Canadian Money Forum banner

21 - 40 of 64 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
talk to any advisor and they will remind you that gold has no place in a portfolio.
I wouldn't have a portfolio without Gold in it....

I liken Gold to a balancing beam or something that provides stability.....

In fact, if I could find another asset class that I liked I would consider adding it into my overall portfolio too.... being ONLY involved with Equities or Bonds is boring and has some risks to it as we get ever closer to the Zero rate ! Err I mean when we really get started with the printing of money !

If its not negative interest rates its MMT.... either way in the near future we will probably see a new level of money creation as the world fabricates and basically gives away money....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
hfp75, make sure you get some real, physical gold. One real risk is that the electronic tracking vehicles (MNT, CGL.C, IAU, GLD) could fail for a variety of reasons. For example if there was some kind of mismanagement or theft at the Mint, the MNT share price could fall and stop tracking gold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,517 Posts
... Then again... what kind of a nut would want gold in their portfolio? Sure, it tends to rise when stock markets are weak and fear is high, it acts as a currency and protects against weakening domestic currencies, protects against inflation, and it acts as a diversifying third asset in a portfolio

... but other than that, it's a useless, unproductive asset that you can't eat and which pays no dividends! Probably best to avoid it. If you ever have any doubts about that just talk to any advisor and they will remind you that gold has no place in a portfolio.
A bit bitter and projecting maybe? :rolleyes2:


... make sure you get some real, physical gold. One real risk is that the electronic tracking vehicles (MNT, CGL.C, IAU, GLD) could fail for a variety of reasons. For example if there was some kind of mismanagement or theft at the Mint, the MNT share price could fall and stop tracking gold.
Sure ... and your kid could also find the gold coins and spend them or there could be a break in. A mix seems a better way of hedging your bets IMO.


Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
Well I was joking, thought I'd poke fun at all the great reasons to not invest in gold. Personally I think it's great for diversification in my asset allocation and I couldn't care less that it pays no dividends and has no nutritional value.

As for the gold coins, yes they are at risk too. I think it makes sense to use the ETFs for the bulk of holdings, also allows rebalancing in asset allocation (I have both MNT and IAU, more liquid). I would hold the minority of my gold allocation in physical bars & coins.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
Beware everyone, as gold spikes to new highs (it has now hit new highs in CAD) this MNT is having a little trouble. It seems to be straying from NAV slightly, about 0.5% premium to NAV.

That's not a huge dislocation from NAV so it's not catastrophic, but the bid/ask spread has widened significantly and it's currently around 10 or 11 cents! Be careful if you're placing orders.

Probably due to the significant new buying interest in gold. It's still doing a pretty good job at tracking bullion, as is CGL.C which is the other choice domestically.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,710 Posts
my CEF.TO is finally worth more than I paid for it. It has been a long wait. I am tempted to dump it and move to MNT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
my CEF.TO is finally worth more than I paid for it. It has been a long wait. I am tempted to dump it and move to MNT.
Reasonable idea. I dumped it as soon as Sprott ruined it... I hold all of the following and think they're all pretty good:

* MNT (CAD) but beware the large bid/ask spread
* CGL.C (CAD) has a tight spread, but a high MER and is a small fund
* IAU (USD) tracks great, low MER, but is foreign

So there are pros and cons of each. MNT is my favourite but you must enter orders carefully. Try using limit order near the bid/ask mid point. Once you run into another retail investors, your orders will match. The market makers aren't helping much on this one.

Given that "gold tracking ETFs" are somewhat of a new invention, and I have a pretty large holding, I decided to spread my risk around between these three.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
I know someone who a few weeks ago picked up $150k of MNT in the $22-23 range. It cost easily 0.2-0.3% extra in the bid/ask spread to grab it and I'm pretty sure he was into market makers at that point. But very happy with the trade and it didn't take too long to pick it up. Obviously that trade is doing well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
Nice. For anyone thinking of buying though, just beware of that spread and the potential premium to NAV.

Here's how to calculate it in real-time before you make a trade. On the Mint program's web site you can find the "Per ETR Entitlement to Gold" which is how many ounces each share represents. Currently it's 0.0105891

Next you get real-time gold and USDCAD quotes
gold=1683
USDCAD=1.34203

Therefore real-time MNT nav = 1683 x 1.34203 x 0.0105891 = 23.917
Current bid 24.00 ask 24.29

If you were to hit the ask 24.29 you'd be a whopping 1.56% above NAV
And even the mid point 24.145 is still 0.95% above NAV

I've kept records since 2016 and the premium/discount on NAV, using the mid point, varies between -1.5% and +1.5% so it's not that out of the ordinary. But still something to watch out for when trading. Unlike other bullion ETFs, it is very easy to calculate the fair real-time NAV of this thing because of the simple structure, as a fractional ownership in Mint's gold reserves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
In recent months, MNT has started behaving more like a closed-end fund, since the Mint is not adding more ounces of gold. This is resulting in a premium to NAV. There are also some large bid/ask spreads.

While that isn't ideal, remember that MNT also has some unique advantages, which could be why people are willing to pay a premium to fair value:

The claims on gold are backed by the crown corp and there are no intermediaries. A unit of MNT is almost like official currency. From their ETR program certificate:

Subject to the terms of the ETRs contained herein, the ETRs shall constitute direct unconditional obligations of the Mint, an agent of Her Majesty in right of Canada, and as such shall constitute direct unconditional obligations of Her Majesty in right of Canada.
So while the premium/discount is a nuisance, the fund may be more solid than other competitors. I find it pretty interesting that the holder of a unit gets X ounces of gold, backed by Canada.

( Admittedly, the promise is somewhat theoretical, and does not guarantee accurate pricing )

If you prefer trading in CAD and want something which tracks gold bullion more precisely, then CGL.C is a good option and at least keeps the gold domiciled in Canada.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Its interesting - Using TMX Money comparing MNT and CGL, CGL has lost a 38% lead on MNT !!! and once they crossed MNT has about a 15% lead on CGL...

If MNT can trade with a variable premium / discount & today it sits at about 10%, this does not explain the constant over appreciation of MNT or the constant depreciation of CGL....

from 2015 to 2020 they basically were neck in neck - pretty close to one another, but this year MNT has left CGL in the dirt.... no doubt the MNT premium explains only a portion of the variance.. any idea what the rest is due to ?

Also, how from 2012 to 2015 did CGL loose so much value (vs MNT) ? they are tracking the same thing....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
779 Posts
Also, how from 2012 to 2015 did CGL loose so much value (vs MNT) ? they are tracking the same thing....
CGL tracks the price of gold, but is hedged to the CAD. MNT is not hedged. So part of the difference can be explained by the drop in exchange rates between CAD and USD. CGL.C would be the more appropriate comparison since it is not hedged.

Looking at the 5 year chart below, it seems to me that the divergence began about a year ago and seems to be widening. This is likely related to MNT's premium expansion. CGL.C seems to track its NAV closely.

20269
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
CGL tracks the price of gold, but is hedged to the CAD. MNT is not hedged. So part of the difference can be explained by the drop in exchange rates between CAD and USD. CGL.C would be the more appropriate comparison since it is not hedged.
Yes, the valid comparison is MNT versus CGL.C. Both should represent the price of gold in CAD. As Topo's graph shows, the two have tracked each other very closely until recently. Lately, MNT is showing a persistent premium whereas CGL.C is sticking close to NAV.

I think it has to do with the structural difference between the two. CGL.C is a more conventional ETF which includes share creation & redemption, and market makers are involved. This is an open-ended fund and the ability to dynamically issue more shares (or redeem) keeps the trading price in line with the underlying.

MNT is not an ETF; it's more like a certificate representing beneficial gold ownership. There is not an active share creation & redemption process happening. That makes it somewhat like a closed-end fund and I'm really not sure if market makers are active in this.

If you want a holding that accurately tracks the price of gold, CGL.C is likely better.

But there is nothing inherently wrong with closed end funds. I held Central Fund of Canada for many years, and that was a closed end fund. What happens is that a premium or discount appears according to the market's mood. This cuts both ways; there can also be a discount when the asset is out of favour, so you get to pick up the asset (gold) cheaper than fair value.

In the past, MNT has traded at a discount to fair value (NAV) when gold was out of favour. Now it's trading at a premium. The old CEF showed similar behaviour, so I don't find it that unusual.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
MNT hit a new all time high and also the largest premium I've ever seen. I measured over 14% premium to NAV and the Mint's web site gives a similar number. Since I have quite a large position, I sold a few hundred shares today to partially cash out that 14% premium.

I sold MNT at 29.03 and bought CGL.C at 20.77
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
MNT hit a new all time high and also the largest premium I've ever seen. I measured over 14% premium to NAV and the Mint's web site gives a similar number. Since I have quite a large position, I sold a few hundred shares today to partially cash out that 14% premium.

I sold MNT at 29.03 and bought CGL.C at 20.77
I have done the same, twice this week. Gold allocation is now split between those two.
Thank you, hfp75 and Topo, for the idea.

Added: MNT has gained 39% this year, versus 21% for CGL.C. That's hard to ignore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
I have done the same, twice this week. Gold allocation is now split between those two.
Thank you, and Topo, for the idea.

Added: MNT has gained 39% this year, versus 21% for CGL.C. That's hard to ignore.
Yeah, I was ignoring them when the difference was small. But now the premium difference adds up to real money.

I just hope we're right that these are "equivalent". It's still possible that MNT is fundamentally a stronger holding and perhaps it deserves a premium for some reason that I haven't figured out yet.

It might be useful to look at the brokerage codes on the buyers who are buying it at the premium. One might be able to infer if they are retail customers or more professional / institutional.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
It might be useful to look at the brokerage codes on the buyers who are buying it at the premium. One might be able to infer if they are retail customers or more professional / institutional.
Someone using National Bank Financial bought your shares at 29.03.

Since then, Mackie Research Capital Corp has bought more than 5,000 shares of MNT at $29.05-.17. I know nothing about them, but they sure don't look like Robin Hood.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,729 Posts
Someone using National Bank Financial bought your shares at 29.03.

Since then, Mackie Research Capital Corp has bought more than 5,000 shares of MNT at $29.05-.17. I know nothing about them, but they sure don't look like Robin Hood.
Interesting. Maybe they (Mackie) know something that we don't know. In any case, CGL.C should be fine.
 
21 - 40 of 64 Posts
Top