Category: Investment

  • Trusts are no longer only for the ultra-rich

    Trusts are no longer only for the ultra-rich

    Trusts are no longer only for the ultra-rich

    When most people hear the word trust, they assume it’s something only the ultra-wealthy need to worry about. Something reserved for billionaires trying to manage estate taxes or pass down dynastic wealth.

    But that’s no longer true.

    Today, more professionals and families are using trusts as a simple, effective tool to protect assets, provide for loved ones, and ensure their money is used according to their wishes—even if they’re no longer around or able to decide for themselves.

    It’s easier to set one up than most people think.

    Here’s a guide to help you understand what’s involved.

    Phase 1: Plan With Purpose

    Be Clear on Why You Want a Trust

    Most people set up trusts for one of these reasons:

      • To protect assets for children or dependents
      • To manage wealth in the event of illness or mental incapacity
      • To avoid family disputes or mismanagement
      • To pass on wealth without complications later

    Your objective sets the direction for the rest of the setup.

    Choose the Right Structure

    The most common types include:

      • Living trusts (activated while you’re alive)
      • Testamentary trusts (activated through your will)
      • Revocable (can be changed)
      • Irrevocable (can’t be changed, but offers stronger protection)

    What you choose depends on how flexible or protective you want the trust to be.

    Decide Who’s Involved

    Pick a trustee—someone or a professional company you trust to manage the assets.

    Name your beneficiaries and decide how and when they’ll benefit (e.g. age milestones, fixed payouts, or specific situations).

    Phase 2: Set Up the Trust

    Identify the Assets You Want to Protect

    You don’t need to move everything. Start with what’s important:

      • Investment accounts
      • Cash savings
      • Insurance payouts
      • Business shares
      • Property

    Draft the Legal Document

    This trust deed oulines your instructions, distribution rules and the trustee’s responsibilities. Work with a trust service provider or lawyer to get this right.

    Fund the Trust

    Once the structure is in place, move the selected assets into it. This step activates the trust. Until then, it is just a plan on paper.

    Phase 3: Maintain and Review

    Review As Life Changes

    Trusts aren’t fire-and-forget. Revisit the structure when there’s a major life event—marriage, illness, children, or a significant change in finances. If it’s a revocable trust, you can make updates easily. For irrevocable ones, you’ll need to plan carefully from the start.

    If you’ve built up savings, investments or property, you already have something worth protecting. A trust gives you control over where that money goes and peace of mind for those you care about.

    If this sounds important to you, we’d be happy to have a chat. No jargon, no pressure. Just a conversation about what matters most to you.

  • If Your Portfolio Only Consisted of S&P 500, 28% Would Be Invested in Just 7 Companies

    If Your Portfolio Only Consisted of S&P 500, 28% Would Be Invested in Just 7 Companies

    If Your Portfolio Only Consisted of S&P 500, 28% Would Be Invested in Just 7 Companies

    Investing in the S&P 500 is often considered one of the safest and most reliable ways to grow your wealth over time. After all, it’s an index that tracks 500 of the largest and most successful companies in the U.S., offering what seems to be a well-diversified portfolio. However, what many investors don’t realize is that if your portfolio only consisted of the S&P 500, a whopping 28% of it would be concentrated in just 7 companies. These are mostly tech giants like Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla, and Nvidia, which currently dominate the index.

    This over-reliance on a few companies presents both opportunities and risks, particularly when it comes to diversification, portfolio stability, and long-term growth.

    The Illusion of Diversification in the S&P 500

    One of the primary reasons investors flock to the S&P 500 is the belief that it offers built-in diversification. After all, with 500 companies spanning various sectors like technology, healthcare, financial services, and consumer goods, you’d assume that you’re spreading your risk across multiple industries and companies.

    But here’s the catch: the S&P 500 is a market-capitalization-weighted index. This means that companies with the largest market values have the most significant impact on the index’s overall performance. As a result, the top 7 companies, which include some of the most valuable corporations in the world, make up 28% of the entire index, while the remaining 493 companies share the rest.

    Essentially, even though your portfolio may include hundreds of companies, nearly one-third of its performance depends on just 7 players.

    Why is This Important?

    This concentration in the top few companies means that your portfolio is much more vulnerable to the success or failure of these firms than you might expect. If one or two of these tech giants were to experience a significant downturn, the impact on your overall portfolio could be substantial, regardless of how the rest of the companies in the index perform.

    In short, while the S&P 500 offers broad exposure in terms of the number of companies, its market-cap weighting results in a concentration risk that could undermine the diversification benefits you were expecting.

    Sector Imbalance: The Tech Overload

    Let’s dig a little deeper into the composition of the S&P 500’s top holdings. The top 7 companies are all tech giants or closely related to the technology sector. These include Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (Google’s parent company), Meta (formerly Facebook), Tesla, and Nvidia. While technology has been the driving force behind much of the growth in the stock market over the last decade, this sector’s heavy influence presents some risks.

    Over-Exposure to One Sector

    A well-diversified portfolio typically spreads investments across different sectors to reduce the risk that a downturn in any one area of the economy will hurt your returns too much. However, with the S&P 500’s top 7 companies all being tech-focused, you are disproportionately exposed to the performance of the technology sector.

    Tech stocks have seen tremendous growth over the past few years, but they are also prone to volatility. Regulatory challenges, changes in consumer behavior, or even a tech bubble could impact these stocks significantly. If you’re heavily invested in the S&P 500, a downturn in the tech sector could have a much larger impact on your portfolio than you might expect, despite the index being composed of 500 companies.

    Economic Cycles and Tech Volatility

    Different sectors perform better or worse depending on where we are in the economic cycle. Technology tends to do well during economic booms but can struggle in periods of economic slowdown or high inflation. For instance, tech companies are often valued based on their future growth potential, and when interest rates rise, it becomes harder for these companies to justify their high valuations.

    If your portfolio is concentrated in tech-heavy S&P 500 holdings, you could be more exposed to market volatility in economic downturns, which could erode your portfolio’s value at a time when stability is most needed.

    The Potential Risks of Heavy Concentration

    Concentration risk is a term used to describe the potential downside of having too much of your portfolio invested in a small number of assets. In the case of the S&P 500, the top 7 companies dominate the index, meaning that a significant portion of your portfolio is reliant on their performance. This over-reliance can expose you to several risks:

    Market Volatility

    The stock market is inherently volatile, and while diversification can help manage this volatility, a concentrated portfolio exacerbates it. In a concentrated portfolio, if one or more of the top 7 companies were to underperform or face an external challenge (such as regulatory fines, lawsuits, or leadership changes), the entire portfolio could suffer.

    For example, when Facebook (now Meta) faced privacy scandals and regulatory scrutiny, its stock dropped significantly, impacting not just individual investors but also those with heavy S&P 500 exposure. Similarly, if any of the current top 7 companies were to face a major setback, the ripple effect could be substantial, especially if your portfolio is concentrated in the S&P 500.

    Regulatory and Market Risks

    As companies grow larger, they often attract more regulatory attention. We’ve already seen this with many of the top tech firms in the S&P 500, such as Apple, Alphabet, and Meta, which have faced increasing scrutiny over issues like privacy, antitrust laws, and monopolistic practices.

    Regulatory challenges can result in significant fines, restrictions on business practices, or even the breakup of large corporations. This type of regulatory risk disproportionately affects companies with massive market power, like the top 7 in the S&P 500. As an investor, this exposes you to risks beyond the usual market fluctuations.

    Why It Matters for Long-Term Investors

    Investing is not just about short-term returns; it’s about ensuring long-term financial stability and growth. When too much of your portfolio is reliant on a handful of companies, your risk profile becomes skewed, even if it seems like you are diversified.

    The Case for Further Diversification

    Given the concentration risks associated with the S&P 500, it may be time to consider further diversification. While the S&P 500 remains a strong investment option, relying solely on it could leave you vulnerable to market fluctuations, particularly those affecting the tech sector.

    Adding Other Asset Classes

    To mitigate these risks, consider adding other asset classes to your portfolio, such as bonds, international stocks, and small-cap stocks. Bonds, for example, provide stability and income, while international stocks offer exposure to markets outside the U.S., helping to spread your risk across different regions and economies.

    Small-cap stocks, on the other hand, can provide growth potential without being as heavily concentrated in the same sectors as the S&P 500. By including these additional asset classes, you can create a more balanced portfolio that’s better suited to weather market downturns.

    What Investors Should Consider

    When managing your portfolio, it’s essential to take a proactive approach to diversification. Here are a few things to keep in mind:

    Understand Your Risk Tolerance

    Every investor has a different level of risk tolerance. If you’re comfortable with the potential ups and downs of a tech-heavy portfolio, then the S&P 500 may suit your needs. However, if you prefer more balanced exposure and less volatility, you may want to consider diversifying further into other asset classes.

    Active vs. Passive Investing

    The S&P 500 is a passive investment, meaning you simply track the performance of the index. While this can be a low-cost and effective strategy, it may not provide the diversification you need. In some cases, actively managing your portfolio by selecting individual stocks or sectors can help you avoid the concentration risks present in the S&P 500.

    Monitoring and Rebalancing

    No matter how diversified your portfolio is, it’s essential to monitor and rebalance it regularly. Over time, certain assets may outperform others, causing your portfolio to become unbalanced. For example, if the tech sector outperforms significantly, your portfolio may become overly concentrated in that area. Regular rebalancing ensures that your asset allocation stays aligned with your long-term financial goals.

    Conclusion

    While the S&P 500 remains one of the most popular and effective investment tools available, it’s important to recognize the concentration risk that comes with it. With 28% of the index concentrated in just 7 companies, your portfolio may not be as diversified as you think. By understanding these risks and considering further diversification, you can build a more balanced and resilient portfolio that better aligns with your financial goals.

  • Should You Work with a Fee-Based Financial Advisor? Here’s What You Need to Know

    Should You Work with a Fee-Based Financial Advisor? Here’s What You Need to Know

    Should You Work with a Fee-Based Financial Advisor? Here’s What You Need to Know

    When it comes to financial planning, finding the right advisor is just as important as making the right investment choices. Many investors today are exploring fee-based financial advisors as an alternative to traditional commission-based advisors. But how do these advisors work, and is it worth paying for their services?  

    Let’s break down what you need to know about fee-based financial advisors, how they differ from commission-based advisors, and why fee-based planning remains less common in Singapore despite its benefits.  

    Why Do People Look for Fee-Based Advisors?

    One of the biggest reasons investors seek out fee-based financial advisors is to eliminate sales pressure. When working with a fee-based advisor, you’re paying for professional guidance—not for buying financial products. This means the advisor’s income isn’t dependent on selling specific investments, insurance, or other financial products.  

    With commission-based advisors, there’s always the potential for conflict of interest, where the advisor’s recommendations might be influenced by which products offer the highest commissions. Fee-based advisors remove this concern by ensuring they are compensated only by the client, aligning their interests directly with the people they serve.  

    How Fee-Based Advisors Charge for Their Services

    Fee-based financial advisors use different pricing structures based on how involved they are in managing your finances. Generally, these are the most common models – 

    Flat Fee for a Financial Plan

    • You pay a one-time fee for a customized financial plan.

    • The advisor provides you with recommendations, but it’s up to you to execute the plan.  

    Ongoing Advisory Fee

    • You pay a recurring fee (typically annually) for the advisor to implement and manage your financial plan.
    • This model includes regular reviews, investment adjustments, and financial check-ins.

    The key takeaway here is that fee-based advisors charge for advice, not transactions. This allows them to focus entirely on what’s best for you, rather than what generates the highest commission. 

    How Are Fee-Based Advisors Different from Traditional Commission-Based Advisors? 

    Most financial advisors in Singapore operate on a commission-based model, which means they earn commissions from the financial products they sell, such as insurance policies and investment-linked products. While many commission-based advisors provide excellent service, their income structure creates inherent conflicts of interest.  

    Challenges with the Commission-Based Model 

    A commission-based advisor must keep selling products to maintain income. Their revenue stream is driven by –

    • Finding new clients to sell products to.  

    • Selling new products to existing clients, even if they may not need them.  

    • Recruiting new advisors to earn an override from their sales (common in multi-tier advisory firms).  

    While there are ethical and competent commission-based advisors, the fee structure itself influences behavior, often leading to – 

    • Selling higher-commission products over lower-cost alternatives.  

    • Encouraging clients to buy additional insurance or investment products even if they don’t need them.  

    • Prioritizing transactions over long-term financial planning.  

    The reality is that the quality of service a client receives under this model is heavily dependent on the individual advisor’s moral compass. Some advisors successfully balance ethics and commissions, but others may prioritize their income over what’s truly in the client’s best interest.  

    How Fee-Based Advisors Solve These Issues

    Unlike commission-based advisors, fee-based advisors earn their income mainly from client fees. This structure provides several key benefits –

    • No pressure to sell specific products – The advisor gets paid the same amount regardless of which recommendations they make.  

    • No bias toward high-commission options – Investments and insurance recommendations are based purely on merit, not commissions.  

    • Greater focus on financial planning – Fee-based advisors prioritize long-term strategy over one-time sales.  

    • Alignment of interests – The advisor’s success depends on delivering high-quality advice, not on selling products.  

    Ultimately, the core difference between fee-based and commission-based advisors is how they are compensated. The former gets paid for guidance, while the latter gets paid for selling financial products.  

    If Fee-Based Advice is Better, Why Isn’t It More Common? 

    Despite its benefits, fee-based financial planning is still relatively rare in Singapore. Why?  

    Consumers Often Prefer “Free” Advice Over Paying Fees

    Many consumers balk at the idea of paying a visible fee for financial advice, even though commission-based advisors still get paid—just in a less obvious way.  

    When working with a commission-based advisor, clients typically don’t realize how much they’re indirectly paying because –

    • Commissions are built into the product’s pricing, so clients don’t see the costs explicitly.  

    • Fees are often hidden in long, complex documents that most clients don’t read.  

    • Some products (e.g., investment-linked insurance) have high embedded fees, making them more expensive over time compared to alternatives.  

    In contrast, a fee-based advisor clearly states their fee upfront, which some clients perceive as an “extra” cost, even though they may end up paying more in hidden commissions with a traditional advisor.  

    The Commission Model is the Industry Norm

    Because most financial advisors in Singapore work on a commission basis, the industry itself promotes this model. Consumers are far more likely to encounter commission-based advisors, making them the default choice simply due to visibility.  

    Moreover, commission-based advisors often work for large firms with strong marketing budgets, while fee-based advisors operate independently and rely more on referrals. This means many investors may never even come across a fee-based advisor unless they actively search for one.  

    Becoming a Fee-based Advisor is Challenging

    For an advisor, transitioning to a fee-based model is difficult. The commission-based system provides –  

    • Immediate income from product sales.  

    • A steady stream of commissions from previously sold policies.  

    • A structured career path where selling more means making more.  

    In contrast, fee-based advisors must –

    • Convince clients to pay for advice instead of getting “free” commission-based planning.  

    • Build a reputation and client base from scratch without relying on product sales.  

    • Constantly prove their value to clients, since they aren’t making money from transactions.  

    It’s a much tougher business model, which is why many advisors choose the easier path and stick to commissions.

    So, Should You Work with a Fee-Based Advisor?  

    If you’re looking for truly unbiased financial advice, a fee-based advisor may be the right choice. They align their interests with yours, focus on your long-term financial well-being, and don’t rely on product sales to earn a living.  

    However, that doesn’t mean all commission-based advisors are bad. Some are highly ethical and prioritize their clients’ best interests despite the structural conflicts. The key is understanding how your advisor gets paid and whether that affects their recommendations.  

    How to Choose the Right Advisor for You

    • If you want unbiased advice and are willing to pay for professional guidance, a fee-based advisor is the better option.  

    • If you prefer not to pay upfront fees and are comfortable navigating potential product bias, a commission-based advisor may still work for you.  

    • If you’re unsure, ask questions about how the advisor is compensated and how they make their recommendations. A good advisor — whether fee-based or commission-based — should be transparent about their fees and willing to put your interests first.  

    At the end of the day, what matters most is finding an advisor you trust—one who prioritizes your financial goals over their own commissions. Understanding these differences helps you make a more informed decision about who you entrust with your wealth planning.  

    By shedding light on how different advisors operate, I hope this article helps you navigate the world of financial planning with greater clarity. If you like an honest second opinion on your current approach, we offer a complimentary initial consultation to offer clarity.

     

  • Worried about high valuations? Here’s how using a low-cost active strategy can help.

    Worried about high valuations? Here’s how using a low-cost active strategy can help.

    Worried about high valuations? Here’s how using a low-cost active strategy can help.

    Lately, there’s been a lot of buzz about the market, especially worries over high valuations. The Magnificent 7 stocks are holding a significant chunk of the market, and many are concerned that if these major players experience a downturn, it could bring more volatility to your portfolio.

    To address this, an approach might be to diversify and rebalance your investments to lower the overall valuation. One way to do this is by exploring an equal-weighted S&P 500 fund instead of the traditional market cap-weighted S&P 500 index. To help you understand the potential benefits, let’s take a closer look at the historical performance of the S&P 500 from 1974 to 2019.

    Exhibit 1 – Summary of Historical Performance, July 1974–December 2019

    Returns

    From July 1974 to December 2019, an equal-weighted index simulation delivered impressive results, outperforming the traditional market with an average annual return of 13.8% compared to 11.8%. While these numbers show a stronger return, it’s important to remember that higher returns aren’t the only thing that matters—keeping risks in check is equally vital.

    Risk Management

    The equal-weighted portfolio is more volatile, with an average annual standard deviation of 19.9% compared to 15.5% for the market-weighted portfolio. This higher volatility occurs because equal-weighted indexes don’t incorporate real-time information about individual companies or the broader market, leading to less effective risk control. 

    For example, if some companies in the portfolio are heading towards bankruptcy, the equal-weighted approach continues to allocate the same weights to both struggling and profitable companies, increasing overall risk.

    Costs

    Equal-weighted strategies require frequent rebalancing, which results in much higher trading activity compared to the traditional market approach—about 32% versus 6% (refer to the  Exhibit 2). This increased trading means higher expenses, and those extra costs can eat into your overall returns.

    There are three key differences between equal-weighted and market-weighted portfolios: equal-weighted portfolios often achieve higher returns, experience greater fluctuations in value, and incur higher trading costs compared to market-weighted portfolios.

    So.. what is the solution?

    We compare our low-cost core strategies with a focus on small-cap, value, and profitability within the same timeframe.

    Returns & Risk Management

    Our core strategy utilizes market prices to adjust the weights of securities, preventing extreme deviations and maintaining a balanced approach to over- and underweighting. From our observations, the core strategy not only delivers higher returns than the traditional market approach but also manages risk more effectively, achieving similar returns to the equal-weighted strategy with lower volatility.

    Exhibit 2 – Average Annual One-Way Turnover by Strategy Weight, July 1974–December 2019

    Costs

    When it comes to costs, both the Equal-weighted and our Core strategy involve more trading activity than the market. However, our Core strategy has a lower turnover rate, which means you’ll incur fewer trading fees overall.

    Recent Observations

    Another timeframe when technology company valuations were soaring spanned from 2000 to 2009, overlapping with both the dot-com bust and the global financial crisis. During this challenging period, we compared our Core strategy against the S&P 500 to assess performance and resilience.

    Exhibit 3 – Performance, Monthly: 01/01/2000 – 31/12/2009

    With $100,000 invested in our core portfolio from 2000 to 2009—it would have grown by 46%, reaching a total of $146,000. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 would have taken a hit, ending the decade with a loss of 9%.

    In short, while passive index investing is certainly valuable, active strategies like ours offer significant benefits by helping investors achieve higher returns for each unit of volatility risk they take on.

  • How to Choose the Right Financial Advisor: 4 Key Questions to Ask

    How to Choose the Right Financial Advisor: 4 Key Questions to Ask

    How to Choose the Right Financial Advisor: 4 Key Questions to Ask

    Choosing a financial advisor is more than just finding someone who knows the numbers. It’s about finding a partner who understands your goals, values, and unique financial journey. Here’s how to determine if an advisor is the right fit for you.

    Philosophy

    “What is your approach to wealth management?”

    An advisor should always align with your goals, whether it’s building wealth, retiring comfortably, or creating a legacy.

    You’ll want to look for a philosophy rooted in transparency, and clear strategies to deliver long-term results.

    Services Offered

    What’s included in your scope of services?”

    Your advisor should offer comprehensive services that cover your financial life—from investment strategies to appropriate planning beyond just selling a product. The services should include –

    1. Wealth Enhancement: Portfolio management, retirement planning, and mortgage advisory.

    2. Wealth Transfer: Estate planning, wills, and advanced medical directives.

    3. Risk Protection: Insurance advisory and asset protection.

    The Process

    How will we work together?”

    The process you’re looking for should be a clear, step-by-step process that ensures transparency and alignment. Look for the following.

    1. Discovery Meeting to understand your goals and important considerations.

    2. Roadmap & Recommendations for a tailored report to achieve your aspirations.

    3. Proper Implementation to set your roadmap in motion with precision

    4. Post-Implementation Reviews that address both investment, and non-investment goals.

    5. Annual Year Check-Ins to ensure alignment of your portfolio with your evolving life.

    Fees

    “What am I paying for, and how is it structured?”

    Understanding the fees involved helps you to see the value of the services provided. The fees are typically broken down into 3 parts, as listed below.

    1. Planning: A one-time fee for a personalised financial roadmap.

    2. Implementation: Covers portfolio creation based on your roadmap.

    3. Ongoing Management: Regular advisory to adjust strategies and ensure long-term success.

  • Case Study: Entry level into suitable asset class allocation for new investors

    Case Study: Entry level into suitable asset class allocation for new investors

    Case Study: Entry level into suitable asset class allocation for new investors

    The case

    “I’m a single 40 year old male with net savings of $65K and no debt or commitments. what sort of allocations would be suitable?”

    My current personal assessment is:

    $15K in cash

    $25K in medium-liquidity assets with a 3 to 6 month lock in

    $15K in low-liquidity assets with a 12 to 18 month lock in

    $10K in equity

    Is this reasonable or way too conservative?

    Recently, we came across a question on Reddit that we feel resonates with many new investors. “Is my allocation too conservative?” is a common concern for new investors.

    The approach

    Start with your goal

    Begin with the end in mind. Ask yourself: What are you investing for? For this example, let’s assume the goal is retirement at 65 with a portfolio that generates $3,000 monthly income. With 25 years to invest, you’d need roughly $1M by 65.

    Determine your need for return

    To reach $1M in 25 years starting with $65K  and a $1,000 monthly contribution, the required return (or need for return) is around 6.3%. This means a portfolio allocation like 70% global equities and 30% bonds is likely needed to hit that target.

    Understand the risk

    A 70/30 portfolio typically has an annualised standard deviation of around 9.83%. This means your portfolio could go up or down by that amount in an average year. Can you emotionally handle periods of decline, potentially as steep as 9% or more, without selling? If not, you may need to adjust your risk tolerance or expectations.

    Investing isn’t just about numbers—it’s about behaviour

    Sticking to a plan, especially during downturns, is critical. Emotional decisions often derail long-term goals. This is why many people turn to advisors, not just for portfolio management but for guidance and discipline throughout the journey.

    Re-assess as life changes.

    This isn’t a one-and-done decision. Over time, as your investments grow or your circumstances change, revisit your portfolio. You may want to reduce risk as you get closer to retirement or adjust based on changes in income or goals.

    By focusing on goals, understanding how much risk feels right for you, and regularly fine-tuning your approach, you can make choices with confidence to reach long-term success.

    Source: Dimensional Fund Advisors Ltd, Dimensional Global Core Equity Index, Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index

  • Nokia’s Transformation: From Mobile Giant to Network Innovator

    Nokia’s Transformation: From Mobile Giant to Network Innovator

    Nokia’s Transformation: From Mobile Giant to Network Innovator

    Many of us remember Nokia as the titan of the mobile phone industry, the brand that defined the early era of cellphones with its nearly indestructible models and memorable ringtones. To many, it seemed Nokia’s reign might have quietly faded into the annals of tech history, overshadowed by the rise of smartphones. However, the truth is far from it. Nokia has not just survived; it has evolved, transforming its core business in a bold move that showcases its adaptability and forward-thinking approach.

    The Transition of Nokia’s Core Business

    Nokia, once synonymous with mobile phones, has undertaken a significant shift in focus under the guidance of CEO Pekka Lundmark. The company has rebranded itself, shedding its 60-year-old logo and mobile phone identity to emerge as a leader in networks and industrial digitalization. This pivot reflects Nokia’s ambition to pioneer the future where networks meet cloud technology, marking a complete strategy overhaul.

    This transition saw Nokia stepping away from phone manufacturing a decade ago to concentrate on telecommunications infrastructure and technology sectors, including pivotal areas like 5G networks, cloud services, and software-defined networking. While Nokia-branded phones continue to exist, thanks to HMD Global, Nokia’s own journey has taken a different path, emphasising its expertise in B2B technology innovations and its extensive portfolio of telecommunications and mobile technology patents.

    Adapting to Market Conditions: Lessons from Nokia

    Nokia’s journey teaches us the critical importance of adapting to market conditions. Recognizing the shift in the industry and consumer needs, Nokia understood that its strength and future lay not in fighting an uphill battle in the smartphone market but in leveraging its vast experience and capabilities in network technology. This strategic pivot, though daring, highlights a vital business principle: it’s never too late to adapt to changing market dynamics.

    Applying Nokia’s Principles to Portfolio Rebalancing

    The story of Nokia’s transformation mirrors the essential practices of successful investment, particularly portfolio rebalancing. Just as Nokia reassessed its core business and shifted its focus to align with future growth areas, investors must regularly evaluate their portfolios and adjust their asset allocations in response to changing market conditions and personal financial goals.

    Portfolio rebalancing is not about conceding defeat; rather, it’s about recognizing when the landscape has changed and adapting your strategy accordingly. It’s about knowing when to hold on, when to let go, and when to diversify into new territories to ensure sustainable growth and stability.

    Nokia’s partnership with Dell Technologies exemplifies its commitment to innovation and adaptability. By collaborating on advancing open network architectures and private 5G use cases, Nokia is not only expanding its footprint in the telecom ecosystem but also setting new standards for how businesses leverage network technology.

    Conclusion

    Nokia’s evolution from a mobile phone behemoth to a network and industrial digitalization pioneer serves as a compelling case study in adaptability, innovation, and strategic foresight. As Nokia continues to redefine itself and lead in its chosen domains, it offers valuable lessons for businesses and investors alike. 

    The key takeaway is clear: success lies not in clinging to past glories but in the ability to anticipate future trends and pivot accordingly. In the dynamic landscape of technology and investment, being adaptable is not just an advantage; it’s a necessity.

  • Case Study: Paying down mortgage vs. investing

    Case Study: Paying down mortgage vs. investing

    Case Study: Paying down mortgage vs. investing

    Embarking on the journey of homeownership often prompts a pivotal question: Should you direct your resources towards paying down your mortgage or invest? In this article, we dissect the crucial factors that guide this decision-making process, shedding light on interest rates, risk tolerance, and time horizon.

    Interest Rates and Returns

    At the heart of the dilemma lies the balance between the interest rate on your mortgage and the potential returns from investments. Understanding this interplay becomes paramount, as it directly influences the allocation of your financial resources.

    Risk Tolerance

    Consideration of your risk tolerance forms the backbone in this decision-making process. Mortgage payments assure a guaranteed return by chipping away at your debt, while investments introduce risks.

    Time Horizon

    Investing often thrives as a long-term strategy, reaping benefits over an extended period, while paying down a mortgage yields immediate advantages. We guide you through the evaluation of your time horizon, urging alignment with your unique financial goals and timeframe.

    Case Study

    Let’s look at a real-world scenario. Imagine you as a homeowner with a S$1 million mortgage, a 25-year loan period, and a 3% per annum interest rate. It would work out to something like this –

    In the initial years, a significant chunk of the fixed monthly payment is allocated to covering interest expenses. However, the percentage of the monthly payment that goes toward interest decreases over time.

    At the end of 25 years, your total cash outlay (incl. interest) is estimated at $1,422,633.94, meaning your total estimated interest paid is $422,633.94.

    What if you were to make an additional $500/month principal repayment?

    By doing so, you would finish paying off your mortgage around 3 years earlier with a total cash outlay of $1,360,445.13 with interest paid at $360,445.13. That means you would have saved $62,188.82 in interest payments.

    Now, let’s look at what happens if you invested the $500/month instead.

    Assuming you get an annualised return of 7%, this is what it will look like –

    If you were to invest, you would have a total portfolio value of $304,937.65 with $174,937.65 in total returns. Your investment returns would be worth more than double compared to your interest savings of $62,188.82.

    And if you were to continue investing $500/month until the end of 25 years, you would have a portfolio value of $407,398.56 with $257,398.56 in total returns.

    As the numbers are laid out, the choice becomes clear. However, remember that the challenge lies not in making the choice but in creating and managing a portfolio capable of delivering an annualised return of 7%.

    Whether you opt for the stability of reducing mortgage debt or the potential growth offered by investments, the key lies in aligning these decisions with your unique financial goals.

  • Are all investments risky?

    Are all investments risky?

    Are all investments risky?

    Navigating risks of asset classes

    Understanding the associated risks is key to making informed decisions. Whether you’re a seasoned investor or just dipping your toes into the financial world, recognising the risk spectrum is crucial. Let’s take a closer look from the safest to the riskiest investments, demystifying the complexities along the way.

    Cash – The Foundation of Security

    The safe haven at the foundation of the risk pyramid lies cash. Holding physical currency or maintaining funds in a bank account provides liquidity and safety. However, the trade-off is low returns, and over time, the value may erode due to inflation.

    Bonds Stepping into Stability (slow and steady)

    Stepping into Stability Moving up, we take a look at bonds, a debt instrument. 

    In short, you are lending money in exchange for “interest”, which is known as the coupon. 

    Government bonds are considered low-risk, providing a fixed interest rate and return of principal at maturity. They offer stability but might have lower returns compared to bonds issued by companies (Low risk, low returns).

    Investment grade bonds are bonds issued by large stable companies, which brings a balance between risk and return. An instrument that investors love if they are looking for stability and passive income.

    Money market instruments is another name for bonds as an alternative for bank deposits.

    They are short-term, highly liquid and high quality debt securities with maturities usually less than one year. 

    Money market instruments are known for their stability and low-risk profile, making it attractive to investors seeking safety and preservation of capital, over fixed deposits. It is a suitable parking tool for money that you do not want to take risk on, such as emergency funds.

    High yield bonds sit on the riskier side, offering higher returns. 

    As the name suggests, high yield bonds are usually issued by an entity with a less ideal financial standing which compensates investors with a higher coupon for taking on the risk.

    REITs Real Estate’s Investment Gem

    Entering the world of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), we find a unique asset class that provides exposure to real estate without the need for direct ownership. 

    REITs focus on owning and managing income producing real estate properties, which offers both passive income and capital appreciation potential to investors primarily from rents collected and price appreciation of the underlying properties owned by the REITs. 

    Investors no longer need millions or commit to hefty mortgage loans to invest in real estate. With REITs, investors can gain access and diversification to a wide range of real estate investment such as residential, retail, office, industrial, healthcare, data centre or even mortgage backed investments to generate passive income and capital growth.

    Stocks/Equities  Riding the Market Waves (high volatility, high returns)

    Now, let’s venture into the realm of stocks/equities. Starting with the least risky of the asset class, we have blue chip, or large-cap stocks. These are shares in large, well-established companies known for their business stability and consistent dividends.

    Moving up in the risk spectrum, there are growth stocks. These belong to companies with potential for substantial expansion, offering capital appreciation but often with increased volatility. Usually associated with sectors like Tech or drugs developing pharmaceutical companies. 

    There are also small-cap stocks, which represent smaller companies with higher growth potential but also heightened risk. These stocks belong to smaller and often newer companies with a relatively small market capitalisation. While they offer the potential for high returns, they come with a considerable risk of volatility. 

    There are also cases where long-standing companies may fall into the small-cap category. This can happen for various reasons –

    Market Conditions

    Economic downturns or industry-specific challenges can impact a company’s stock price and market capitalisation.

    Niche Markets

    Companies operating in niche markets may have smaller overall market capitalisation, even if they’ve been around for a significant period.

    Size of Operations

    Some companies deliberately choose to remain smaller in terms of operations and market capitalisation.

    Investors interested in growth and small-cap stocks for higher returns should conduct thorough research, as these stocks can be volatile and may require a different risk tolerance compared to larger, more established companies. 

    Embracing the Risk-Return Tradeoff 

    In conclusion, shying away from investments due to fear of risk may not be the wisest approach. Each investment class caters to different risk appetites, and understanding their dynamics is the key to successful wealth building. 

    Diversification across various asset classes can help manage risks effectively. 

    Finding Your Comfort Zone

    Ultimately, your investment journey is unique. It’s about aligning your financial goals with investments that match your risk tolerance. As you navigate the markets, each type of asset class reacts to market conditions differently, education and knowledge is your compass, and professional advice can be your guiding star. 

    In the world of investments, risk is inevitable, but so are opportunities. By understanding the landscape, you empower yourself to make choices that resonate with your financial aspirations.”

    Whether you are embarking on the journey on your own or working with an adviser, investing is a must if you want your money to be working for you while you sleep. 

    Here at InvestAble, we believe that there are no single best or worst investments, but it is more about understanding them and using them accordingly to get the ideal investment experience. We hope to educate and work with clients to reach their financial goals by making decisions with research, data and statistics. 

    If we are able to be of assistance, feel free to reach out for a consultation.

    Check out our article – Do I need to work with a financial professional for my own personal investment?

  • Building Wealth in Your 30s, 40s, and Beyond

    Building Wealth in Your 30s, 40s, and Beyond

    Building Wealth in Your 30s, 40s, and Beyond

    The pursuit of financial success is not just a goal—it’s a necessity. In the dynamic world of investments, where every decision can shape your financial future, strategic planning becomes paramount.

    Whether you find yourself in the vibrant years of your 30s, the seasoned expertise of your 40s, or beyond, the journey to building and preserving wealth is both an art and a science.

    Financial Goal Setting: Charting Your Path to Success

    One of the initial steps in building wealth is setting clear and realistic financial goals. As a professional, you likely have various milestones on your horizon, such as homeownership, education expenses, and retirement. Take the time to evaluate your short-term and long-term objectives, considering the timeframes and financial commitments associated with each. This deliberate approach not only provides direction but also allows you to tailor your investment strategy to align with your unique goals.

    Diversification Strategies: Mitigating Risk and Maximising Returns

    Diversification is a cornerstone of successful investing, and it’s particularly relevant for professionals juggling diverse responsibilities. Spread your investments across different asset classes to reduce risk and enhance the potential for returns. While the allure of high-risk, high-reward investments may be tempting, a well-balanced and diversified portfolio is more likely to weather market fluctuations and deliver stable growth over time. Consider a mix of stocks, bonds, and other investment vehicles that align with your risk tolerance and financial objectives. For a more comprehensive article on diversification, please refer to this article

    Retirement Planning Realities: Navigating the Future

    Retirement planning takes on a different hue for professionals in their 30s, 40s, and beyond. Beyond the traditional considerations of lifestyle expectations, healthcare costs become a critical factor. Start by envisioning your desired retirement lifestyle and estimating the associated expenses. Factor in potential healthcare needs, and explore investment strategies that ensure your retirement nest egg is robust enough to support your chosen lifestyle. Remember, the earlier you start planning, the more effectively you can navigate the unique challenges posed by retirement in your professional years.

    Navigating Market Volatility: Staying the Course

    Market volatility is an inevitable part of the investment landscape. For professionals with demanding careers, the ability to navigate market ups and downs is essential. Develop a long-term perspective that allows you to weather short-term fluctuations without succumbing to panic. Resist the temptation to make impulsive decisions based on market noise. Instead, focus on the underlying strength of your investment strategy and the resilience of your diversified portfolio. This mindset ensures that you stay on course, even when the financial seas get rough.

    Remember that building wealth is not a sprint but a marathon. The steps you take today, in your 30s, 40s, or beyond, shape the financial landscape of your future. By setting clear goals, diversifying strategically, planning for retirement realistically, and navigating market volatility with resilience, you are not just managing money; you are crafting a legacy.