Victory Lap

Once you achieve Financial Independence, you may choose to leave salaried employment but with decades of vibrant life ahead, it’s too soon to do nothing. The new stage of life between traditional employment and Full Retirement we call Victory Lap, or Victory Lap Retirement (also the title of a new book to be published in August 2016. You can pre-order now at VictoryLapRetirement.com). You may choose to start a business, go back to school or launch an Encore Act or Legacy Career. Perhaps you become a free agent, consultant, freelance writer or to change careers and re-enter the corporate world or government.

The Critical Element of Bonds  

Posted By |
Image from Shutterstock, courtesy Outcome

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what’s puzzlin’ you
Is the nature of my game

  • Sympathy for the Devil, by The Rolling Stones

 

 

 

By Noah Solomon

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Historically, bonds have offered investors two main benefits. Firstly, their yields provided a reasonable, if unspectacular return. Secondly, they offered diversification value, muting overall portfolio losses during bear markets.

In my view, it is the second attribute that is the most important. In relative terms, bonds are not particularly useful for providing investors with strong long-term returns (that’s equities’ job!). So, by process of elimination it follows that the primary function of bonds is their diversification value.

When comparing equity strategies, one should compare their relative returns, volatilities, Sharpe ratios, drawdown characteristics, etc. However, given bonds’ primary purpose of providing diversification, an extra layer of diligence is required when evaluating bond strategies. Specifically, you should analyze their differing correlations to equities, and by extension their varying abilities to offset stock price declines during challenging environments.

There is no Free Lunch Part I

Economist and Nobel Prize recipient Milton Friedman famously stated, “There is no such thing as a free lunch,” which means that every choice has a cost, even if it’s not immediately obvious.

Traditional bond mandates each have their individual advantages and pitfalls with respect to returns, risks, and diversification properties. In terms of the tradeoff between risk and return, history strongly suggests that there is no clear free lunch to be had.

Risk vs. Return by Bond Type: 2000 – 2024

 

As the above table illustrates, there is a clear relationship between the returns of the various segments of the bond market and the maximum losses that they have sustained over the past 25 years. If you want extra return, you can reasonably expect to suffer larger losses in bad times. That being said, large losses in bond holdings are generally not what investors want or expect.

There is no Free Lunch Part II

Not only is there no free lunch with respect to the tradeoff between risk and return, but there is also none when it comes to diversification value. Higher returns are not only associated with larger losses but are also associated with higher correlations to equities.

Return vs. Correlation to Stocks by Bond Type: 2000 – 2024

Bonds that offer higher returns have a greater tendency to move in tandem with stocks, thereby providing less ability to mitigate stock losses during bear markets. In contrast, lower-return bonds possess greater diversification properties and thus are better equipped to offset stock-price declines during times of equity market turmoil.

None of the above: Sometimes there’s Nowhere to Hide

Notwithstanding the fact that higher-return bonds have on average suffered more severe losses and offered less diversification value than their lower return counterparts, these relationships have exhibited significant variations across different bear markets. Continue Reading…

CDRs vs. ADRs: What Canadian Investors need to know

Posted By |

Learn the key differences between Canadian Depositary Receipts (CDRs) and American Depositary Receipts (ADRs), and how each structure helps Canadians access international stocks.

Image courtesy BMO/Getty Images.

 

By Erin Allen, CIM, BMO ETFs

(Sponsor Blog)

Investing outside of Canada sounds simple. Just buy shares of Apple, right? But if you’ve ever tried, you know it’s not that straightforward. You’ll need U.S. dollars, your brokerage will likely charge a steep currency conversion fee, and you’ll be exposed to foreign exchange (FX) risk the entire time you hold the stock.

That’s where depositary receipts come in. Canadian Depositary Receipts (CDRs) and American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) are two ways to buy foreign stocks without directly trading on an international exchange. They’re designed to make global investing easier: but they work differently.

In this article, we’ll break down the differences between CDRs and ADRs, which could help you determine which one makes more sense for your portfolio.

Canadian Depositary Receipts (CDRs)

CDRs are a homegrown solution designed to make global stocks more accessible to Canadian investors. Listed on a Canadian exchange and priced in Canadian dollars, CDRs give you exposure to foreign companies: without needing to exchange currency or worry about FX fluctuations.

What makes CDRs unique?

CDRs come with a built-in notional currency hedge. That means the value of the receipt adjusts for movements in the Canadian–U.S. dollar exchange rate (or other foreign exchange rate depending on the stock), helping reduce the impact of currency swings on your return. It’s a structural feature that’s automatically factored into the pricing of each CDR, so you don’t need to manage it yourself.

Another feature is fractional share access. Most CDRs are initially priced around CAD $10 per unit, making them more accessible than buying full shares of blue-chip companies like Tesla or Berkshire Hathaway in U.S. dollars. This structure makes it easier to build diversified portfolios: even with modest amounts of capital, which makes them particularly beginner-friendly.

Why consider CDRs?

Because CDRs trade on a Canadian exchange and in Canadian dollars, there’s no need for currency conversion, which means no currency conversion fees and the impact of currency movements is managed through a built-in notional hedge.

They also streamline global access: the current lineup includes U.S. giants, international developed-market companies.

And you can buy them at any major Canadian brokerage, just like any other Canadian-listed ETF or stock.

Notable examples in BMO’s CDR directory include ex-Canada companies like:

  1. ASML Canadian Depositary Receipt (CAD Hedged) (Ticker: ASMH)
  2. LVMH Canadian Depositary Receipts (CAD Hedged) (LV)
  3. Nintendo Canadian Depositary Receipts (CAD Hedged) (NTDO)
  4. Honda Canadian Depositary Receipts (CAD Hedged) (HNDA)
  5. Tesla (TSLA) BMO Canadian Depositary Receipts (CAD Hedged) (ZTSL)
  6. Berkshire Hathaway (BRK/B) BMO Canadian Depositary Receipt (CAD Hedged) (ZBRK)

With lower dollar-per-share amounts and built-in currency hedging, CDRs are designed to simplify international single-stock investing for Canadian portfolios.

American Depositary Receipts (ADRs)

ADRs are the original gateway to international investing for North American investors. Introduced nearly a century ago, ADRs were designed to make it easier for U.S. investors to buy foreign stocks: without dealing with foreign exchanges, unfamiliar regulations, or foreign currencies.

How ADRs work

ADRs trade in U.S. dollars on major U.S. exchanges like the NYSE and Nasdaq. Each ADR represents shares of a non-U.S. company, held by a U.S. depositary bank. These banks issue the ADRs and handle the underlying foreign shares.

There are two types of ADRs:

  1. Sponsored ADRs are backed by the foreign company itself and often come with better disclosure, liquidity, and alignment with investor interests.
  2. Unsponsored ADRs are issued by banks without the direct involvement of the company. These tend to be less liquid and may not offer the same level of investor information. They trade exclusively on Over-The-Counter (OTC) markets making them very hard to retail investors to access.

Unlike CDRs, most ADRs do not include currency hedging. Your returns will reflect not just the performance of the stock, but also any gains or losses from exchange rate movements between the foreign currency and the U.S. dollar.

Why investors use ADRs

ADRs are widely accepted and highly liquid, with a long track record. They provide convenient access to hundreds of international companies, particularly from developed and emerging markets in Europe, Asia, and Latin America.

But for Canadian investors, there are some added frictions. Because ADRs are priced in U.S. dollars, you’ll need to convert Canadian dollars to buy and sell them. That introduces currency conversion costs and FX risk, which can eat into returns.

For Canadian investors, ADRs still remain a viable route to global diversification. But they come with a few more moving parts compared to Canadian-listed alternatives that need to be accounted for.

CDR vs. ADR: Side-by-side comparison

Feature CDR ADR
Currency CAD USD
Exchange Cboe Canada / TSX NYSE / NASDAQ
Currency Hedge Yes (notional hedge) Typically, no
Fractional Access Yes Varies
Accessibility for Canadians High Limited

Investor considerations: a checklist

When deciding between a CDR and an ADR, the best choice often depends on your specific needs as a Canadian investor. Here’s a checklist of key factors to think about:

  1. ✓ Portfolio diversification with local convenience
    Both CDRs and ADRs give you access to global stocks, but only CDRs let you do it without leaving the Canadian market. You can trade them in Canadian dollars, through your regular Canadian brokerage account, during local market hours.
  2. ✓ Currency risk management
    CDRs include a built-in notional hedge that helps offset the effects of exchange rate fluctuations. ADRs, on the other hand, generally leave you fully exposed to currency movements. If FX risk is something you’d rather not manage, CDRs offer a more hands-off approach. Continue Reading…

Retired Money: Experts opine on various tweaks to Bengen’s famous 4% Rule

Posted By |
William Bengen, creator of the famed “4% Rule.”

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column is titled The 4% rule, revisited: A more flexible approach to retirement income. Click on the hyperlink for full column.

It goes into more detail on William Bengen’s updated book about the 4% Rule, which was one of three recently published financial books we reviewed in the last Retired Money column.

For that column I had originally planned to focus exclusively on that book, A Richer Retirement, Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More. However, I decided to review two other books at the same time; meanwhile I ended up on a related project on my own site, which involved asking more than a dozen financial advisors on both sides of the border what they think of the 4% Rule and the tweaks Bengen covers in his follow-up book. You can see all responses in this blog that appeared earlier this month on Findependence Hub, but at over 5,000 words  it was a tad long for the space normally assigned to the Retired Money column.

 For the MoneySense version, I focused on the most insightful comments and added a few thoughts of my own. The survey was conducted via Linked In and Featured.com, which has long supplied good content for my site.

Broader diversification spawns a 4.7% Rule

Trusts and estates expert Andrew Izrailo, Senior Corporate and Fiduciary Manager for Astra Trust, says Bengen’s original idea was to provide a sustainable income stream for at least 30 years without depleting your savings. In his new book, Bengen “revisits this concept using updated data and broader asset allocations,” summarizes Izrailo, “He now argues the safe withdrawal rate could rise to around 4.7%, supported by stronger market performance and portfolio diversification beyond the original stock-bond mix.”

For American investors, Izrailo still begins with 4% as a baseline because “it remains simple and conservative. Then I evaluate three major factors before adjusting: market volatility, portfolio performance, and expected longevity.” For Canadian retirees, “I tend to start lower, around 3.5%, due to differences in taxation, mandatory RRIF withdrawal rules, and the impact of currency and inflation differences compared to U.S. portfolios.”

Toronto-based wealth advisor Matthew Ardrey, of TriDelta Financial was not part of the original Featured roundup but agreed with the general view that while a helpful starting point, the 4 Rule is only a guideline. “When I meet with a client, I don’t rely on the 4% rule at all,” said Ardrey, who has worked with clients for more than 25 years “I’ve learned that rules of thumb — like the 4% rule — pale in comparison to the clarity and confidence that come from a well-crafted” and personalized financial plan.  Such a plan should reflect each person’s unique circumstances, priorities, and goals, allowing them to build the right decumulation strategy for their situation.

No one size fits all

Almost all the experts caution against taking a one-size-fits-all approach to the 4% Rule or its variants. Over 20 years with her own clients financial advisor and educator Winnie Sun, Executive Producer of ModernMom, starts with 4% as the baseline, then adjusts it based on actual client spending patterns and market conditions … The biggest mistake I see isn’t about the percentage itself: it’s that people forget about tax efficiency in withdrawal sequencing.”

Oakville, Ont.-based insurance broker James Inwood says the 4% rule is “a decent guideline, but it’s not some magic number you can set and forget. I’ve watched people get into trouble because they didn’t account for medical bills, which are a real wild card here in Canada. I always tell people to build in a cash buffer and check in on that withdrawal rate every couple of years instead of just locking it in permanently.” Continue Reading…

HCAL turns 5: Enhanced Exposure to Canadian Banks

Posted By |
Image courtesy of Hamilton ETFs

By Hamilton ETFs

(Sponsor Blog)

Since launching in October 2020, the Hamilton Enhanced Canadian Bank ETF (HCAL) has provided investors with a simple way to get more from one of Canada’s most reliable sectors, the Big-6 banks. By adding modest 25% leverage to an equal-weight portfolio of Canadian bank stocks, HCAL has delivered strong results over the past five years, offering investors enhanced income and growth potential from a sector known for its stability and consistent dividends.

Five years of Enhanced Growth & Income

HCAL’s structure is straightforward: for every $100 invested, HCAL borrows ~$25 at institutional borrowing rates and invests it back into the same six banks, providing roughly 1.25x exposure to the sector. This approach has supported higher monthly income and higher long-term returns since HCAL’s inception when compared to a non-levered Canadian bank portfolio, specifically the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index (“Canadian Bank Index.”)

HCAL vs. Canadian Bank Index — Growth of $100K [1]

Long-Term benefits of Modest Leverage

Over time, the power of compounding is a key driver of returns, and modest leverage can amplify that effect. In HCAL’s case, the 25% leverage applied to Canada’s largest banks has contributed to meaningfully higher long-term returns. The leverage is realized at institutional borrowing rates, typically lower than those available to individual investors, and HCAL can be held in registered accounts, providing access to the benefits of low-cost leverage in accounts where margin isn’t normally available. Continue Reading…

Book Review: The Wealthy Barber (2025 fully revised edition)

Posted By |

Special to Financial Independence Hub

 

Many aspects of personal finance have changed in the 36 years since The Wealthy Barber classic book first appeared.

To update it, author David Chilton had to not only do an extensive rewrite, but he had to come up with new advice.  He did a great job of making The Wealthy Barber 2025 update fully relevant to Canadians today.

Chilton takes important topics that are usually dry and hard to understand and brings them alive in an entertaining story format. But this book is much more than just a fun take on personal finances; the advice is excellent.  Chilton gives insights you won’t find elsewhere.  The book is like a course on personal finance requiring no previous knowledge, and even discussions of insurance and wills are funny and compelling enough to be page-turners.

The bulk of the book is a set of financial lessons mainly aimed at Canadians between 20 and 45.  The early chapters introduce the characters, make it clear that the lessons require no prior expertise, and that the lessons really will help with seemingly impossible problems like the high cost of housing.  These early chapters do a good job of convincing readers that they really can improve their financial lives.

Between the jokes and identifying with the characters, readers will find themselves enjoying lessons that would normally be boring.  Chilton uses dialogue to emphasize important points, to voice objections to his advice, and to clarify common misunderstandings.

I often find things I disagree with in books, but that really isn’t the case here.  Chilton had to make some tough decisions about which details to include and which to leave out, and most readers could come up with a topic or nuance they wish was covered.  One topic I think could have made the cut is that some investors think they don’t pay investment fees.  I’ve heard people recommend their advisor because he doesn’t charge any fees.  All advisors get paid out of their clients’ money in one way or another, no matter what anyone says to the contrary.

I won’t try to summarize the lessons because the result wouldn’t be useful.  Without Chilton’s explanations of the whys behind his advice, too much would be lost.  Instead, I’ll comment on several areas.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Chilton didn’t really discuss AI except to make a good joke that I won’t spoil.  He was asked the question “What happens if AI takes away most of our jobs and the economic system collapses?”  There are some bad things AI could do such as cyber war, monitoring all of our actions, preventing us from doing “unapproved” things, and limiting our movements.  However, I don’t see negatives in AI doing jobs for us.  If AI together with machines will eventually grow our food, make clothes and other goods, and build houses, why will we need money?  Until we get to that point, we’ll still need money and people to do jobs.

Pay yourself first

One of the book’s characters says “Save first, spend the rest, good.  Spend first, save the rest, bad.”  This core piece of advice survived from the original book, but there are some caveats now.  For example, some diligent savers “offset the growing value of their assets on their net-worth statements with matching, or near matching, debts on the liability side.  From excessive car loans to large credit-card balances to massive lines of credit, many [live] beyond their means to a scary level.”

Watching other people, I’m convinced that it’s important to set aside savings from your pay first and then spend later, but my wife and I are weirdos who never needed to do this.  Our natural tendency to spend little usually left plenty of savings at the end of each pay period.  We’re the type who had to learn to spend more as our income and savings grew.

Index investing

I thought the passage explaining why we should just buy all stocks instead of trying to pick the best ones was well done.  It included “No, we can’t just buy the winners.  No, there is no way for us to consistently pick them ahead of time.  No, the people we hire to do it for us aren’t any good at it either.”

Like most experts who are trying to help their audiences, Chilton is a fan of all-in-one asset allocation ETFs.  “Not only does the fund buy the individual stocks for you, it does so across the world,” and “These funds also do all the rebalancing for you.”  These funds handle everything so there is no need to monitor your progress.  In fact, to avoid making emotional decisions, you’re best to “pay almost no attention” to the daily or weekly changes in the value of your savings.

“One of the most important factors, if not the most important, as you choose what type of investments to make, is the associated time frame.  How long are you able to set the money aside?  How long until you need it?”  Stocks in the form of all-in-one ETFs are for the long term.  For something like a house down payment, “unless I thought my purchase was at least five to seven years away,” I wouldn’t invest it aggressively.

Starting early

I’m a fan of advising people to start the saving habit early.  Chilton gives an example to motivate this advice where saving $1000 per month for 8 years is more valuable than saving $1000 per month for the subsequent 24 years.  Continue Reading…