1nv35t wrote:Read a quote somewhere (haven't a link and can't be bothered to search), that suggested the average investors average stocks rewards lagged T-Bills. By the time you factor in brokers fees, market makers spread, fund manager fees, withholdings taxes and dividend/capital gains taxes ... alongside the tendency towards bad behaviour (sell-low (fear)/buy-high (greed)), many investors would have been better just having held T-Bills (short term bonds).....
Thanks this is all very interesting. Yet more food for thought.
Well, I purchased another "Fixed income securities" book the other day. I'd previously found Mark Gs book a very good intro, but I wanted to know more. Unfortunately I got slightly more than I bargained for in the form of:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fixed-Income-S ... 0470852771
Whilst I can handle some of the maths, to me this book is more a "sit down at a desk with pen+paper" book, rather than a read in the armchair book. Which is fine in it's place, and fortunately I bought it 2nd-hand, and may resell once I've had my fill of it.
I really wanted the book to clarify more of the terminology I've recently been reading, along with some slight elaboration of some the terminology I'd already understood.
For example, people speak of bonds/gilts being liquid or illiquid. I'm curious as to how this term exactly applies to those two asset classes. For instance I'd always assumed that liquidity just meant "cash-richness". So surely by that naive simplistic view bonds and gilts are always liquid, since if you require cash you sell them at the brokers. So does the terminology of liquidity mean that "how easy it is to exchange back for cash, at your desired price, i.e. to at least get back what you put in? IOW does this term's usage overlap onto that of risk?
Other terms I'd like to understand is more specifics such as "bullet bonds", "barbell", etc. Let's see what I can google!
Matt