US Treasury Bills - where can we buy in Canada | Page 3 | GIC discussions | Discussion forum

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
US Treasury Bills - where can we buy in Canada
April 10, 2024
5:35 am
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

zgic said

That is a very good example Norman1.
So my question to mordko is: If we assume a steady ISA or GIC rate of 5% for 1 or 2 years. Why would you buy SCHP and ZAG and not ISA or GIC.
Does ZAG and SCHP (considering everything - commissions, fees, trading etc) have better returns because of tax gains than 5% ?(are there more capital gains there?)
I am just trying to understand the net gains and not question your other asset allocation considerations or other requirements you might have. Thank you.
I will put Liquidity of ISA as a top consideration.  

I use ZAG and SCHP in registered accounts. I wouldn’t use GICs in registered accounts because they lack liquidity and are a pain. I want FI to be sellable if needed for rebalancing. My lower tax bracket spouse has some non-reg GICs. ISAs are for big bank brokerage accounts which we don’t tend to use if we can avoid them. SCHP is TIPS, it is not directly comparable to ISAs. I started using SCHP around Covid time as I got scared that money supply could trigger inflation. SCHP is showing 20% total gain, uniquely for FI over that period, but some of it is due to CAD falling.

In taxable accounts I have HBB and ZST. I also use Preferred Shares, which is a mixed asset class paying lots of eligible dividends (but requires caution). HBB is particularly tax efficient and I am comfortable with how it is structured. Worth a little extra risk in a taxable account. And, of course, cash moving around in promo accounts. Everyone needs some.

April 10, 2024
5:50 am
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2990
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

zgic said

That is a very good example Norman1.
So my question to mordko is: If we assume a steady ISA or GIC rate of 5% for 1 or 2 years. Why would you buy SCHP and ZAG and not ISA or GIC.
Does ZAG and SCHP (considering everything - commissions, fees, trading etc) have better returns because of tax gains than 5% ?(are there more capital gains there?)
I am just trying to understand the net gains and not question your other asset allocation considerations or other requirements you might have. Thank you.
I will put Liquidity of ISA as a top consideration.  

If you need liquidity in a year or 2, keep in mind any bond ETF can trade above or below you purchase price. The entire ETF portfolio is marked to market daily (hence the NAV). Look at the chart (e.g. ZAG). Also most bond ETF's return is worse than the index it is tracking (the annual fee being the main reason.) The "active portfolio management" is not as value added as one think. Having said that, an individual's only venue to invest as close to the index return as possible is via a ETF, that justify the existence of the fund manager and the ETF, not cuz they net create extra return..

April 10, 2024
6:03 am
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

am just trying to understand the net gains and not question your other asset allocation considerations or other requirements you might have. Thank you.

To me, its ALWAYS about asset allocation. Everything I have makes up a portfolio and is managed as such. I expect net losses in real terms on some of the assets. Thats OK. As long as the portfolio keeps churning out multi-year 8% money weighted rate of return and I can stomach volatility, I am happy.

But you are right to focus on taxes; far more important in a taxable account than the 9bp MER.

April 10, 2024
12:38 pm
Lodown
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 249
Member Since:
January 10, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Norman1 said
One can have low risk capital gains by buying low-coupon bonds like this one from BMO InvestorLine:

GOVT OF CDA 0.25% 01MAR26
Price: 93.644
Yield to maturity: 3.804%

 6.356 Capital gains at maturity
 0.222 Interest: 2024-Apr-11 - 2025-Mar-01 (324 days)
 0.250 Interest: 2025-Mar-01 - 2026-Mar-01
 6.828 Total gain

Challenge is that it is really not much better after taxes than a 5.05% two-year term deposit from Hubert which would produce 10.100 of interest over the two years.

Really only compelling to those who have net capital losses to apply against the capital gains.  

I thought some might wonder what their particular case may be, so here it is. Certainly not compelling unless, as Norman1 notes, for using up your net capital losses.Bond-vs-GIC-vs-Marg-Tax-Rates-1.png

April 10, 2024
12:58 pm
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2990
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Good table. Unless one trade 7 figure bond position, the incremental gain is just a rounding error. Spend the time and effort on the big picture is far important and where the focus should be.

April 10, 2024
1:18 pm
zgic
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 150
Member Since:
August 30, 2023
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Can we come to a conclusion here:
GICs are better than Bonds with less stress.

April 10, 2024
3:18 pm
zgic
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 150
Member Since:
August 30, 2023
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

savemoresaveoften said

If you need liquidity in a year or 2, keep in mind any bond ETF can trade above or below you purchase price. The entire ETF portfolio is marked to market daily (hence the NAV). Look at the chart (e.g. ZAG). Also most bond ETF's return is worse than the index it is tracking (the annual fee being the main reason.) The "active portfolio management" is not as value added as one think. Having said that, an individual's only venue to invest as close to the index return as possible is via a ETF, that justify the existence of the fund manager and the ETF, not cuz they net create extra return..  

Thank you savemoresaveoften. I will have to learn the inner workings of a Bond ETF. I invest in Stock Index ETFs.
I looked at the chart of ZAG over a 5 year period on yahoo and it is -15.04%. Am I looking at it correctly, what am I missing here.
All time chart shows -11.84% on yahoo is this correct?
wow

April 10, 2024
10:06 pm
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 7171
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

zgic said
Can we come to a conclusion here:
GICs are better than Bonds with less stress.

That depends on each individual bond and on the bond buyer's tax situation.

There aren't that many interesting opporunities with AAA-rated Government of Canada bonds in normal times. But, there are more opportunities of interest should one be willing to participate further down the bond rating scales, around the BBB- and BB+ region, the boundary between investment grade bonds and junk bonds.

April 10, 2024
10:25 pm
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

zgic said

Thank you savemoresaveoften. I will have to learn the inner workings of a Bond ETF. I invest in Stock Index ETFs.
I looked at the chart of ZAG over a 5 year period on yahoo and it is -15.04%. Am I looking at it correctly, what am I missing here.
All time chart shows -11.84% on yahoo is this correct?
wow  

I don’t know what you are looking at but total return over 5 years is -0.04%. It’s positive if you take a longer period of time. You might be ignoring the interest. Bonds have been struggling lately.

If you could sell your GIC from 3 years ago, you would have incurred a loss. The fact you have an illiquid product masks this loss and (perhaps) makes you feel better. In fact, liquidity is an advantage even if it hurts feelings. Bonds can be sold, if you look at the price of one bought a few years ago, you’d see the same thing as ZAG showed.

This should not be a surprise. Fixed income products suffer during periods of unexpected inflation. Thats why one needs a portfolio with different asset classes. A good portfolio mitigates volatility of individual assets. You would struggle to find a negative 5-year period for a balanced portfolio.

If all you learn from this discussion is that “bonds are worse than GICs”, or that “one needs to buy junk bonds” then it will hurt your financial future in the long term. You need to read a couple of good books, eg Bernstein’s “investing for adults” series.

Apart from understanding asset classes, you need to set a clear objective for fixed income elements within your portfolio. That will help you pick the right investment vehicle.

April 11, 2024
12:17 am
zgic
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 150
Member Since:
August 30, 2023
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

mordko said

I don’t know what you are looking at but total return over 5 years is -0.04%. It’s positive if you take a longer period of time. You might be ignoring the interest. Bonds have been struggling lately.

If all you learn from this discussion is that “bonds are worse than GICs”, or that “one needs to buy junk bonds” then it will hurt your financial future in the long term. You need to read a couple of good books, eg Bernstein’s “investing for adults” series.

Apart from understanding asset classes, you need to set a clear objective for fixed income elements within your portfolio. That will help you pick the right investment vehicle.  

Sorry mordko. You are correct. The yahoo charts must not be including the interest.
Thanks for your suggestions. I will have a look at the book you suggested.

April 11, 2024
8:24 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 7171
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

zgic said

Thank you savemoresaveoften. I will have to learn the inner workings of a Bond ETF. I invest in Stock Index ETFs.
I looked at the chart of ZAG over a 5 year period on yahoo and it is -15.04%. Am I looking at it correctly, what am I missing here.
All time chart shows -11.84% on yahoo is this correct?

I'd stay away from ZAG and other such bond ETF's. The 5-year return with interest reinvested of the underlying FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index is a scant 0.27% per annum.

Returns on GIC's may not have been great. But, one could have easily achieved more than 0.27% per annum with 1- to 5-year GIC's these past five years. Same with the 10-year 2.00% per annum return.

Is this really what one wants for the GIC's and bonds in the portfolio?

Calendar
Year
2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014
Index 6.69% -11.69% -2.54% 8.66% 6.83% 1.42% 2.47% 1.66% 3.53% 8.74%

Such bond index ETF's are good for speculating on interest rates and lousy otherwise. There's no certainty of income or value on maturity dates as one would have with GIC's. There's also bonds in such ETF's that one would not normally consider putting money into, like Ford Credit Canada 5.67% bonds maturing 20-Feb-2030.

Was one really looking to place over 55% of the money into GIC's and bonds maturing in 5 to 30 years? This is what that underlying bond index and such ETF's have:

43.40% 1-5 Years
28.80% 5-10 Years
27.80% 10-30 Years

Average weighted maturity is currently 9.68 Years!

April 11, 2024
8:45 am
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Norman1 said

zgic said

Thank you savemoresaveoften. I will have to learn the inner workings of a Bond ETF. I invest in Stock Index ETFs.
I looked at the chart of ZAG over a 5 year period on yahoo and it is -15.04%. Am I looking at it correctly, what am I missing here.
All time chart shows -11.84% on yahoo is this correct?

I'd stay away from ZAG and other such bond ETF's. The 5-year return with interest reinvested of the underlying FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index is a scant 0.27% per annum.

Returns on GIC's may not have been great. But, one could have easily achieved more than 0.27% per annum with 1- to 5-year GIC's these past five years. Same with the 10-year 2.00% per annum return.

 

^ bad financial advice.

There are many paths to success, but thats just pure bad advice. Starting from the usual “past returns don’t say much about the future” and down to the fallacy picking a very specific period of time to make a false argument.

Sound advice on this issue can be found here: https://canadianportfoliomanagerblog.com/bond-etfs-vs-gic-ladders/

April 11, 2024
10:33 am
Norman1
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 7171
Member Since:
April 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

That's real advice. What you've been writing is garbage based on a lack of understanding of what has been driving those bond ETF performance numbers.

One does not start off with a lower yielding bonds and somehow end up with higher returns than GIC's without there being a catch. The catch is that those bond ETF performance numbers have been juiced for many years by falling interest rates. Interest rates cannot fall forever. The performance numbers have also been temporarily skewered recently by rising interest rates.

The long term returns will eventually converge to what the yield to maturity of the bonds were at the time one buys the bonds. Any extra gains or losses along the way will evapourate as the bonds approach maturity.

If one wasn't thinking of lock in around 4.30% for about 10 years, then don't put money in ZAG that has that yield to maturity and that average maturity.

As savemoresaveoften pointed out, if one is counting on selling before maturity then one is going get something different and is hoping/speculating that interest rates won't be higher at that time.

April 11, 2024
10:42 am
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

That’s irrelevant whataboutism. Different market environments lead to different outcomes for different asset classes. Thats why diversifying is a good thing, and bond ETfs are an excellent tool (among others). The point is that this is harmful garbage:

I'd stay away from ZAG and other such bond ETF's.

And everything that followed. That’s lack of basic investment literacy. There is no reputable source that would make a claim like this. Some self-interested financial advisors would, of course. Let’s not count them. The link I provided above is a reputable source and provides a very clear explanation of advantages and disadvantages in simple terms https://canadianportfoliomanagerblog.com/bond-etfs-vs-gic-ladders/

April 11, 2024
12:21 pm
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2990
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Norman1 said
If one wasn't thinking of lock in around 4.30% for about 10 years, then don't put money in ZAG that has that yield to maturity and that average maturity.

That one sentence summarized all one needs to know about ZAG at its current price.
4.3% yield is rougly 70bps over the GC 10y. One can decide if its worth it or not.

April 11, 2024
12:58 pm
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

savemoresaveoften said

Norman1 said
If one wasn't thinking of lock in around 4.30% for about 10 years, then don't put money in ZAG that has that yield to maturity and that average maturity.

That one sentence summarized all one needs to know about ZAG at its current price.
4.3% yield is rougly 70bps over the GC 10y. One can decide if its worth it or not.  

Not in any way shape or form. Missing out on a whole lot of obvious issues.

Like that routine portfolio management and maintaining a consistent level of risk involves rebalancing and that buying and selling ZAG (or VAB, etc) would cost you A LOT less than buying and selling bonds via a bank brokerage while GICs are completely useless in that respect.

Its also missing out on understanding what objectives for fixed income are for a given portfolio, which may vary depending on circumstances and individual.

Its core principles of investing, big picture. Suggesting that the only purpose for bond funds is 70 bps over GOC bonds is just plain wrong.

April 11, 2024
1:36 pm
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2990
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

mordko said

Not in any way shape or form. Missing out on a whole lot of obvious issues.

Like that routine portfolio management and maintaining a consistent level of risk involves rebalancing and that buying and selling ZAG (or VAB, etc) would cost you A LOT less than buying and selling bonds via a bank brokerage while GICs are completely useless in that respect.

Its also missing out on understanding what objectives for fixed income are for a given portfolio, which may vary depending on circumstances and individual.

Its core principles of investing, big picture. Suggesting that the only purpose for bond funds is 70 bps over GOC bonds is just plain wrong.  

Everything you said is just simple basic portfolio management and not relevant to ZAG. You praise it so much makes me wonder if you are the PM running it and feel the need to defend it.

And speaking of portfolio managment and trading bonds, would love to see your credentials or u just read a bunch of books or watched some webcast..

April 11, 2024
2:56 pm
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

savemoresaveoften said

Everything you said is just simple basic portfolio management and not relevant to ZAG. You praise it so much makes me wonder if you are the PM running it and feel the need to defend it.

And speaking of portfolio managment and trading bonds, would love to see your credentials or u just read a bunch of books or watched some webcast..  

Its not relevant to ZAG. Its relevant to picking a bond ETF vs individual bonds vs GIC. A particular tool for each of the options is a secondary question. ZAG is a solid option (among several) for a bond ETF. A solid solution for most peoples needs, although these days even simpler options like VBAL might be good enough.

I am a mere nuclear physicist. Nothing to do with fund management, except for my own portfolio. Then again, its a chat room and you can call yourself Warren Buffett but its irrelevant. Yes, I did read books. You should try it.

April 11, 2024
4:32 pm
savemoresaveoften
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2990
Member Since:
March 30, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

mordko said

Its not relevant to ZAG. Its relevant to picking a bond ETF vs individual bonds vs GIC. A particular tool for each of the options is a secondary question. ZAG is a solid option (among several) for a bond ETF. A solid solution for most peoples needs, although these days even simpler options like VBAL might be good enough.

I am a mere nuclear physicist. Nothing to do with fund management, except for my own portfolio. Then again, its a chat room and you can call yourself Warren Buffett but its irrelevant. Yes, I did read books. You should try it.  

I read enough books and got my CFA and worked in the industry. So while I dont know much about nuclear physics, I do know portfolio management, how bonds work, what ETFs are. I know enough that if one has a portfolio big enough, choosing single bonds for their fixed income portion is likely better than paying a PM fee every year to "manage" their bond potfolios.
Already said bond etfs exist for covenience, not for best return. You think ZAG is better and so be it.

April 11, 2024
4:45 pm
mordko
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 988
Member Since:
April 27, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

savemoresaveoften said

I read enough books and got my CFA and worked in the industry. So while I dont know much about nuclear physics, I do know portfolio management, how bonds work, what ETFs are. I know enough that if one has a portfolio big enough, choosing single bonds for their fixed income portion is likely better than paying a PM fee every year to "manage" their bond potfolios.
Already said bond etfs exist for covenience, not for best return. You think ZAG is better and so be it.  

I wouldn’t brag about it. Knowing what MER is ought to be known by people “in the industry” with special expertise in bond ETF costs but, to be fair, many don’t seem to know how much is 2+2.

It is true that bond ETFs are not for best returns. Neither are individual bonds or GICs. That’s not what fixed income is for, full stop. That said, bond ETFs have a really good chance of outperforming individual bonds over meaningful periods of time for the vast majority of us. In addition to low transaction costs, better diversification and liquidity, passive ETFs provide behavioural benefits over actively picked portfolios. Not quite as much as for stocks, but still meaningful. Funny enough, that’s exactly what the stats are showing, regardless of “indistry” claims. Financial industry is great at maximizing its own profits.

No permission to create posts

Please write your comments in the forum.