Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleF
The point really isn't about the $1K position affecting the over portfolio or diversification. Plus I'm mentioning people with pure mutual fund/ETF portfolios who aren't truly constructing portfolios anyways. It's more along the lines that bank stocks are IMO the easiest stocks to really understand from a newbie/amateur point of view. If ultimately stocks aren't your thing, by all means do ETF and mutual funds. But I think that if you're going to store your life savings into these things, you should understand what these things are in general.
But perhaps I am just ranting in an outdated manner. Me saying that a small dabble in bank stocks to understand the stock vehicle is perhaps akin to me being incredulous that people no longer want to learn to drive. IMO it's a life skill that everyone should have in case of emergency etc. even if you don't regularly drive. But everyone else is content with mutual funds/ETFs as one would be happy with transit/uber etc. Furthermore, my beef with mutual funds is outdated with some of the newer rules. I just hated how in the past some of them could be kinda greasy with their admin fee rules etc. They'll claim you get a 5% gain or something, but after fees, you're sitting on like half of that.
Old man yelling at clouds here. Sorry ya'll.
|
Don't you think it's pretty dangerous to advise new investors to go completely into one sector in one geography? Sure, they have been stable for decades, but that means nothing and seems risk as hell to me.
I think the most important party of risk management is to be geographically and sector diverse.
Canada represents such a small portion of the world markets, it is home bias to have the majority of your portfolio invested in Canadian companies.
We've seen banking blow up elsewhere. There are no guarantees that doesn't happen here.