From stocks to interest rates to real estate to resources, there was a lot to write about in 2013. There was also a lot of noise to cut through, and we were busy doing our part.

Below is a list of our most popular blog posts last year, as judged by you, the readers (well, actually judged by Google Analytics according to which postings received the most views).

1. RRSP Transfers – An Industry Embarrassment (Jul 22)
2. A Lot Has Gone On (Oct 31)
3. Better Investors – One Article at a Time (Jul 3)
4. Income Investing: Stay Balanced and Don’t Reach (Feb 19)
5. Real Estate Update – Part III: Why so Bearish? (Jun 13)
6. Mystified Over Fund Fees? Big Changes are Coming (Jan 19)
7. Purchasing Steadyhand Through Discount Brokers – Clearing the Air (Mar 27)
8. Heartbreak Summer (Aug 29)
9. Canadian Banks – The Next 25 Years? (Jun 6)
10. Dividends at any Cost (Feb 5)

Thanks to all our loyal readers! We look forward to keeping you well informed in 2014.

As a reminder, you can subscribe to our blog via email or RSS.

Turns out the world didn’t end in 2012. A good thing, really, as Tom and I had a lot to write about. With over 120 posts, our updates, explanations, advice, observations, opinions, musings, rants and ramblings were well received, despite the odd scathing comment (thanks Mom).

Below is a list of our most popular posts in 2012, as judged by you, the readers (well, actually judged by Google Analytics according to which postings received the most views).

1. Canadian Real Estate – More Reasons for Caution (April 25th)
2. Introducing the Founders Fund (February 21st)
3. Real Estate as an Investment? Look Elsewhere (March 17th)
4. Uh-Oh Canada (November 28th)
5. My Toughest Five Months (April 10th)
6. Asset Mix Update (June 11th)
7. Equities: The Most Despised Asset is Poised to Surprise (June 9th)
8. First Rant of 2012: RRSP Transfers (January 10th)
9. Market Support (June 15th)
10. Introducing Emmylou (March 6th)

Thanks to all our loyal readers! We look forward to keeping you well informed in 2013.

As a reminder, you can subscribe to our blog via email or RSS.

Another year, another 120 blog postings. We had some thoughtful, informative, helpful, useless, controversial and scathing posts last year, based on the emails and comments we received.

Below is a list of our most popular posts in 2011, as judged by you, the readers (well, actually judged by Google Analytics according to which postings received the most views).

1. What Now – Part II (August 10th)
2. The F-Bomb (June 22nd)
3. Monthly Income Funds: Some Useful Math (January 12th)
4. When Fear Rules the Markets, It’s Time to Say Buy (August 20th)
5. My TFSA Strategy (February 14th)
6. Investing Certainties in an Era of Economic Doubt (October 1st)
7. Steadyhand vs. ETFs (November 7th)
8. What to do About Japan – Part II (March 17th)
9. How is Your Portfolio Doing? (January 20th)
10. Hocus Pocus But no Magic (March 7th)

Thanks to all our loyal readers! We look forward to keeping you well informed in 2012.

(As a reminder, you can subscribe to our blog via email or RSS)

By Scott Ronalds

At Steadyhand, we think we’ve got the best business model and investment philosophy around. We offer investors access to talented and experienced investment managers (who are typically only available to the ultra-wealthy) and straight advice. We invest alongside our clients, charge low fees and provide timely & transparent reporting. Further, simplicity is a pillar of our company.

But ... we’re also biased in our assessment, and there are certain things about our business that we can improve upon. Here’s where we’d love to hear from you. In the comment box below, let us know what aspect(s) of our business we can enhance. Is our service/advice offering unclear? Is our fund lineup too limited? Do our reports and blogs put you to sleep? Do you want to hear more from our managers? Would you like to see more tools on our website? Is there too much paperwork in getting started? Does Tom need a new pair of glasses? You get the point. Don’t hold back.

Is it a long-term trend or an investment truth?

In my last Globe and Mail column (Much-maligned Greenback is Looking Increasingly Cheap), I held this question up to a number of economic factors - the declining supply of oil, China’s growth, Japan’s lack of it, gold’s status and the declining U.S. dollar.

I used the dollar as an example of the trend vs. truth dilemma, so naturally it produced most of the traffic on-line. But I did get a few comments about oil, questioning why it was even on the list. Michael James, one of my favourite bloggers, asked: “I was puzzled by the reference to oil. Isn't it true that we are running out of oil (but that experts disagree on how fast)?”

Of the ones on the list, oil would appear to be the closest to a truth, but even here, investors have to be careful. Perhaps we can say we’re running out of oil that can be brought to the surface for $50 a barrel. But what about at a cost of $75 or $100? As with every cycle, high prices support new innovation and lead to increased capital investment. The question is, what does the supply curve look like as prices go up? How high do prices have to go to double the world’s resource base?

It wasn’t too many years ago that the U.S. was running out of natural gas. Production was in steady decline. But low and behold, the technology to exploit shale gas came along and now they don’t know what to do with the resource they have (go figure?). And neither do we for that matter.

In any case, I’m not an expert on oil, or China or gold. The column was meant to point out that we need to be careful about what factors we declare to be facts.

Here are a few quotes from the comments posted on the Globe and Mail's website following my column on the U.S. dollar:

“... with a spendthrift administration and Helicopter Ben clearly willing to throw as much increasingly worthless paper as is necessary to (attempt to) mask the fetid, rotting mass that is the US economy, the greenback is going nowhere but down in the long run.” -Pikey 11

“The US is BANKRUPT bankrupt and close to being insolvent. All that's missing is market awareness....which of course can continue to ignore fundamentals for a very long time.” - sam enpadi

“Lets look at the two countries: we have oil gas coal wood gold silver copper platinum zinc uranium most of the fresh water in the world. they have crooked bankers huge debt and a big army with political gridlock for the next two years. whose dollar should be worth more??? ours of course 1.20 here we come and get used to it.” - oldcynic

“My my...look at the thread count of the Emperor's wonderful suit? It's SO FINE!” - sam enpadi

“Too many cops, too many tanks, too many lying politicians and not enough respect for liberty.” - respectfulcomment

There were lots of other comments that weren’t as visceral – they agreed with or poked holes in my argument – but clearly the consensus is very negative towards the U.S. and might I say, emotionally charged.

Currencies are complicated. They detach from economic fundamentals, sometimes trending in one direction for an extended period. And they are influenced by a myriad of factors including productivity, debt levels, purchasing power (measured by the much-maligned PPP), inflation and capital flows. It’s too bad it’s so complex, because if the dollar’s direction was based strictly on investor sentiment, the U.S. dollar would be a screaming buy. The fact that none of us have a good word to say about the U.S. tells me that the issues are well known.

In a recent article written about Steadyhand titled Mischievous Strangers and a Steadyhand, Karin Mizgala draws a connection between Tom Bradley and Charles Dickens. Very flattering. Especially when compared to some of the other comparisons thrown around the shop.

Karin, a fee-only financial planner and co-founder of the Women’s Financial Learning Centre, is referring to Tom’s frequent writing on the problem of relying on “mischievous strangers” (i.e., economists and financial analysts) to do our thinking and investing for us. In Dickens’ novel Hard Times, he similarly comes down hard on the bankers and other financial experts of the day and “rages against their dubious use of statistics to confound and befuddle the common man.”

Karin mentions Steadyhand’s commitment to educating the public about the investment industry from an “insiders” perspective and how we (Tom) are not afraid to express controversial views. She also has some kind words about Steadyhand’s investment philosophy and transparency in her article, which of course makes it a must-read.

We couldn’t have said it better ourselves – that’s what this blog is all about. And for those of you ladies who are interested in quality financial education programs which speak to women, check out the WFLC’s website (a little back-scratching, in the interest of transparency).

My last posting on packaged investment products generated a lot of feedback. There were some great comments posted on the blog, but I received many more emails from readers of the Saturday Globe and Mail. Below are snippets from some of the emails.

Of note, more than half of them are from fellow investment professionals who have had experience with the ‘products’ and feel the same way I do. The sampling very much represents the consensus of my feedback so far.

“As an advisor myself, I come across prospects who have these types of investments in their portfolios and have no clear understanding of the products. I often see PPN's inside fee-based accounts.” (TB note: Putting a PPN, that is already loaded with fees, into a fee-based account is egregious.)

"Excellent article Tom. Incredible how the industry knows that consumer ignorance is highly profitable.”

“I hope your message opens many people’s eyes, as it very well should!”

“I've noticed you're still criticizing ppns in your articles. I think it’s pretty funny that people would do that - given ppns are probably the best performing products in many people’s portfolios. Anyways - there is a significant increase in transparency and regulation for PPN both from the issuer and dealer perspective. Far more regulation, transparency, and better returns than the hedge fund industry...Bottom line is - I'm happy to pay a higher price for a product that will protect me from meltdowns like the one we are going through”

“Your Saturday column was sooooooo right on. We always say to our clients...if a guy talks to you about a PRODUCT or something where your capital is GUARANTEED...IT IS REEEEAAALLL EXPENSIVE. The salesman or his company will make the dough.”

“Your recent article in the Globe contains a sentence, Who's insuring who? Does one insure he or him?
He - who
Him - whom
Therefore, Who is insuring whom?
That simple.”
(TB: I need all the help me can get on this stuff.)

“Keep up the great work by informing Canadians about all these useless financial products out there.”

“Once again thanks for an excellent article today. "It will sell" is a clear proof that there is little difference between many salesmen in the financial industry and George Foreman. Except of course, that George's grill actually works.”

That’s how one reader felt about my last Globe and Mail column (Focusing Too Much on the Short Term Can Lead to a Short Career). 

I stand by what I wrote about long-term thinking, but in response to that comment and a couple of others, I should clarify one thing.  I am not suggesting that we should be oblivious to opportunities or risks that arise as a result of short-term factors.  Indeed, market gyrations are a boon for investors with a good sense of long-term value. 

Another reader provided some assistance in addressing the short-term/long-term issue.  He quoted Benjamin Graham’s The Intelligent Investor, which is the bible for value investors.

"Since common stocks, even of investment grade, are subject to recurrent and wide fluctuations in their prices, the intelligent investor should be interested in the possibilities of profiting from these pendulum swings. There are two possible ways by which he may try to do this: the way of timing and the way of pricing. By timing we mean the endeavor to anticipate action of the stock market - to buy or hold when the future course is deemed to be upward, to sell or refrain from buying when the course is downward. By pricing we mean the endeavor to buy stocks when they are quoted below their fair value and to sell them when they rise above such value. A less ambitious form of pricing is the simple effort to make sure that when you buy you do not pay too much for your stocks. This may suffice for the defensive investor, whose emphasis is on long-pull holding; but as such it represents an essential minimum of attention to market levels - except, perhaps, in dollar-cost averaging plans begun at reasonable price levels."

When in doubt, go to the source.

As 2008 comes to an end (thank god!), we’d like to thank all of the loyal readers of our blog.  We hope you’ve enjoyed our thoughts, opinions, commentaries, criticisms, musings and satires on investing and the industry that we call home.  Below is a list of our most popular postings for the year, as judged by you, the readers (well, actually judged by Google Analytics according to which postings received the most views).

1. RBC Buys PH&N (Feb 21)
2. Top Business Ideas for 2008 (Jan 2)
3. Get a Reality Check Folks: Those Low-risk Big Yields are History (May 6)
4. Put the Investment Guys Back in Charge (Feb 28)
5. The ETF Diaries – Part V: All Dressed Up and Nowhere to Go (May 13)
6. Mixed Emotions: Sadness, Fascination and Excitement Over the PH&N Sale (Feb 25)
7. Steadyhand Wins Coveted Lippy Awards (Apr 16)
8. Things I’d Like to hear – But Probably Won’t – in the World of Business (Jul 14)
9. Tax-Free Savings Accounts – The RRSP for the Facebook Generation? (Feb 28)
10. Retire 40% Slower (Feb 14)

We look forward to keeping you well informed in 2009.

Happy Holidays!