Central Bank restrictions on unqualified investors. - page 4
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I couldn't get past it...but what country are we talking about where you can entrust your money for 3 years and sleep well?
I'll ask another way, just to make it clear, investing 200-300 thousand or so makes no sense, you need a larger sum,
Would you sell your property and invest for 3 years in such an offer to earn a significant amount? - Then you would buy a new flat again and be even better off!
;)
If you can sleep well, it means to be sure that if everything goes well in the country, you will get your money back in 3 years - nothing more.
Why does it not make sense? It does, if the aim is to have a potential return higher than that of a deposit. I do not support the venture with the risk of losing my house, besides there is no guarantee of a good income, and real estate may rise in price, if the economy is fine.
I am talking about the Russian Federation.
Why doesn't it make sense - it does, if the goal is to have a potential return higher than deposits. I do not support the gamble with the risk of losing housing, besides there is no guarantee of income, and real estate may rise in price, if the economy will be normal.
Well, that's the whole discussion of such a tempting offer - I'm not ready either (even if it's not about a gamble with housing) to invest 1 400 000 (+) rubles .... as they say on the internet with the phrase "the government lives on another planet..."
I am all for negative rates on foreign currency deposits. It would force them to move the currency into roubles. But I do not see an incentive to bring them to the exchange. Those who do not want to part with the currency will take them to a foreign broker and will buy foreign shares for the currency.
About the investment insurance products I read on one website, there really is an investment period of 3 years with no guarantee to get the declared yield by the end of the term (indicating only projected yield) but there is insurance against loss of deposit and as a result the high commission, which greatly reduces the final income. Usually such products are offered by different insurance companies. In the case of early withdrawal there are high penalties. There have been many negative comments about this article, mostly from people who wanted to withdraw their funds early. An investment insurance product is a type of ETF that manages a portfolio of different stocks and bonds and puts your money into this portfolio. The difference from an ETF is high fees, deposit insurance, and it is not a mutual fund.
I haven't gone into the commissions, but I think everyone's terms are different. If the commission is from income and not from the investment, it's no big deal. I think it is comparable to a mutual fund, except for the fact that you can withdraw money more quickly from a mutual fund. Some have a portfolio of assets for the whole term, others just have a list of instruments that are currently traded but are subject to change. If you ignore commissions, the possibility of return of personal income tax 13% of the amount of insurance (by the way, there are bad design options, for example, insurance is given on paper, no personal income tax refund) immediately gives you 4.3% per annum, which at current rates is not much less than a bank deposit in any "state bank".
These products are a relatively new phenomenon, as I understand it, and there are no adequate statistics on the results yet.
well, that's all the discussion on such a tempting offer - i'm not ready either (even if it's not about housing ventures) to invest 1,400,000 (+) roubles .... as they say on the internet with the phrase from the movie "The government lives on another planet..."
However, the risks here look less than trading on the stock exchanges on their own.
Or investing in a trader.However, the risks here look less than trading on the stock market on their own.
I haven't taken an interest now, but as I wrote above, a couple of years ago, Sberbank offered profitable investment programmes. It was written in the terms and conditions that they specified the maximum rate of return without taking risks into account.... As it happens with us, all fees and risks are borne solely by the end consumer and banks do not intend to insure their risks.
imho, it's just another clever scam when things go wrong... They will shrug their hands and say, well, it just so happens - the Central Bank does not offer protection, does it? - The deposits were insured at the behest of the CBR, so where are the guarantees?
I haven't looked into commissions, but I think everyone has different conditions. If the commission is on the income and not on the investment, then it's no big deal. I think they are comparable to mutual funds, except for the fact that you can withdraw your money more quickly from a mutual fund. Some have a portfolio of assets for the whole term, others just have a list of instruments that are currently traded but can change. If you ignore commissions, the possibility of return of personal income tax 13% of the amount of insurance (by the way, there are bad design options, for example, insurance is given on paper, no personal income tax refund) immediately gives you 4.3% per annum, which at current rates is not much less than a bank deposit in any "state bank".
These products are a relatively new phenomenon, as I understand it, and there are no adequate statistics on the results yet.
On the same site (I do not remember the address) people posted screenshots of the contract with the company, they even indicated the papers in which the funds will be invested. I do not know if this portfolio is under review or remains unchanged throughout the term, but after examination of the securities, I personally did not like some of them from the blue chip index and some of the securities that I would never include in my portfolio, there were also bonds of different companies with yield over 20%, which shows a great risk of buying these bonds. There were a lot of comments to the article and all of them were mostly negative. The yield is not guaranteed and it can be even lower than a bank deposit.
For myself, I concluded that if you know better, it is better to build your own portfolio or as an alternative to buy ETF units.
I am not currently interested, but as I wrote above, a couple of years ago, Sberbank offered a profitable investment programme, and the terms stated the maximum percentage of return without taking into account risks.... As it happens with us, all fees and risks are borne solely by the end consumer and banks do not intend to insure their risks.
imho, it's just another clever scam when things go wrong... They will shrug their hands and say, well, it just so happens - the Central Bank does not offer protection, does it? - The deposits were insured at the behest of the Central Bank, where's the guarantee?
A couple of years ago, they were probably mutual funds essentially from Troika Dialog, perhaps under a different wrapper, but now the point is that they insure the body of the investment.
As for guarantees, there are risks of bankruptcy of the insurance company, but there is also protection from the state, because it's all done as life insurance, although I don't know about limits and calculation, but that's why the amount of investment needs to be divided among different insurance companies or focus on monsters, like state insurer...
On the same website (I do not remember the address) people posted screenshots of the agreement with the company, which even indicated the securities in which the funds would be invested. I do not know whether this portfolio is reviewed or remains unchanged during the whole term, but having studied the composition of the securities I personally did not like some of them from the blue chip index and some from securities which I would never include in my portfolio, there were also bonds of different companies with a yield over 20%, which says about a big risk of buying these bonds. There were a lot of comments to the article and all of them were mostly negative. The yield is not guaranteed and it can be even lower than a bank deposit.
I've concluded that if you know something, it's better to build a portfolio or buy ETF units as an alternative.
Units have higher risks - the possibility of losing all of your money!
Yes, the profitability is not guaranteed, but on the stock exchange there are no guarantees either.
Regarding the portfolio - everyone has different conditions, you have to look at it individually. However, yes, I have seen a bank buying junk bonds - I got confused myself, and it was either an insight or a way of crediting... however, the percentage of the portfolio there was low - in the region of 1%. There are those who focus on a particular sector simply, like ETFs.
but that's why you have to split the investment amount between different insurance companies.
That's what I'm talking about! What are the new terms offered? - As far as I understand it, either you use ready-to-use investment products from the bank or have a deposit of 1.5 million and do what you want... it is not logical, is it? Why should one expose private investors to higher risks?
However, yes, I have seen a bank buying junk bonds - confused myself, and there's either an insight or a way of lending .
...or ... this is where a quality regulator is needed to keep track of where the bank will dump this rubbish in the future - what if it's to clients in the portfolio? .... let them keep it for their dubious machinations - cronyism is flourishing, so someone has taken over the money through the bank for this rubbish, imho
That's what I'm talking about! What are the new terms being offered? - As far as I understand it, either you use ready-to-use investment products from the bank or have a deposit of 1.5 million and do whatever you want - it's not logical, is it? why would you push private investors into big risks?
Well, actually the products are not from a bank - the bank is just an agent there usually to increase sales but the real money is transferred to the account of the investment company.
The bank does not really care what the income from this product will be - it will not pay out of its own money, the risk is zero for the bank, and the profit is immediately in the form of a commission from the investment company, so it is quite a profitable business, even compared to deposits and the falling key rate of the Central Bank.
...or ... What they need is a good regulator to monitor where a bank would dump the rubbish in the future - what if it goes to a customer's portfolio? .... Let them keep it for their own shady dealings - cronyism flourishes, so someone intercepts the money through the bank for this rubbish, imho.
There are many such deals, I think, with different managers - more money is a circle, and there is nothing that can be done about it....
It's like the scam with Peresvet bank bonds when their license was revoked - only a special type of bond holder (with a certain ticket) got redeemed immediately, while others just froze their money for many years (and thank goodness for that).