归（never chase the falling knife).
我信息有限，孤陋寡闻，想听听高手的见解。顺便把几大银行５２周最高和最低价，及周四最后价贴上。
name high low Ｍarch 20 price
royal 61.08 42.82 46.68
CIBC 107.45 56.25 64.26
BMO 72.75 38 44.51
TD 77.1 58.57 63.2
BNS 54.73 42 44.35
- 注册
- 2002-04-16
- 消息
- 7,217
- 荣誉分数
- 1,637
- 声望点数
- 393
楼上你太谦虚了吧。你是CFA加上就职的部门应该很多的INSIDER INFO，我们怎么敢班门弄斧呢。:blowzy:
算是抛砖引玉，我对此的看法还是这样
作为SWING TRADER，我觉得是机会试水，如果没有大的意外发生，应该会有一波向上的行情，做空的不要着急入场了。对于长期来说，还没有看到FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE。需要耐心及确认。:blowzy:
但是就这几家银行，TD, ROYAL, BNS，甚至BMO，长期来看我觉得任何低点入场都不会有什么太大的风险，只要大盘出现PANIC SELL的时候就逢低买入，分批分拨，肯定会有不错的收益。
楼上你是专家，你觉得呢？
- 注册
- 2002-04-16
- 消息
- 7,217
- 荣誉分数
- 1,637
- 声望点数
- 393
Thanks, for the analysis in detail. That is realy useful information.
Now I really agree with your second claim in the following, but still not sure about the first claim. I guess it's irrelevant here anyway.
Thanks again and keep the good job in the downturn portion of economic cycle.
你不知道我过去是干什么的,你真的还嫩点.
我对论坛的贡献恐怕超出了你的想象极限.
我的签名引用的都是CFC网上的“名人名言”:blowzy: 没付版权费:blowzy:
要说对论坛的贡献超出想象极限的非要找出个来也就是RIVEN和JANE了吧。
- 注册
- 2005-08-24
- 消息
- 4,244
- 荣誉分数
- 1,530
- 声望点数
- 373
从现价和最高的差价来看，TD, ROYAL, BNS，甚至BMO升水的幅度并不很大。只有ＣＭ降了４０%以上，但是你似乎对ＣＭ怀谨慎态度。
其实我对美国的几大银行及Fannie Mae ， Freddie Mac 更感兴趣（见下面数据）。他们多数下降了５０%以上。只是买美国股票，还要加上外汇汇率风险。如美元继续贬值，那么即使股票赚了钱，折成加元后还会损失（我有过这类经验）。我想在
１１月美国大选，如果民主党胜出，美元有可能反弹，因为两位候选人都表示进白宫后第一件事是从伊拉克撤兵（每天省１０亿美元以上）。反之，共和党赢了，美元会继续贬值（要在伊拉克接着烧钱）。My two cents.
美国大银行的数据(最低价多是在３月１７日实现的）
name, 52 week high low USD$ at March 20
Citigroup 最高55.55 最低17.99 周四最后价 22.5
JP Morgan 最高53.25 最低36.01 周四最后价 46.85
Morgan Stanley 最高75.50 最低33.56 周四最后价 49.67
Merrill Lynch 最高95 最低37.25 周四最后价 46.85
Goldman Sachs 最高250.7 最低140.27 周四最后价 179.63
Fannie Mae 最高70.67 最低18.25 周四最后价 32.58
Freddie Mac 最高68.19 最低16.59 周四最后价 34.30
