What about the pre-need? Saan naka invest?

Do you have access to information on Manulife’s life insurance investment profile also? Thank you.

Thank you very much Salve! Pero dapat ni-release na lang nila in public or using their website which is hardly useful. Yung GSIS Mutual Fund (GMFI) doesn’t have a dedicated link for more info. It took a vigilant comlumnist for them to disclose information, paano pa kaya sila mag deal with their investors???

oo nga po. if you could also supply us information on the pre need. thank you!

I still can recall, long before this financial trouble of AIG that offcials from PhilAm always tells thier client that they are very financially stable and nothing to worry because they are backup by the biggest insurance group in US which is AIG.

Now with AIG in financial troubles, Philam is disclaiming huge financial relations with them.

The way I see it, it’s like a person linked himself with the rich and power people for his business. But now that the rich and power is in a big mess, this person is denying any relation with them.

Let’s set aside the investment portrfolios of PAMI for the meantime. What if the custodian bank of these funds goes bankrupt, what will happen to the “cash portion” of the total portfolio? Are these deposited/distributed with different banks? Will this significantly bring the total value of the funds down? If that happens, there would be panic and massive withdrawal of investments.

To all,

Almost all mutual fund companies are very transparent with their books. All you need is to ask them.

Yan ang usual problem ng mga pinoy eh. Alam naman nilang may investments sila pero di naman sila masyado nag-reresearch mabuti, di binabasa yung pinapasok na kontrata. Mag rereklamo lang pag negative yung return.

I believe most mutual fund agents explain the risks involve in investing. They also explain the asset composition of the investments. So dapat prepared tayo.

Sometimes, kelangan din natin ng effort to gain knowledge. Mutual fund companies hold annual stockholders meeting, distribute year-end balance sheets and inform us about their investments. Honestly, medyo tamad din kasi tayong mga pinoy mag-research, gusto natin madaslas “easy money”. Kaya nga madaming na-dedenggoy sa mga pyramid scams eh. Kung mas inform lang talaga tayong mga pinoy di masyadong magpapanic na nakaka affect ng malaki sa NAV, hence hindi ganun sana masyasdo bababa ang NAV ng mga mutual fund companies. Kung alam naman natin na hiwalay ang PAMI sa AIG in the US then din tayo mag-aalala. Panic kasi causes distress in the market.

Di nga pala ako taga Philam. Most of my investments are in Sunlife, hehehe

from alijeffty gonzales on the “what now philam?” thread:

ordinary joe,

my apologies for the my incomplete response earlier:

the 10% limit applies to 2 measures;

first is that a fund cannot invest (own) more than 10% of the capital stock of the company (this is the PLDT illustration)

and second, it cannot invest more than 10% of its fund in a single security (this is what you are clarifying)

the percentage indicated in the report is the percentage of PLDT to the equity portfolio, you are correct in your observation that it is over the 10% limit, my computation shows:

PSG - 14.63% of 78.86% = 11.54%
GMFI - 18.12% of 64.71% = 11.73%
PFI - 18.05% of 64.25% = 11.60%

as this is obviously over the limit as set by law (and not because i said so), if you want to take this further you may have to direct your inquiry to PAMI

salve, i’m echoing the others who need info on the pre-need investments…

thanks!

one possible explanation however is that different stocks in an equity portfolio does not move in exactly the same “magnitude” given a time period, stocks that rise during the interim would end up with a bigger percentage allocation while stocks that declined would see their share of the total portfolio drop.

please see the excel illustration at http://www.acgadvisors.net

thank you,

ok a few quick comments:

@ salve:
wow, these funds should be called “PLDT” funds lol…imagine having almost 1/5th of the fund’s assets invested in ONE STOCK! talk about massive individual security risk lol

@ alijeffty gonzales:
i’m afraid you are gravely mistaken in your calculations and your concept of individual security weights within portfolios is flawed…

you said: “the percentage indicated in the report is the percentage of PLDT to the equity portfolio, you are correct in your observation that it is over the 10% limit, my computation shows:

PSG - 14.63% of 78.86% = 11.54%
GMFI - 18.12% of 64.71% = 11.73%
PFI - 18.05% of 64.25% = 11.60%”

the PLDT weight along with the other individual stocks add up to the TOTAL EQUITY WGT; therefore each security’s stated weight is already its allocation/weighting in the original portfolio…

i.e. in the case of GFMI, PLDT is 18.12% of the ENTIRE portfolio or 28% of the equity portion (and not 11.73% as you calculated)

lastly, banks, conglomerates, electric, electric power and gas, and mining are NOT broad-based sectors and should not be grouped with the broader based ones like finance, telecom. isnt banking part of finance? lol

@salve:
you should report these mutual funds to the relevant securities regulator as they are clearly in violation of the 10%-max-per-individual-security rule that jeff mentioned

@alijeffty:
one more thing. its a given that individual security weights will fluctuate because of their individual performance/return as of the reporting period. however, this alone cannot account for the fact that PLDT’s weight in some of these mutual funds were almost twice the allowed maximum.

this is also easily verified by checking PLDT’s historical weighting in the fund.

i bet you its always been around these reported ranges.

Hi Oda,

Re: GSIS Fund

maybe you missed the title of the column which says Top 10 holdings which is 67.94% of the equity portfolio, if my math is right there is another group of 32.06% invested in other stocks to total 100%

Salve did not indicate the portfolio allocation which is 64.47% equities and 35.53% fixed income, so maybe my computation of 18.12% (PLDT) in the equity portion of 64.47% of 11.68% (give or take a few bits) is correct?

regards,

@alijeffty:

either your math and assumptions are incorrect, or philippine mutual fund companies do not know how to properly report their holdings. apologies if its the latter.

any report publishing the “top ten HOLDINGS” of any mutual fund and their % weights should report the figures as part of the whole, not as % weights of the equity or fixed income portions.