Deposit Rates: ING etc. (2009)
My son's cheque finally showed up at ally.
Considering the starting up pains chronicled here and elsewhere for ally, I find it interesting that they seem to have mounted a massive publicity campaign. They have had full page ads on the back of the business section of the Toronto Saturday Star for the last two weeks. I have also seen several prime time TV ads.
By contrast internet Citizens Bank now shutting down retail savings never seemed to conduct any advertising, perhaps explaining why they only had a subscriber base of 30,000 in Ontario at windup.
If it had not been for snowback's original post here I would not know about CDF as I have not seen any advertising from them.
Still paying the top savings rate Peoples Trust does not advertise the fact although they show up in interest rate comparisons. Of course they do not have internet banking.
ING current interest 1.05% continue to advertise as does RBC with their 'Hi Interest' esavings of 0.75%
Considering the starting up pains chronicled here and elsewhere for ally, I find it interesting that they seem to have mounted a massive publicity campaign. They have had full page ads on the back of the business section of the Toronto Saturday Star for the last two weeks. I have also seen several prime time TV ads.
By contrast internet Citizens Bank now shutting down retail savings never seemed to conduct any advertising, perhaps explaining why they only had a subscriber base of 30,000 in Ontario at windup.
If it had not been for snowback's original post here I would not know about CDF as I have not seen any advertising from them.
Still paying the top savings rate Peoples Trust does not advertise the fact although they show up in interest rate comparisons. Of course they do not have internet banking.
ING current interest 1.05% continue to advertise as does RBC with their 'Hi Interest' esavings of 0.75%
For anyone interested, the transfer and other problems at Ally seem to be resolved, per posters here and elsewhere.
As a follow-up to my complaint to the ombudsman about the transfer screwups
post Sept.29
I received a letter by courier from the Managing Director, Ally dated Oct.7.
This seems to indicate that they take such correspondence seriously.
As a follow-up to my complaint to the ombudsman about the transfer screwups
post Sept.29
I received a letter by courier from the Managing Director, Ally dated Oct.7.
This seems to indicate that they take such correspondence seriously.
HSBC non-redeem 5-yr GIC at 3.7%
https://www.hsbc.ca/1/2/en/personal/tod ... ment-rates
Anyone know any other 5-yrs better rate?
https://www.hsbc.ca/1/2/en/personal/tod ... ment-rates
Anyone know any other 5-yrs better rate?
deposit rates
Attn: novice 99
Maxa financial is holding it's slight edge with 3.8% for 5 yrs, 4% for 7 yrs
http://maxafinancial.com/bins/page.aspx?cid=1719
Maxa financial is holding it's slight edge with 3.8% for 5 yrs, 4% for 7 yrs
http://maxafinancial.com/bins/page.aspx?cid=1719
- snowback96
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 1200
- Joined: 18 Mar 2007 18:15
For those that have signed up for Canadian Direct Financial's KeyRate Savings Account, it looks like they're also adding a Chequing Account:
https://www.canadiandirectfinancial.com ... tChequing/
Not sure there is a compelling reason to switch my chequing account from PC Financial but I think this is worth monitoring. Nice to see them building their product offerings. Next thing I need to see is online transfers and account statements.
https://www.canadiandirectfinancial.com ... tChequing/
Not sure there is a compelling reason to switch my chequing account from PC Financial but I think this is worth monitoring. Nice to see them building their product offerings. Next thing I need to see is online transfers and account statements.
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 153
- Joined: 09 May 2007 17:28
Does anyone know the expected/implied inflation rate for the coming year and average for next 5 yrs? The past 9 months is supposed to be negative .9%, I think. Also, what is the yield curve like? Real return bonds seem to be offering a nominal return of around 3.7%. For some reason I'd rather take a 5yr GIC with a 3.8% nominal return.(especially since I assume anticipated inflation is low over next 5yrs)
You normally buy RRBs on the long end of the curve, not the short end. So, you're comparing apples and oranges. If your need is 5 years, then stick with a GIC. If your need is 30 years, then compare RRBs and nominal long-bonds.Contrarian wrote:Does anyone know the expected/implied inflation rate for the coming year and average for next 5 yrs? The past 9 months is supposed to be negative .9%, I think. Also, what is the yield curve like? Real return bonds seem to be offering a nominal return of around 3.7%. For some reason I'd rather take a 5yr GIC with a 3.8% nominal return.(especially since I assume anticipated inflation is low over next 5yrs)
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 153
- Joined: 09 May 2007 17:28
rrb's have zero inflation risk so are more comparable to short term gics.bones1 wrote:You normally buy RRBs on the long end of the curve, not the short end. So, you're comparing apples and oranges. If your need is 5 years, then stick with a GIC. If your need is 30 years, then compare RRBs and nominal long-bonds.Contrarian wrote:Does anyone know the expected/implied inflation rate for the coming year and average for next 5 yrs? The past 9 months is supposed to be negative .9%, I think. Also, what is the yield curve like? Real return bonds seem to be offering a nominal return of around 3.7%. For some reason I'd rather take a 5yr GIC with a 3.8% nominal return.(especially since I assume anticipated inflation is low over next 5yrs)
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 3385
- Joined: 27 May 2008 16:25
No they aren't because you can't necessarily get out risk-free after a short period of time. RRBs still have duration risk. When expectations of inflation change, this affects the real yields on RRBs, and the effect of this rate shift on bond prices will be amplified with long-duration RRBs.Contrarian wrote: rrb's have zero inflation risk so are more comparable to short term gics.
Look at the behaviour of XRB from September 2008-September 2009. In three months we lose 17% and then gain it all back. With a weighted average duration of about 16 years, and the rule of thumb that you multiply rate change by duration to get the change in bond price, we'd estimate this comes from a 1% spike in RRB yields followed by a return to prior levels - and I believe this is roughly what happened.
Duration still matters! If there existed an RRB with shorter maturity (say 1-5 years) then we'd get the inflation protection without the same duration risk. With long RRBs, you get protection from short-term changes in inflation but large exposure to long term *expectations*...
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 153
- Joined: 09 May 2007 17:28
Duration should'nt matter to most people. If yields go up and your rrb goes down in value , you will sell at a lower price but your new investment will have the new higher yield. Duration should be irrelevant for most people. I dont know how inflation expectations would change real returns unless you mean changes in the predictability of inflation. Regardless, real returns don't change much. a 1% change in real returns is a once in a lifetime kind of thing.queerasmoi wrote:No they aren't because you can't necessarily get out risk-free after a short period of time. RRBs still have duration risk. When expectations of inflation change, this affects the real yields on RRBs, and the effect of this rate shift on bond prices will be amplified with long-duration RRBs.Contrarian wrote: rrb's have zero inflation risk so are more comparable to short term gics.
Look at the behaviour of XRB from September 2008-September 2009. In three months we lose 17% and then gain it all back. With a weighted average duration of about 16 years, and the rule of thumb that you multiply rate change by duration to get the change in bond price, we'd estimate this comes from a 1% spike in RRB yields followed by a return to prior levels - and I believe this is roughly what happened.
Duration still matters! If there existed an RRB with shorter maturity (say 1-5 years) then we'd get the inflation protection without the same duration risk. With long RRBs, you get protection from short-term changes in inflation but large exposure to long term *expectations*...
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 3385
- Joined: 27 May 2008 16:25
Umm... I sell an RRB at a lower price, okay, and then how exactly would I be sure my new investment will have a higher yield?Contrarian wrote: Duration should'nt matter to most people. If yields go up and your rrb goes down in value , you will sell at a lower price but your new investment will have the new higher yield. Duration should be irrelevant for most people. I dont know how inflation expectations would change real returns unless you mean changes in the predictability of inflation. Regardless, real returns don't change much. a 1% change in real returns is a once in a lifetime kind of thing.
I've run out of energy to respond to this but maybe someone else could step in
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 153
- Joined: 09 May 2007 17:28
Real returns should go up for all interest bearing securities , right? You should be no better or worse off. Your income stream will remain constant as long as you don't procrastinate reinvesting in another interest bearing security. If you need the proceeds to buy a house that would change things. The yield is only 1.6 percent on rrb's. It cant be a risky investment.queerasmoi wrote:Umm... I sell an RRB at a lower price, okay, and then how exactly would I be sure my new investment will have a higher yield?Contrarian wrote: Duration should'nt matter to most people. If yields go up and your rrb goes down in value , you will sell at a lower price but your new investment will have the new higher yield. Duration should be irrelevant for most people. I dont know how inflation expectations would change real returns unless you mean changes in the predictability of inflation. Regardless, real returns don't change much. a 1% change in real returns is a once in a lifetime kind of thing.
I've run out of energy to respond to this but maybe someone else could step in
True. But I believe that the funny business a year ago was a spike in liquidity risk and some "novelty" risk. Every investment that was not thoroughly familiar to investors was heavily discounted. While the liquidity risk may happen agan (the next time the financial system faces complete meltdown), I expect the novelty risk to slowly diminish over time.queerasmoi wrote:No they aren't because you can't necessarily get out risk-free after a short period of time. RRBs still have duration risk.
Yes, real rates do fluctuate. On nominal bonds, they can go negative. RRBs give some protection against this.
There was an old, old discussion here or on the predecessor forum, about picking the term of RRBs. The consensus, as I remember it, is that one should match them with one's spending/life expectation. Thus, I intend to annuitize at 75. If I plan to live until 90, then I should invest in RRBs maturing in 2036. If interest rates are low in 2021, when I sell and annuitize, then I will get a good price for the RRBs. But the annuity will also have a low interest rate, and so it will be expensive to get the payout I want. Conversely, if interest rates are high in 2021, I will get a low price for my RRBs, but my annuity will also cost less.
Oh, it exists all right. It's called a strip. Strips can be used to completely eliminate interest rate risk, even from real rate changes. Unfortunately, the price is dramatically lower liquidity -- see above for liquidity risk.If there existed an RRB with shorter maturity (say 1-5 years) then
George
The juice is worth the squeeze
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 3385
- Joined: 27 May 2008 16:25
Fair enough. Compare though to the US case where TIPS of shorter maturities are readily available in ETF form - thus much more liquid.ghariton wrote: Oh, it exists all right. It's called a strip. Strips can be used to completely eliminate interest rate risk, even from real rate changes. Unfortunately, the price is dramatically lower liquidity -- see above for liquidity risk.
George
- snowback96
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 1200
- Joined: 18 Mar 2007 18:15
Re: Deposit Rates: ING etc. (2009)
Just noticed CIBC has a new high-interest savings account, eAdvantage Savings Account. At a glance it appears to be a mirror image of Scotia's Power Savings Account. Currently they both pay 1% interest on balances of $5,000 and more.
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 6701
- Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:53
Re: Deposit Rates: ING etc. (2009)
Quick question for the po' QCers around 'ere.
A good number of the 'institutions' that give some decent rates are not open for business in QC: ex PCF, CT, ALLY ...
We won't get into the politics of the whys but does anyone have a list of those QC places that are better than RB or Caisse Populaire; rate wise.
thanks,
WW
A good number of the 'institutions' that give some decent rates are not open for business in QC: ex PCF, CT, ALLY ...
We won't get into the politics of the whys but does anyone have a list of those QC places that are better than RB or Caisse Populaire; rate wise.
thanks,
WW
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 3385
- Joined: 27 May 2008 16:25
Re: Deposit Rates: ING etc. (2009)
www.bankrate.ca seems to believe that Achieva is available in Quebec. Can't find any confirmation on this.
Re: Deposit Rates: ING etc. (2009)
The interest rate of ING savings account has been increased to 1.20%,
while MIP510, ATL5000 stay at 0.75%
while MIP510, ATL5000 stay at 0.75%
Re: Deposit Rates: ING etc. (2009)
For your information, MFC298 (Mackenzie cash management) reported inflated return rate from April 1 to Sept 15 2009. They've now adjusted their rate down to 0% and took back all the deposited dividends. Most fund holders should have seen adjusted share counts on their broker accounts in November.