Latest Stock Buy or Sell? Make More Informed Decisions!

Reality is that the market analysts, from a company-specific basis, are looking at everything that's happening geopolitically as "temporary". That is, companies are not guiding yet towards lower outcomes. Until that happens, the analysts will stay the line. Very few of them are bold enough to say, "Hey, this conflict will have long-term consequences."

No one really knows how this is all going to play out. He thinks it's going to be an issue. Question is how long will it last? There are things you can do about it from an investment perspective. But, typically, that will involve far more sophisticated strategies than the DIY, at-home investor can execute.

He'll unpack this a bit more in the Educational Segment.

In the history of the world, these things are always relatively short-lived (measured in weeks to months). But if there's a clear disruption to the supply of materials through the Strait of Hormuz that turns into years, that would be extremely problematic.

The world can handle a number of months' disruption, but we're already starting to see rolling blackouts and supply rebalancing. The biggest thing that comes to mind is fertilizer for food production.

From an uncertainty standpoint, investors are looking at markets and wondering what to do. We should be prepared for several more months of this. Boots on the ground are not politically palatable at the moment, but inevitable if the US is really going to claim victory.

Trump's current claims are certainly not founded.

Central banks, no matter if they raise or cut rates here, can't move the needle. Rates don't impact, in any remote way, what's happening in the Middle East.

We need a resolution in the war. Because of the uncertainty around added inflation, it makes sense to pause any additional rate cuts. If the conflict lasts longer, central banks may have to get more aggressive at cutting rates because the economy is weakening in other ways. Rate cuts are not the cure for this kind of market disruption.

BMO has a hedged and an unhedged version. Both are equal weight. More diversified to include regional banks.

There's also UBNK, also an equal weighting. Much more concentrated in the big banks only.

BMO has a hedged and an unhedged version. Both are equal weight. More diversified to include regional banks.

There's also UBNK, also an equal weighting. Much more concentrated in the big banks only.

BMO has a hedged and an unhedged version. Both are equal weight. More diversified to include regional banks.

There's also UBNK, also an equal weighting. Much more concentrated in the big banks only.

He started nibbling at the sector 6-8 months ago, feeling that there was some value building. Will probably take a while for these stocks to turn. Accumulate on weakness.

Excellent question. His answer is that there aren't too many. Most of them are differentiated in the style of how they write. Some are more aggressive and focus on more yield, while some give you much more in capital gains potential because they write on only part of the portfolio.

Great income-enhancing strategies for income seekers. Bring 'em on. What's needed is more education in this area for the individual investor.

At his firm they can do their own, so he wouldn't use it. That said, the zero-day strategies (where they write options every day) have their pluses and minuses. Generate lots of capital gains by way of distributions, but give up a lot of upside potential. Specifically for income seekers and those wanting tax-efficient income.

If that's who you are, then they're probably appropriate for some part of your income portfolio. If you're a long-term capital gains investor, these aren't for you -- you'll likely underperform in the long run.

He remembers back in 2008-2009 at the time of the GFC, these ETFs were launched as leveraged ways to play commodity markets. 

The danger is the promise of 2:1 daily exposure in terms of leverage. Because of that daily exposure to rebalancing (buying higher and selling lower), they're a bad long-term hold.

The danger is the promise of 2:1 daily exposure in terms of leverage. Because of that daily exposure to rebalancing (buying higher and selling lower), they're bad long-term hold.

This one is a double-leveraged down. For a very, very short-term view. There may be other ETFs, but this is the one he's aware of.

He's in the camp that any advantage to the Canadian oil industry is transient, not long term. We need structural change in how the Canadian government looks at our ability as Canadians to distribute one of our best assets to the world. Until that happens, Canada will always trade at a discount to just about everywhere else in the world that sees O&G in a different light.

If your view is that the benefit is longer lasting, you'd move toward small caps. So equal-weight ZEO would potentially give you a better return than XEG. But that's not his outlook.

Since the war broke out, XEG is outperforming. The market sees recent moves as temporary, not permanent.

He's in the camp that any advantage to the Canadian oil industry is transient, not long term. We need structural change in how the Canadian government looks at our ability as Canadians to distribute one of our best assets to the world. Until that happens, Canada will always trade at a discount to just about everywhere else in the world that sees O&G in a different light.

If your view is that the benefit is longer lasting, you'd move toward small caps. So equal-weight ZEO would potentially give you a better return than XEG. But that's not his outlook.

Since the war broke out, XEG is outperforming. The market sees recent moves as temporary, not permanent.

An MIC is backed by the value of a person's home. Typically, the loan-to-value is in the 50-70% range. So you have a lot of equity coverage. Whereas when you're lending to a business, you're typically lending off cashflows. 

So the headlines you're hearing about problems in mortgages, they're of the construction type -- where you take business risk. Those types of mortgages will typically generate much higher returns than residential mortgage investment corporations. Only a handful of residential mortgages will default, there's plenty of equity, and the mortgagee will get their $$ out.

Loves them. Great fixed-income alternatives. You'll do far better than with public-market short-term bonds.