Read? How We Grew
An impressive growth in Temasek's Portfolio value across market and economics cycles!
But how much of this growth is contributed by yearly capital injection?
Is yearly capital injection by Big Daddy reported somewhere?
Anyone knows?
Posts
Hmm, maybe changes to the Share Capital?
ReplyDeleteBut only got past 2 years of numbers online.
Balance sheet online starts from 2002, but it's lumped together with shareholder equity.
PS: I'm no accountant, so I'm just talking out of my ass lol.
CW,
ReplyDeleteI don't think big daddy would want to reveal it with precision in 2 decimal places...
Just broad stroke teasers like:
Funds Ins & Outs of Temasek
Basically, they saying they got use leverage as in debts to fund investments, but don't lose sleep over it!
This would disappoint the NEVER use leverage or get into debt parrots though...
Plus Buy-and-Hold forever acolytes too cannot quote Temasek as their "yalor, yalor" fan favourite as Temasek got practice...
Gasp!
Divestments!?
LOL!
Smol,
DeleteLol, everybody wants to know the "New Capital from Shareholder" category.
Just feast your eyes on the buy-sell-buy-sell over the past 19 years.
With administrative expenses (mostly rental & salaries) of $11.3B one should expect quite a fair bit of active investing otherwise a low-cost automated buy-sell-rebalance of ETFs will do the job liao. 😂
Spur,
DeleteI'm more interested in the share between passive and active investing.
And more importantly, the respective Total Shareholder Returns between the two ;)
That would be more illuminating!
Smol,
DeleteTemasek is open enough to share their performance against passive indexes.
If measured from 2002, Temasek is the winner with MSCI Asia ex-Jap a close 2nd.
But if measured from 2010, Temasek loses out to a passive investor in both Global or Asia ex-Jap indexes.
Luckily never show S&P500 (or Nasdaq, or FANGAM) otherwise more lao kui.
I guess it's a big reason why they're now investing more into overseas markets, and is no longer koala or panda. LOL.
Spur,
DeleteInteresting...
It ties in nicely with what you wrote in the comments to another post here:
"home-country bias, which was great in the 2000s but sucked in the 2010s. US one would be mediocre in 2000s but great in 2010s. Global one would be average throughout lol."
That's the elephant in the room when it comes to passive investing - WHICH vehicles to ride!?
The discussion between time in the market versus timing the market is meaningless when your chosen vehicle has underperformed other vehicles big time!
Imagine compounding that underperformance over 20 to 30 years!?
But if we constantly switch vehicles every decade, how is that "passive"?
Investing is not easy :(
Smol,
DeleteTo optimise for maximum gains is tough coz you need to be lucky & predict the unknown future.
The default option can be a global index. For those with no opinion, then it's just a question of loss/risk tolerance -- how much into global stocks, and how much into short term govt bonds & cash.
For those with opinions, then it's a matter of tilting e.g. reducing global stocks & bringing in allocations to say, cloud computing or semiconductors or China/India or emerging markets or small cap value or Reits or Pan-Asian (good for dividends) etc.
The more academically inclined can try to find efficient frontier programs to determine the "ideal" allocation of the various asset classes based on their historical returns patterns. I used to play around with some free ones 16 years ago.
Or like the Wife, just follow a tried & tested allocation like the Permanent Portfolio & get on with fun things in life.
And for those with itchy fingers, just allocate 5%-20% for craftsmanship LOL.
Long-term investing for yield and short-term trading for gains or capital cycling is workable strategy for retail investors across market and economics cycles.
ReplyDelete