Canadian Money Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
For the investors with gold holdings of any form, what are you folks' opinions about the MNT or MNS?

Is it better than CGL or even holding physical?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,764 Posts
You don't want CGL. This is currency hedged and IMO completely invalidates the point of owning gold. There is CGL.C, unhedged, which is comparable to MNT.

I think MNT is much better than CGL.C. Just in fees alone, MNT has 0.35% and CGL has 0.50%. MNT also has much better daily volume and liquidity than CGL.C.

Considering fund size+liquidity, think MNT is the only game in town for 'pure gold bullion in CAD'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,223 Posts
if you want to trade or hold as a portfolio asset then buy MNT, do not buy physical except as a long term hold, as in a decade at least
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,764 Posts
I think physical gold is great for long term accumulation. This is not something you want to trade in & out of. I hold some physical gold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks for the tips. Not really a gold bug so holding physical has zero attractiveness to me. It is more for a defensive position against a major stock correction. I could hold cash but the greedy twin really wanna make a buck when stocks tank as well. So far, im considering a position in mnt, mns and cef.a
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,764 Posts
Let's assume for a moment that you can time a stock market decline...

Short term bonds (XSB) are another place that money flees during a crisis. XSB was up as much as 9% during 2008.

Timing a decline is unlikely to work, though. Your best bet might be to adjust your allocations as a longer term plan. This is what I've done with my weighting (25% stocks, 25% bonds, 25% gold, 25% cash/GIC)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Wow that allocation is pretty defensive. You must have a higher allocation to equities last yr?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,764 Posts
I've always been pretty low on equities, but I only recently started following the exact permanent portfolio (PP). It may seem very defensive, but long term returns with this allocation are similar to a 60/40 balanced fund. You will probably sacrifice some returns in the PP, but you will benefit from reduced volatility. Here are some stats from my historical calculations:

15 years (2002 - 2016 full years):
PP annual return: 6.3% <--- identical returns
Standard deviation: 3% <--- lower volatility

60/40 annual return: 6.3%
Standard deviation: 8%


20 years (1997 - 2016 full years):
PP annual return: 5.9%
Standard deviation: 3% <--- lower volatility

60/40 annual return: 6.8% <--- higher returns
Standard deviation: 8%


(All these figures use equal weighted Canadian & US stocks)
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top