Five crowdfunding platforms with which they seek funding for your project

The topic of crowdfunding (or collective financing) through online platforms through which anyone can contribute their own funds to a project has been running for the past few years but lately the issue has taken special importance not only for the current situation, in which for certain projects can come better than ever as crowdfunding support, but for some specific cases in which it has raised exaggerated amounts of money and have made ​​headlines everywhere.
I'm thinking now in the case of Double Fine , the game studio owned by Tim Schafer (one of the creators of 'The Secret of Monkey Island' , in case you helps the data) that in February this year Kickstarter opened a campaign with the goal of getting $ 400,000 to develop a new graphic adventure and eventually reached $ 3,336,371 thanks to the contributions of 87,142 people. A truly absurd figure.
It is because of cases like Double Fine when this route of financing charges a much larger role and anyone who has a project in mind you will be going through your head the possibility of doing things differently. As there are many crowdfunding platforms available to us I think are worth knowing at least the most powerful and interesting (two of them are American and three Spanish) to know where to direct us depending on the type of project you have in hand. Some do not delimit by type, others do.
Normally they all have a number of common features: one that starts a campaign puts an economic objective to be achieved in a time limit (usually around the month, month and a half) and a series of rewards for those who choose to contribute some amount. The greater the input, the reward juicier. On the other hand it is essential to know that the amount you choose to provide will only become effective if the campaign reaches the target set within the stipulated time.

Kickstarter

Kickstarter is a crowdfunding platform fashion. Of U.S. origin and born in 2008, has thousands of active campaigns of all types and a very large user community that make it the most interesting.
The bad news for those who live outside the United States is that in principle allows only based projects in that country (requires a bank account to receive funds there as well). What we can do is support existing campaigns, but I have to emphasize that only supports a payment method: Amazon Payments. Kickstarter keeps 5% of the target quantity in a campaign as long as it is reached. Otherwise there is no charge.
Official Site | Kickstarter

Verkami

Verkami was one of the first crowdfunding platform created in Spain. His proposal, as opposed to Kickstarter, is aimed solely at those independent creators who want to finance their projects through this channel. The created a father and his two sons in 2010 and during this short period of time have made some renown.
Make it clear that the creators of the works that are generated through the capital raised through rights Verkami keep them (CDs, books, etc..).
Verkami charges 5% of each project only if they get funding.
Official Site | Verkami

Drip

Drip is a crowdfunding platform and distributed collaboration (services, infrastructure, microtasks) for projects that promote the commons, open source and / or free knowledge. The code of the platform, as have those responsible, will be opened when it is structured properly tested. They have no place here, therefore, for-profit projects or fundraising for charity, for example.
If funding is achieved, the commission is 8%.
Official Site | Drip

Indiegogo

The Indiegogo operation is almost similar to Kickstarter, but has a remarkable difference. While all of these platforms are carried by their leaders rule 5% of the total amount achieved by a campaign funded in Indiegogo Two types of funding. In the Flexible Funding they take 4% if the target is achieved and 9% if not achieved, but the campaign creator gets the amount he had managed to run out the time limit for the campaign. This forces seeking funding to set reasonable prices and promote the campaign well.
Then there is the Fixed Funding, where Indiegoo takes 4% if the target is achieved and nothing if not achieved, but the creator also earn a single dollar. This is the system that is used more commonly in other platforms, although it is true that Indiegogo takes the lowest percentage (4% vs. 5% standard).
Official Site | Indiegogo

Lánzanos

In the above platforms we have seen the maximum time for each project is determined by the service itself and is usually around 30 to 40 days. In Lánzanos is the creator of the campaign which sets the time it expects to raise the targeted amount of funding. And there is no maximum, but once started the campaign and can not be modified.
Lánzanos makers take 5% of each successfully funded, a figure that is reduced to 1% if it is a charity project. Payments can be made via PayPal or by using the payment gateway of La Caixa.
Official Site | Lánzanos
As said earlier, the network can find many crowdfunding platforms, but these five are the most powerful, if not more. I hope you will be helpful.

Waiting for the big-market bond rotation

The OECD issued its latest revision on global economic growth prospects, in the first of his two appointments or annual reviews. The overall impression is of slow growth and downward adjustments in earlier projections.

In USA GDP will expand even more slowly, at rates of 1.9% this year and 2.8% in 2014.

In Europe much more pessimistic, expecting a contraction of 0.36% of GDP this year and moderate growth of 1.1% in 2014. The main problem remains the debt.

For Asia disparate and curious vision, the two largest economies China and Japan grow although downgrades the first, to 7.8% and the second upward to 1.6%. Curious because if China grows below 7.8% will be a warning sign of weakness and would alert the government while if Japan grows by 1.6% all happy ... not the Nikkei has left a 5.15% on the session.

U.S. bond markets nervous, considering that the expected growth without being robust, it could be enough to affect the asset purchase program by the Fed.

Furthermore bonds approaching resistance area (in profitability or price support, as you look) interesting from a technical perspective, the 10 years in 2.4%, which if exceeded invite managers to modify some strategies.

The technical aspect of fixed income USA invites caution for months, as I come through the graphic exposing long stretch following:

Bonds "high Yied" are also suffering falling sales and prices in line with the sovereign. You can read at this link an interesting article about the risks of rising rates, derived from the tendency to convexity hedging.

A reference to the debt market USA is the ETF (AGG) designed to track the performance of all U.S. debt, Total U.S. Bond Market ETF (37% Treasuries, 28% MBS and the rest in corporate and agencies) capitalization of $ 15,600 million is also falling in price and this will be five weeks straight and falling sales.

Generally, when the bonds fall weak moves financial markets assembly and intermediate trends ruptures tend to bring major changes in the outlook and portfolio adjustment, feeding additional losses in assets.

This time, before such change in the mindset presumed investor and as turbulent markets, handled all markets fall? Unison or there will be a mass migration of Fixed Income Funds Equity?.

Uncertainty about the Great Rotation is debated and concern among fund managers and selectors will depend largely on market confidence about staying "apuntaladora" Bernanke and real economic opportunities.

In view of the behavior of the Fed, it could be argued that the Great Rotation want to further enhance asset reflation and get the expected wealth effect that can finally bring down the pernicious tendency of the money multiplier.

Specific corrections in stock prices are necessary and "healthy" for the strength of trends, there should be an adjustment at any time, perhaps coinciding with breaks bearish on bonds.

After an eventual correction will attract capital bags different sources, one of them raised liquidity proceed with the settings fixed income portfolio and if the helicopter flies over satin, as the FED-BAG correlation is 85%.

True, stock valuations discounted cash flow worsen with rising interest rates and subtract bag. However, the bag can also grow through multiples expansion as we tested several times.

The music continues to play and as said the CEO of City before the debacle, must keep on dancing ... but unlike Mr. Charles Prince also closely monitoring the situation to avoid being caught in an artificial rise will end in tears, as the rest.

Equities vs. fixed income

We want to invest but do not know where to start. We heard that a neighbor buys shares, another has-bills ... but it sounds like Chinese. The most common among the ordinary people, not familiar with the investment world is to know the stock exchange. Equities bag not associated with on many occasions.

If we go a step further, on the other side of the sidewalk, no bonds. Four out of five people questioned in the street has never heard of the bonds, but the bonds of state and treasury bills.

There is a lack of knowledge of concepts and the association has to be clear that equity = stock exchange = buy / sell shares on an exchange.

And fixed income = letters / bonds / debentures, although in this case it is not so easy to explain as above.

I am often asked which is better, if the fixed or variable?, is an open question as it is not a duel to be the best way to invest, but every one of the options requires a plan or strategy determined and made ​​to measure.

By email I have received a comment on why equities RECOMMEND even. I have to say that I've never done, just position myself where best suits me and I adapt to the rules of the game on the fly. Who else who ever invested less in stock, if not he will have done so indirectly through your bank in a structured deposit or a mutual fund. Of all the people who have bought shares being aware of what they did, probably 8 out of 10 will have lost money, have won something and that ten will be made ​​in August. It's pure statistics. To earn a few most be missed.

The bag is fascinating. But never an individual investor may invest to a "higher level" because just as fascinating is equally manipulable. If I want to buy shares of Google I can do with a few mouse clicks. I can think that the company is "on fire" and that will go far. But managers may hedge funds, pension funds and large investment funds do not think the same and withdraw their positions. In that case the action begin letting down caught out if I have not heard before, either by choice or by the use of a stop loss (stop loss).

The strategy followed by these three groups of investors is quite simple in concept. They come in solid companies with good growth and the mere fact of having a reputation draws lots of people, and I do not mean people like you and me (also), but managers and smaller funds and large investors capital private. When the action is "hot" is said, the great go through the back door, by stealth, reaping the benefits and leaving others with an action that is devalued by simply taking away a part of its value . This happens every day, and is to blame for that 8 out of 10 of us lose money in stock market.

If you look at a recent case we can see if Apple / Google. The first was the world's most powerful company, shares more than 700 usd and bank account filled to the brim, to say nothing of the benefits you get. Until one day a great manager decides he has had enough and leaves, of course others are wary and follow him. There is no reason. Humans are like dogs when you shoot with a stick.

Source | Yahoo! Finance

So where has the money gone? Much of it directly to Google. In six months is up 40% to more than 900 usd per share, your business is going well or very well, but Apple is stronger and gets more benefits. And the box (cash money) is several times larger than that of the search engine block. But the funds are positioned in the search, making skyrocket while Apple already looks like 700 usd far and passes through a discrete (to be what it is) 400 usd.

Source | Yahoo! Finance

Until some lit, some other privileged information worldwide leading company, decides to abandon positions. The action will begin to lose because it is what makes the law of supply and demand. If a site is removed as there are less.

With fixed income this can not happen in this measure. Market does not work like this. As much as the bond is not fixed for the purpose of this type of investment is not the same. In this market, commonly, it comes knowing what is going to win, and although we can speculate without any problem, large funds do not use this method. In this market, which we are most knowing the outcome. Knowing that the current uncertainty is no reason for you to lose money, and if all goes well I will recover the initial capital plus interest at maturity.

Clearly positioning myself for fixed income, but that does not mean they do not use the equity (if I use it) but I move into what best suits my investment method.

I see it like a business. Imagine you are the manager of a company and you have two possible scenarios for the end of year results. Think of your choice dependent jobs. On one side of the table is the aggressive option (the reference to equities), this option is as follows: if the thing goes well the company will earn a 25% in this fiscal year. If something goes wrong the company will lose 15% and you have to make a cut of 30% of the workforce.

Across the table is the most relaxed (relating to bonds), in that you will not lose in that year but the benefits will not 8%.

Which do you prefer?

Sure you reflect on this example you have decided that the bond is better. No, not better. It's different. It is used for different things. It depends on your plan and your ambition. Not the same winning by 8% to 25%, but it is the same to win by 8% to lose 15%.

Quite some time I am in favor of adding 8 at 8, and not from adding 25 +10 -15 -8. I hope you understand. I am more than convinced that long-term earning just over fixed income than equities.

Just to give an example, a well-known blog (I will not say the name), which have a public investment portfolio. Since 2008, have achieved 16% revalue. A 16% cumulative, then dividing by the years from the start date is plus or minus 3%.

  In fixed income, and without being a "master business" minimum multiply that number by two.

This is not to say it's easy and those who invest in equities fools. Not at all. Only that each tool is used to a certain way of working.

Bank deposit. You know how it works?

When hiring a bank deposit must look at several things and although it seems to be the easiest investment there, it is not the end of the post and I will tell you that if it is, we have to fix on the characteristics of product we hired, mostly to give us for a ride and at the end we get on a good scare and anger.

Before everything. A bank deposit, fixed term or fixed-term deposit is the same. You will leave some money to the bank to do its thing and he in return gives you a interest as compensation. It has a fixed duration and fixed remuneration contract is fixed, ie before entering already know what you're going to win. They are also guaranteed by the state (FGD) 100,000 per entity and person in case of bank failure.

This strong interest is mainly governed by the Euribor (interest rate to lend money to, including, entities) but with the whole issue of the crisis the illiquidity of banks have had to forget the taxes low interest rates by the European Central Bank (ECB) and make aggressive campaigns to individual customers a higher interest rate.

While official interest rates are at 1% banks are paying them to liabilities with 4.6% APR and without any connection from the client.

We will explain in more understandable words what the previous sentence. THE European Central Bank fixed in 1% the interest rate at which it lends money to banks, that is, that when you decide to open a window of liquidity to banks in need come to him to refinance because only charged 1% APR, which is very little.

But as always there are windows of liquidity banks must ingéniaselas to get more money and this is where the competition starts to get money from ordinary citizens.

Clearly, there are many people who prefer not to earn a little extra to have to change banks but there are many people and with real money if you are willing to move to earn more.

Therefore, the most interest is willing to offer, in theory, is the one with more numbers to get more funding. (Although other factors influence how the country of origin of the entity, rating rating and even if you drop close to home or if you are good at managing the Internet).

Once we are clear because there are going to explain bank deposits which typically offer entities and that we'll be looking.

There are several types of deposits but of course we say that we are interested only pure and hard deposits without additional links, no credit, no insurance, or payroll or anything.

Being a low-risk investment, and suitable for every investor profiles, we can see that the investment triangle occupy a very relaxed site to be a liquid investment, low risk and therefore unprofitable.

Investing in this way we will not get rich but how low we will not lose money, and I say now lose because if you go to a lot of companies and they offer a lower interest rate to 3% and enter missing. So clear.

If you want a band inflation eats it otherwise you better grab your money and spend it how you will at least give pleasure.

We also have to look at whether the associated account where interest is exempt receive commissions or we will charge between 6 and 20 euros per year. Thing that still remains for the low profitability that we provide.

Now we are chastened and they do but you have to be careful that we do not give any kind of product then selling costs or recover the money, you can leereste article preferred to go deeper on the subject.

Remember that the bank is to serve. 's not your friend , and if not keep his promises or not treating you how you deserve there are dozens of them scattered throughout the geography.

As a final conclusion and summary say that everyone who has "some" money should try to get some performance to keep purchasing power and try to at least get something "extra". Do not be charging for anything and remember that it is you who is indebted to the bank money and not leaving you giving interests.

Finally, always read the fine print to take no surprises.

Indeed, investment is simpler than having no money at home. In contrast is the least profitable of all but ultimately is an investment at 0% APR.

I hope this clarification have no hesitation in going to the bank to make "some investment" and if you do not hesitate to contact me.

The role of hedge funds: inequality and financial instability

Hedge funds known as hedge funds or hedge funds, are a type of mutual funds that are not only subject to regulation, and that because of it have played a crucial role in virtually every financial crisis since the nineties . Due to its relative complexity are completely unknown to most people. A population that is, paradoxically, the main affected by the performance of these financial institutions. To prevent that remains so in this article I will try to shed enough light, of course following the usual teaching style, in the murky world of hedge funds.

The performance of mutual funds is collecting money from many sources (individuals, corporate savings or other funds) and investment thereof in any financial product (shares, for example). After a time, when there has been a benefit and money has appreciated, the fund returns to owners past the nominal (money) plus interest, keeping the bank with an important commission.
Origin
The first recognized hedge fund was established in 1949 in the U.S., but its most important expansion took place from the second half of the nineties. Hedge funds differ from other mutual funds precisely in their aggressiveness and risk exposure. On the one hand have no regulatory limitations of any kind, and on the other hand tend to maintain very high leverage positions (operations with borrowed funds, such loans). This means that any fund can perform operations with no money but with so much borrowed money as you want. In case of profit profitability is much higher, but in case of loss the problem is also serious and very contagious (defaults follow each other).
Hedge funds are also managed by professionals who largely turn their profits as investment in the same hedge funds, more intense commitment to the future of the fund. As a result of all these features hedge funds usually yield high levels of profitability.
How and where is made ​​a hedge fund
Hedge funds are managed by professionals and have very high entry barriers for investors, in many cases reaching the million dollars, but in any case depends on the specific regulation of the territory in which it is constituted. These barriers to entry are very high also precisely because of the high risk associated with financial transactions undertaken by hedge funds. Regulators seek to protect small investors and believe the best way is by raising the barriers, while more liberal from orbit is considered to be lower these barriers to involve the largest population possible benefit of hedge funds.
Hedge funds therefore have a minimum of stakeholders: investors, managers and companies that offer services. As investors are currently most other mutual funds (including other hedge funds), transnational corporations and millionaires course.
 

Also, the location is usually territory other than the territory of management. Indeed, 60% of hedge funds in 2010 were located in tax havens (in fact 37% of all hedge funds are in the Cayman Islands and 27% in Delaware, ie United States). The constitution in a tax return also increases because it reduces transaction costs (interest, records, etc..). In terms of managing 80% is on American soil (ie 41% is in New York), and most of the rest is in London. Hedge funds have Anglo flavor.
But banks also have flavor. Because the managers of these funds are logically banks, plus they are also those who offer specialized services to hedge funds. And as all this is a business statistics increasingly concentrated, precisely because of the crisis.
 

In short, like any mutual fund, the purpose of a hedge fund is to highlight the money deposited by investors, and for that we go to all financial markets (stocks, corporate bonds, government bonds, futures, etc..) Seeking returns. The aim is to speculate, and that almost anything goes.
Hedge Fund Strategies
The strategies used by hedge funds can vary between each other, but all seek to "exploit" the opportunities of making profits in the financial markets. And all are, in a sense, gambling. They are usually complex strategies, but sometimes can be as simple as a bet that interest rates of private bonds and government bonds are converging [1]. The usual way of hedge funds bet is to alternate short positions with long positions.
Taking a short position (short) means that the bet is "to think that the price will go down." For example, a hedge fund may sell their shares today and buy tomorrow when they have fallen. As today sells more expensive than you buy tomorrow's benefit. A naked short position (naked short) is the same but in case you are selling something that does not have [2]. For example, we sell at today's prices to deliver after tomorrow and hope that tomorrow is worth much less. Bought and delivered tomorrow after tomorrow, making the profit.
A long position is betting that "the price will go up", which is what we are accustomed. If you combine both positions in different markets can increase profits. For example, the sale we did in the short position will receive money that we invest as a long position. Money Never Sleeps.
History: hedge funds, crises and speculation
The most famous case of a hedge fund is that of Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM), managed by a team of professionals that included two Nobel laureates in economics, and its investors had even central banks. The net returns were from 42.8% in 1995, from 40.8% in 1996 and 17'1% in 1997, and the leverage was 30-1 (Vilariño, 2000). In 1998 the risky and complex hedge fund operations clashed with the Russian debt default and the losses were very severe. Finally the action of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, who pressed a set of large investors to save the bank, prevented greater evils.
But other cases are also spectacular and also reflect the sign of the times. The first thing worth pointing is that of George Soros, who used his hedge fund to speculate against sterling. First George Soros borrowed 15,000 million pounds, and stealthily changed dollars. The purpose of short-Soros was betting with pounds, ie bet that lose value. When he was all prepared and wanted to attack it managed to make it very sounded: summoned the media and announced that he was convinced that the pound would fall. Then sold off their pounds borrowed and sent the signal to the market and the pound fell really (indeed, the sell-off, coupled with the fear of the other holders of pounds, has laid). The British government responded with all its weapons of monetary policy, but after spending more than 50,000 million dollars had to surrender: speculators had expired. With the pound on the floor Soros bought 15,000 million pounds (now worth fewer dollars) and the back (it was a loan). The gains were huge, and teaching more: a speculator, one, could sink an entire country [3].
The Asian crisis of the nineties gives many more examples of this, and the recent debt crisis even more. It teaches us that a few speculators, counted on the fingers but managing huge amounts of money, can bring down countries and set economic policies themselves.
Profitability and current developments
For all, hedge funds receive higher returns in scrambled scenes, as there is nothing worse for a mutual fund that the non-existence of space to speculate. However, widespread uncertainty scenarios or collective crisis can also be its own grave. Also, as I said before, the spread can be huge losses due to the leverage situation. Therefore, depending on which sectors and financial markets suffer losses suffer much hedge funds.
And the crisis was primed with hedge funds in 2008, as many of them had participated in toxic financial assets or had investments in mutual funds that had done so. The case of the investment bank Bear Stearns is representative, since in 2008 he had to respond to losses in two hedge funds managed (offshore) and that made him finally sinking. It was sold at a bargain price to JP Morgan [4].
But bailouts hedge funds could breathe easy again. And again they make profits and continue their speculative activity. Just look at the chart I made with TheCityUK data.
 

The hedge fund business is back up, and that's precisely what the data show not only profitability but also the data of assets managed by it. Without reach even 2007 levels, pre-crisis levels, the hedge fund space have recovered rapidly.
 

And ultimately it seems that the entire financial system returns to normal gradually. Even the leverage is regaining 2007 levels. But that's the "normalcy" that led to the crisis, because although we can guess that the hedge funds are responsible for the crisis itself that it had an important role in the expansion of the bubbles and contagion from further damage. And is that as a society we do not learn.
 

 

Conclusions
But you back to this "normality" was expected. In economics there is a concept of "moral hazard" that has to do with the incentives that exist in the market and the beliefs of the agents. Today all financial actors (investors and managers especially) know the United saved from burning to entities that are in trouble and that endanger the system (and given the amount of money that move the hedge funds and banks could say that are nearly all), so this risk no actual loss. To put it another way: they know that the bill is paid by workers with adjustment plans and other measures, so they do not care not to repeat the same activities that have made them richer and richer before and after the crisis.
We can not forget that the phenomenon of hedge funds and promote financial instability and distort the market (because liberals tell me what benefits to society of naked short operations), increase inequality in several ways. On the one hand because as industry financial elites that manage these funds promote an institutional configuration such that brings in the States tax competition and prevents them from effectively control tax evasion. Following public finances are distorted and end the welfare state ends up being paid by the middle and lower classes, being the high payments outside the system. On the other hand because logically are the upper classes who benefit most from the business of collective investment funds (pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, etc..) And therefore grows exponentially the difference between those less by entering your salary and who increasingly enter their financial activities.
The fact is that we are headed to another huge financial crisis. And if not, at the same time

The 12 principles of value investing (Part 2)

As I mentioned last week the principles are based on ideas large investment managers such as Peter Lynch, Warren Buffett, Mario Gabelli, Charlie Munger, John Templeton, John Neff, Jim Rogers, Christopher H. Browne, Friedrich A. Von Hayek, Walter Schloss, Benjamin Graham and Francisco Garcia Paramés himself. These principles are contained in a book edited by Bestinver funds and summarized weekly by people.
Here we go with the following six principles:
7) Having a bad short-term behavior is inevitable: John Neff (1931) once said that "it is not always easy to invest in what is popular, but it is the way to get outstanding returns." Thus, less popular investments can generate short-term returns ill to stand in longer periods of tiempo.Por Therefore, choosing an investment manager for their results in the short term (less than 3 years) may lead to making the wrong decision, as the short-term outcome is not a good indicator of successful long. A study of Brandes on global equity funds reveals that, while the 7 best fund managers significantly beat the market over a period of 10 years, all had a worse performance than the benchmark for short periods of time.
8) It's not worth guided by economic forecasts: The co-founder of Quantum Fund Jim Rogers (1942) stated that "to be successful investing is necessary to go soon, when things are cheap, when there is panic, when everyone is demoralized ". Investors tend to follow the macroeconomic forecasts when investing, but the correlation between the stock market and the economy is much weaker than it may seem. So it's much more productive to devote every effort to the analysis of companies. It is also important to remember that economic forecasting is a very complicated task where mistakes outnumber the successes. The predictions of the analysts on the quarterly results of companies, according to a study by David Dreman, was erroneous in 75% of the time up to 10% on the quarterly results. Therefore not worth spending time and energy to the analysis of short-term variables totally uncontrollable as GDP, interest rates, the level of stock market indices or the company's quarterly results.
9) Do not invest in companies never overrated: One of the worst decisions of long-term investment is to buy shares overvalued because euphoria fashion sector or stock, as happened with Japan in the 90s, in which the country experienced the greatest speculative bubble twentieth century, when the real estate value was multiplied by 75 and the value of the stock by 100. The most dramatic case is that of the Nasdaq market that slumped 80% in less than three years, dragging millions of investors lose 99% of your investment. Many of these investors will take decades to recover your investment or just not ever recover. The most recent overvaluation has been in China's stock market, the index traded as at 40 times profit.
10) Do not let emotions guide your investment decisions: Benjamin Graham (1894-1976), economist and investor and pioneer of value investing, once said that "getting good returns is easier than people think. Get outstanding performance is much harder than people imagine. " And all because among the greatest challenges of a power inverter is staying true to its investment philosophy, never letting emotions dictate your decisions. And they usually do at the worst time, ignoring the famous board Buffet: "Be fearful when others are greedy and become greedy when everyone is afraid." In this sense, the statistics are revealing: in the last 20 years, the average profit of American funds in the stock market and 11.6%, however, the average profit Inverter U.S. equity funds is as only 4.5%. One of the most paradoxical is the famous Magellan Fund Peter Lynch, whose investors earned on average 5% annualized when performance that had the fund over 14 years was 29 % per year.
The causes of "self-destructive behavior" of the investor are many: to be guided by fear or ambition, invest in the fashion or not stay true to his philosophy. But above all highlights the general trend is the investor to try to predict the short term movement of the stock.
11) Do not try to predict the movement of the stock in the short term: According to the legendary American investor Walter Schloss (1916), "shyness generated by past failures causes most investors lost major bull markets." As described by Peter Lynch in his book "One Up on Wall Street", in late 1972, when the stock was about to suffer one of the worst crashes in history, optimism was at its highest point (85% of advisors were bullish as reported by Investor's Intelligence). At the beginning of the market rebound in 1974, 65% of advisors feared that the worst was yet to come. Again, before the fall of the stock market in 1977, 90% of advisors were bullish. At the start of big climb which took the market in 1982, more than half of the advisers predicted downs and just before the crash of 1987, 80% thought that the market would continue to rise. Lynch perfectly illustrates how difficult it is to predict the movement of stock markets.
Although long-term performance of any stock market approaches a constant 10%, yields on short-term stock market are asymmetric. A common tendency is to give investors their investment plan out of the market in the hope of re-entry when the environment is more favorable.
12) Patience is the main virtue of the successful investor: And, according to Francisco Garcia Paramés, investment director Bestinver AM, "the most fascinating of value investing is that time always works in your favor." Active Stocks are ideal for long-term get rich. Xigen But quality and less common among investors: patience. To achieve satisfactory performance in the stock market you need to have enough stamina to stay invested, sometimes even uncomfortable. Keep in mind that the U.S. stock market has provided positive returns to 5 years in 97% of cases. The market rewards the patient investor who stays true to their investment strategy, said in Bestinver. The Value Investing depends more on common sense, daily work and patience that individual sources of information or the prediction of future events. Its correct application minimizes the possibility of permanent losses in the portfolio and has produced positive results in the long run, beating the average market returns.
And this concludes the summary of the principles of value investing. This Saturday we are in 7th Rankia meeting where I am available to you all.
A greeting.