Sentences with phrase «value of investments rather»

The idea is to produce a net worth that is more indicative of the actual value of investments rather than changes in the stock market valuation.

Not exact matches

You can think of the «return» on this investment as the value of paying yourself, rather than a landlord, even if it's not paying dividends or increasing in value.

I'm much more concerned with the income generated from my investments rather than the value of those investments.

It is likely Keynes would see this mindset reflected in current investment behavior where the focus is often on short - term trading activity in reaction to market noise, i.e., what other market participants are thinking, rather than investment decisions based on the fundamental longer - term value of an enterprise.

Rather, «Are the people, the organisations, the promises, the values and the relationships you put your faith in day by day, year by year, really worth your investment of trust?»

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

The researchers showed that functional products in general will have greater investment activities in the manufacturing stage rather than the use stage, while makers of innovative products should focus their investment efforts in the use stage to create eco-efficient and value enhancing products.

That said, too often the investment of money in a company is treated as a success in and of itself rather than the creation of true intrinsic value in solid and sustainable models.

Rather than investing into a large list of companies — some that will go up in value, some that will go down — do the necessary research to understand the difference and invest in only those that will maximize the return on your investment.

Logically, stocks shouldn't be valued relative to current rates, but rather relative to the expected discounted return from rates across the duration of the investment.

Investing for dividends is one type of investment strategy, and it can be contrasted with value investing, in which we look at the future prospects of a company rather than its current dividend.

Ramsey claims it is better to pay a one - time up - front fee of 5.75 % or thereabouts on the value of your mutual fund investment rather than pay an ongoing fee to a financial advisor.

The advisors he recommends are commissioned salespeople, rather than investment advisors who charge a fee based on the value of your portfolio.

This can have a large impact on your investment if the value of the neighbourhood stays the same or drops rather than increasing.

Depending on the type of investment, you can either contribute to your RRSP early in the year (for fixed income investments) or at regular intervals throughout the year (for most mutual funds) rather than at the end of the contribution year — that way, you can benefit from income sheltering and dollar cost averaging (for investments that fluctuate in value).

When you invest in the stock market, you don't earn a set interest rate but rather a return based on the change in the value of your investment.

The first bone of contention the plaintiffs have is that the company offered the «microscopically low - yielding» Vanguard Prime Money Market Fund, rather than a stable value fund that would have provided better returns while preserving capital and liquidity without any greater increase in risk compared to money market investments.

It's important to note that «RAFI Size Factor» is not the same as the RAFI 1500 for small companies, but rather is a blend of four factor - tilt strategies, each formed within the universe of small - cap stocks: small value, small momentum, small low volatility, and small quality (a factor that combines profitability and investment metrics).

The books aren't strictly about investing, which Taleb regards as a «less interesting, more limited — and rather boring — applications of [his] ideas,» but my interest is in investment, particularly deep value investment, and so I'll be exploring his ideas in that context.

Even WITHOUT factoring in investment returns, etc. — would you rather payoff your mortgage with today's dollars or dollars from 15 years in the future when you know (with 99 % certainty) that the value of a dollar will be less?

In case a company turns out to not be worth as much as you thought, that gap between the price you paid and the (now lower) value of the stock simply closes somewhat rather than the investment turning upside down on you right away.

Value investors understand that investment outcomes are determined by magnitude of success rather than frequency of success.

Expressing rates of return in real values rather than nominal values, particularly during periods of high inflation, offers a clearer picture of an investment's value.

Craig is right, it's best to think about it in connection with a regular influx of savings rather than a lump sum — although a lump sum is a good way to make a sizeable enough initial investment in a position that its performance can inform your value - averaging deployments subsequently.

Rather, we believe it works because investors are human and, as they search for a signal in the noise that surrounds the stock market, they often attribute too much meaning and overreact to information that proves to have little to do with the long - term value of their investments.

This market discount may be due in part to the investment objective of long - term appreciation, which is sought by many closed - end funds, as well as to the fact that the shares of closed - end funds are not redeemable by the holder upon demand to the issuer at the next determined net asset value but rather are subject to the principles of supply and demand in the secondary market.

To me, this is a true representation of the investment, rather than simply looking at the cash flow in isolation or speculating on the appreciation in the property value.

It covers the full value of the financial flow rather than the share associated with the climate change benefit; e.g., the entire investment in a wind turbine rather than the portion attributed to the emission reductions.

To think there's no value to avoided emissions requires some rather extreme views on the distribution of impacts and reversibility of emissions vs. investments.

Talking to budget holders in their language — in terms of value to the business, ROI and alignment with strategy — makes it possible to reframe the conversation as one of investment in the bottom line rather than cost.»

Because the costs are paid in full and upfront, the cash value can grow quickly and your insurance coverage is entirely paid by the account value of the policy which grows if the underlying investment earnings are positive rather than with annual premiums.

Personally, I'd rather keep the life insurance, use the cash values to supplement my investments and / or use the cash value to pay my income in the years the stock market goes down (like 2001, 2008, etc) so that I don't end up worse off than when I began because at the end of the day that account can't lose its value, I can't be sued for the value of it, I don't need to report it on my son's FAFSA form for college, AND if I pull money out of it for my son's school, the dividend still pays the same amount as if I hadn't drawn the money out in the first place (fun fact: that last point isn't something that a northwestern policy does, but new york life and massmutual's contracts do).

These contracts are based on the accumulation value of the investments made inside of the contract, rather than immediate payments.

Since a portion of your money goes towards investments rather than directly to insurance, the cash value of your policy is dependent on how these investments perform.

Rather than having taxable gain on 100 % of the growth of your accounts, your life insurance cash value can grow tax free, increasing you overall financial leverage AND return on investment return on investment.

In the early 1980s, new universal life insurance products started being regarded as investment vehicles — with cash surrender values — rather than traditional definitions of life insurance.

What differentiates an Indexed UL policy from other types of permanent life insurance used for cash accumulation is that the growth of the policy's cash value is based on the performance of an equity index (usually the S&P 500), excluding dividends, collared by a cap and a floor — rather than based on a flat crediting rate that is established by the insurance carrier and adjusted from time to time (a product referred to as «current assumption universal life»), based on a flat dividend rate that is established by the insurance carrier and adjusted from time to time (a product referred to as «whole life»), or based on the actual investment returns of specific equity investments (a product referred to as «variable universal life»).

This fork represents a segment of the cryptocurrency community that wants to see digital coins compete primarily as mainstream currencies and payment mediums rather than digital gold (though they believe Bitcoin has value as an investment as well).

In other words a digital asset is created, a value determined — and by consensus reached by investment, value is settled by a network of participants rather than by a central authority or government.

An increasing number of investors and traders have started to recognize Bitcoin as a long - term investment, store of value and settlement network, rather than as a short - term investment or a short - cut to have huge gains.

In addition to focusing on Munchee's and its agents» statements, as well as statements made by a third party in a YouTube video that Munchee had linked to from Munchee's Facebook page, all of which touted the potential for increases in the MUN token's value, the Munchee Order emphasized that, among other things, Munchee marketed the MUN token specifically to those potentially interested in token sale investments, rather than to restaurant owners and other in the restaurant industry.

This represents a guaranteed investment that will be based on the organic growth value of the parent project rather than being influenced by the unseen forces of the speculative market.

As a pure store of value rather than a functional token, bitcoin is arguably in competition with any other coin that's being bought as an investment or for transactional purposes.

Given that our loans are based on the value of an investment property rather than the borrower's credit, we can fund deals for borrowers who are unable to get conventional financing due to a recent foreclosure or short sale.

Assets will continue to provide value even after you buy them - real estate investments, stocks, college education (value in the form of smarts rather than money), educational books, etc..

Rather than on emotion, they base their capital placement decisions on the value of your investment property.