Sentences with phrase «than conservative stocks»

Second, you should be quicker to sell aggressive stocks than conservative stocks.

As well, they are often more highly leveraged and volatile than conservative stocks.

As well, aggressive stocks tend to be more highly leveraged and volatile than conservative stocks.

As well, aggressive stocks are often more highly leveraged and volatile than conservative stocks.

Not exact matches

This is because, historically, a portfolio with a larger proportion of stocks experiences bigger price swings than a more conservative mix of investments.

You can then increase the portion in ETFs if you wish a more conservative portfolio or simply ignore the last few lines and concentrate on the stocks if you seek more growth than revenues.

As its name suggests, the blog is focused largely on dividend paying stocks rather than value or growth stocks, which makes it better suited for conservative income investors.

A bond investor typically seeks income and security, and in fact, investing in bonds is often considered a more conservative option than investing in stocks.

More conservative investors... should dollar cost average in and be fully invested by no later than November, when the stock market will likely be rallying in anticipation of an improving economic environment in 2010.

You'll probably want to be more conservative than before retirement, yet that does not mean abandoning stocks.

With a price - to - earnings ratio of 17 (lower than its already conservative price - to - earnings ratio of 18.5 earlier this week) and trailing -12-month year - over-year sales and earnings growth of 10 % and 22 %, respectively, a pullback could represent a time to consider buying Apple stock.

The first out of the stocks (with changes from the General Election) are the ICM and Populus polls ICM have CON 18 % -LRB--8), LAB 44 % (+12), LDEM 27 % -LRB--5) Populus have CON 15 % -LRB--11), LAB 46 % (+14), LDEM 29 -LRB--3) So both have Labour substantially up on their general election support and the Lib Dems dropping less than the third placed Conservatives.

Based off of 120, a 50 - year - old should have 70 % invested in stocks rather than 50 % — a more aggressive approach, but one that seems to be more widely accepted as the better way to invest, even for conservative investors.

Bonds tend to be more conservative but yield less than stocks.

Along with the potential to produce higher returns than more conservative stocks, they also bring the... Read More

However, you may want to consider selling part of successful conservative stocks you own if they go way up and come to make up too much of your portfolio — say, more than 8 % to 10 %.

And in cases where portfolios survive, the ones with more stock exposure will generally have much higher balances late in retirement than more conservative ones.

That's largely because increasing stock exposure can be a double - edged sword, helping you when the market is doing well but penalizing much more than more conservative allocations when markets suffer severe setbacks.

Resource and commodity stocks in general should make up only a limited portion of your portfolio — say less than 20 % for a conservative investor or as much as 30 % for an aggressive investor.

Unlike a conservative investor who favours fixed income investments like bonds or GICs, he says, a more aggressive investor — or someone with no less than 50 per cent stocks in their portfolio — will be more likely, though not guaranteed, to net a higher return.

As well, you should always remember that while aggressive stocks may hold the potential for greater gains than conservative selections, they expose you to a higher level of risk — whether or not they are currently paying dividends.

Where you set the slider depends on your outlook for the stock, as well as how conservative you want to be (ITM on the left is more conservative than OTM on the right).

Regardless of whether you are aggressive or conservative, the use of asset allocation to reduce risk through the selection of a balance of stocks and bonds for your portfolio is a more detailed description of how a diversified portfolio is created rather than the simplistic eggs in one basket concept.

As well, you should always remember that while growth stocks hold the potential for greater gains than conservative selections, they typically expose you to a higher level of risk — even if they are dividend - paying stocks.

Is there a large spread between the two values because the preferred stock is much more attractive than the common stock, or because the 409a valuation was somehow too conservative?

Currently I think Canadian stocks yielding more than 6 % are too risky for conservative investors.

Because it is your break even point, when comparing 2 options on the same stock a lower net debit is more conservative (and will have a lower return) than a higher net debit.

That's about 1 % per year better than either the Total Stock Market or its conservative peers.

Note that resource and commodity stocks in general should make up only a limited portion of your portfolio — less than 20 % for a conservative investor.

Stocks in our Aggressive Portfolio, such as these four, tend to be more highly leveraged and more volatile than those in our Conservative Growth or Income - Seeking Portfolios.

An aggressive stock is often more highly leveraged (with more debt) and volatile than value or conservative stocks.

And as mentioned, resource stocks should make up only a limited portion of your portfolio — say less than 20 % for a conservative investor or as much as 30 % for an aggressive investor.

It's an old saying, but it's a sentiment felt by many conservative stock investors who prefer the stocks of stable and established companies that provide part of their return sooner, in the form of dividends, rather than later, in the form of capital gains.

An aggressive stock is a higher - risk investment that can potentially produce higher returns than more conservative stocks, but also has equal potential for bigger losses.

For investors who like to keep things simple and conservative, covered calls using stock is a better choice than any multi-legged pure option - based strategy (such as LEAP covered writes).

If you are conservative you'll want to look at the rows that have a dark grey background in the Call Strike column — those are in - the - money options (where the strike is lower than the current stock price) that have more downside protection.

While this is certainly true of some options strategies, covered calls are actually more conservative than investing in ETFs or stocks alone.

There is nothing precluding a high growth stock from trading materially less than a conservative estimate of its intrinsic worth, and thus becoming a value investment.

Recently I've been working with several new clients who are conservative investors looking for better returns than CDs and Treasuries but aren't interested in taking on the volatile market risk of stocks, bonds and derivatives.

You can then increase the portion in ETFs if you wish a more conservative portfolio or simply ignore the last few lines and concentrate on the stocks if you seek more growth than revenues.

Along with the potential to produce higher returns than more conservative stocks, they also bring the risk of bigger losses.

Women surveyed were slightly more conservative investors than men, BMO reports, as 19 % of women prefer to invest in individual stocks, compared to 25 % of their male counterparts.

Regardless of whether you are aggressive or conservative, the use of asset allocation to reduce risk through the selection of a balance of stocks and bonds for your portfolio is a more detailed description of how a diversified portfolio is created than the simplistic eggs in one basket concept.

As a result, I believe it makes sense to increase your equity exposure a little compared to what you might have done when bonds were more attractive, and to balance that by choosing conservative stocks that carry less risk than the overall market.

I'm not saying a lot more aggressive, but maybe a little bit less conservative, having a little bit more stock allocation for the long term, staying invested, than their percentage rate or return over the long term would be actually significantly higher than men, I would say.

If the calculator puts your chances of success lower than that, you may need to fine - tune your stocks - bonds mix, although you don't want to get too aggressive or conservative.

A bond investor typically seeks income and security, and in fact, investing in bonds is often considered a more conservative option than investing in stocks.

Fixed income investments such as bonds are generally deemed more conservative because they are less volatile on average than equities (stocks).

Our stock selections for the aggressive investor tend to be more highly leveraged and more volatile than our conservative recommendations, and they can give you bigger gains and bigger losses.

The welcome effect is that people took it as a matter of course that stocks were real businesses bought for ownership, although stock buyers had the reputation of being slick and wily because their ownership positions were based on the current and future profitability of companies rather than secured bonds which had been the hallmark of traditional conservative investing accounts because property could be sold to return part of your principal in the event that the business failed.