skip to content
  1. Home
  2. >
  3. Investment Q&A
You can view 3 more answers this month. Sign up for a free trial for unlimited access.

Investment Q&A

Not investment advice or solicitation to buy/sell securities. Do your own due diligence and/or consult an advisor.

Q: I'm considering various ETFs (mostly from Vanguard) for global exposure and I just wanted to get your thoughts:

Asia/Pacific - VPL or VAH
Europe - VEH or ZWE
EM - VEE or VE
USA - VUN or VIG or VGG
Global - VT, VIGI, VYMI, VXC (would it make sense to buy all of these, or is there too much overlap?)

These would all be held for many years. I don't need the income from dividends, but a decent yield is always nice. Currently wondering about things like hedged vs unhedged, fund size, growth potential. Thanks for the advice.
Read Answer Asked by Brian on July 17, 2017
Q: I am retired living off dividend income. In your income portfolio, Loblaw stands out as it only has a 1.52% yield and a relatively low 5 year DGR. It seem that it was originally included for growth vs. income in 2014, however it had a higher yield then of 2%.
Do you still recommend Loblaw in the income portfolio with only a 1.52% yield? Are you considering switching for a higher yield company?
What other consumer non-cyclical looks attractive at current prices with a higher yield for an income portfolio?
Read Answer Asked by Curtis on July 17, 2017
Q: I purchased ZPW in April 2017 primarily as an income source in a stagnant or rising market. Since that time, the ETF has fallen 5%, and the monthly income has also dropped from $0.105/share to $0.095/share. At the same time, the S&P and DJIA have both risen 5%, so this ETF does not appear to be behaving as I would have expected.

Can you please explain why both the NAV and dividends have dropped for this ETF while markets rise? Is it related to the rise of the CAD vs USD or are there other factors at play here? If something fundamental has changed with this ETF, would you suggest any comparable alternative that would provide reliable income that is not fully taxed as income (e.g. bond ETF's). Thanks.
Read Answer Asked by Alan on July 17, 2017
Q: I am retired living off dividend income. I am building my portfolio based on your income portfolio. However, I am not interested in index or bond funds.
Can you recommend 3-4 income stocks that are looking most attractive at current prices and yielding +4% that are not in the income portfolio to replace the index/bond funds?
Read Answer Asked by Curtis on July 17, 2017
Q: I would like an update on LGO, also your opinion on the developments with Vanadium use in batteries (VRB's, VFB's, VRFB's, Redox) it appears to be much better than lithium batteries. Also it's use as a film for reflecting heat from windows, appears to have many potential uses.
Could you also explain the July 12 press release, doesn't make sense to me.
Read Answer Asked by Doug on July 17, 2017
Q: This company first came on my radar in an issue of Capital Ideas Research. Since then, I've found out that Mark Schmiel (Fidelity Special Situations & Canadian Growth Company) holds approximately 10% of the companies shares in his funds.
What does Acuity do that makes them different? What are their prospects for growth?
Read Answer Asked by Cory on July 17, 2017
Q: hi folks:

I am curious as to your understanding of the passage below
(excerpted from stockhouse BB's)

is there a better than even chance that CRH is yet another company being brought to earth by 'creative' accounting or is everything simply been overblown?

thanks in advance


CRH'S CONFUSING ACCOUNTING? Help needed to understand this.

CRH has a unique acquisition model in that the company tends to purchase portions of businesses (typically 51%, sometimes more), recording 100% of the acquired business revenues and earnings on its consolidated financial statements with adjustments made for specific amounts attributable to shareholders and attributable to non-controlling interests. This acquisition practice, while compliant with GAAP and sound from an accounting standpoint, requires that investors pay more attention to the details within the company's financials to get a complete picture of what is going on.

The company's most recent financial statements show a quarterly net and comprehensive income increase of 9% year over year from $3.03 million in Q1 2016 to $3.3 million in Q1 2017. The breakdown of these earnings is where investors need to pay attention.

In Q1 2016, CRH reported that net income attributable to shareholders was $2.96 million (or 97.7% of total earnings).

In Q1 2017, CRH reported that net income attributable to shareholders was $1.54 million (or only 46.7% of total earnings).

Because of the company's acquisition model, stock-based compensation, and increases in finance-related costs, CRH is now paying out more than half of its earnings to non-controlling interests. This is a trend which has been ongoing for the past year with the shareholders portion of earnings consistently declining over time.

Looking at earnings per share (EPS), we can see that earnings have significantly underperformed expectations ($0.02 EPS attributable to shareholders compared to $0.07 EPS expected.

Consider this note from the most recent financial statements: The company has also stated its intention to acquire or develop additional GI anesthesia businesses. In the future, it may be necessary for the Company to raise additional funds for the continuing development of its business plan, including additional acquisitions.

Insiders selling large amounts of stock of late CRH directors David Johnson and Edward Wright sold a combined $5.71 million of stock at average prices between $7.45 and $11.05 in March, which amounts to nearly 1% of CRHs total float. As I have reported previously, insider selling is generally not an issue in large and very liquid equities with compensation structures reliant on stock options. In growth-related businesses, large stock option redemptions can be commonplace and may largely be ignored by the financial markets for those reasons. That said, any time nearly 1% of a company's stock is sold by insiders, questions undoubtedly come to mind.

Bottom line I am skeptical about CRHs growth strategy from the standpoint of a shareholder. It appears to me that the substantial dilution effect resulting from this growth strategy is one which will not benefit shareholders in the long run. My skepticism also extends to the recent large liquidation of stock by two company directors, making me more uneasy about this company's long-term prospects.

Read Answer Asked by Robert on July 17, 2017
Q: In answer to Febin's question on Friday you said that "The stock reaction (crh) is likely appropriate, though, putting its risk/reward in line: thus we would do nothing here". How did you determine the risk/reward of Crh? What metrics/rational did you apply? I'm currently down 48% on a 1/2 position and appreciate your response. Thankyou.
Read Answer Asked by Brad on July 17, 2017
Looking for more? Sign up for a FREE 14 day trial! No credit card required

We invite you to sign up for a 14 day free trial of 5i Research!
Experience all the benefits and tools we have to offer; stock research, model portfolios, Q&A with our experts, and so much more. Join a community of like-minded investors today!