w**x
发帖数: 362 | | B**********r
发帖数: 7517 | 2 I just sold all CAF, although it still has upside potential.
I bought more CHIQ, and sold some EEM weekly calls.
【在 w**x 的大作中提到】
: 还是太晚了。
| f*******e
发帖数: 5277 | 3 ASHR的prem有点高，CAF相对它长期-6%的discount来讲，现在也不便宜。等等吧还是 | Z******7
发帖数: 131 | 4 唱牛唱了两三年了，真正牛来了又开始拿不稳了，买来卖去还搞对冲...何必呢，从20
块拿到28块有那么难么... | l***o
发帖数: 5337 | 5 为什么在a股牛市开始的时候回头去搞chiq? chiq都是些中概和h股,这些资金肯定有回
流a股的冲动...对吗?
谢谢
【在 B**********r 的大作中提到】
: I just sold all CAF, although it still has upside potential.
: I bought more CHIQ, and sold some EEM weekly calls.
| B**********r
发帖数: 7517 | 6 1）A股牛市已经有两年
2）短期A股超买，大家都进来了，我反而觉得危险
3）A-H的premium已经超过11%，上证今年+31%多，恒生0%
4）CHIQ里的消费类严重落后，却是中国经济转型的方向
总之，我看长期估值，玩中期mean reversion，算是保守做法 | w**x
发帖数: 362 | 7 弱问一下，CAF 有lock period 吗？ | h******i
发帖数: 643 | 8 赞一个，
你要是说创业板代表了A股，当我没说话好了 | B**********r
发帖数: 7517 | 9 The bottom of A-shares and Shanghai index was December 2012 to June 2013
【在 h******i 的大作中提到】
: 赞一个，
: 你要是说创业板代表了A股，当我没说话好了
| v****n
发帖数: 40 | | f*******e
发帖数: 5277 | 11 谢谢推荐！
【在 v****n 的大作中提到】
: ASHR 溢价太高。建议试试 KBA
| v****n
发帖数: 40 | 12 最好少碰CAF。 那个用QFII，是封闭基金。看下面：
http://www.etf.com/sections/features/6636-caf-double-trouble-fo
Morgan Stanley’s China A-Share closed-end fund (NYSEArca: CAF) gets a lot
of attention. But that doesn’t mean investors should buy it.
CAF popped onto my radar screen recently because Tom Lydon at ETF Trends
highlighted the fund in this article. It gets called out in the Wall Street
Journal from time to time as well, and we regularly receive questions from
advisers who are interested in the product.
It’s the one closed-end-fund that even people who hate closed-end funds
like. And it’s easy to see why.
MattHouganColCAF is just about the only investment product that lets U.S.
investors tap into the domestic Chinese equity market. Most other funds,
like the iShares FTSE/Xinhua China 25 (NYSEArca: FXI) or the SPDR S&P China
ETF (NYSEArca: GXC), invest in China through either ADRs or so-called H-
shares, the shares of Chinese companies that trade on the Hong Kong exchange
. That’s because U.S. investors are effectively barred from participating
in the domestic Chinese markets.
But CAF has an exemption, thanks to a special agreement between Morgan
Stanley and the government of China. And so, the fund buys the shares of
companies listed on China’s domestic Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets,
which are otherwise off limits to U.S. investors.
The marketing pitch is obvious: Invest in the real China.
But CAF comes with two problems that most investors (and most media articles
) ignore.
First, like many closed-end funds, it’s plagued by premiums and discounts.
As of yesterday, CAF was trading almost 5 percent over its net asset value.
Investors should think twice before buying anything trading at a premium; it
’s like giving money away.
And CAF comes with double trouble. In addition to the premium on the fund
itself, the domestic Chinese market trades at a premium to what you might
call “fair market value.”
There are about 35 companies that list shares on both the domestic Chinese
markets and the Hong Kong markets. The shares are virtually identical, and
represent the same stakes in the same companies.
But for the past few years, the domestic Chinese shares have traded at a
sharp premium to the Hong Kong shares. Whether that’s because of a bubble
mentality among Chinese investors or because Chinese investors have limited
outlets for their capital is almost immaterial; the companies are overpriced
by international, truly open-market standards.
Hang Seng Indexes publishes an index that tracks the premium or discount of
these dual-listed companies. It’s ranged as high as 80 percent in the past.
Currently, it’s only 13 percent: the domestic shares are valued 13 percent
above Hong Kong-listed shares on average.
Maybe that will go higher or lower; who knows. But one thing’s for certain:
Investors who buy into CAF are paying not just the 5 percent premium for
the fund, but the 13 percent premium on the domestic Chinese markets. In
other words, they’re “overpaying” by 19 percent (or, to be precise, 18.65
percent, since 1.13 * 1.05 = 1.1865).
That’s fine, as long as investors know what they’re doing. But that 19
percent premium could collapse or even reverse, turning into a discount. The
risk is that you buy today when it’s overvalued, and then sell out when it
’s undervalued.
In other words, you’re making a bet on the structure of the market, not on
the market itself. You’re betting that U.S. investors will continue to want
to buy the fund, bidding the shares up over their true net asset value. And
you’re betting that domestic Chinese investors will remain exuberant,
overpaying for their domestic markets.
Just for kicks, you’re paying Morgan Stanley 1.75 percent for the privilege.
There have been stretches when CAF has outperformed funds like GXC (my
favored Chinese equity ETF), mostly when the China A-Share premium is on the
rise. In January of this year, for instance, CAF outperformed GXC by more
than 25 percent.
Maybe that will happen again. Maybe Chinese animal spirits will stir and
domestic investors will bid shares back up to an 80 percent premium.
For my money, I’d rather buy a fund that trades at fair value and invests
in a truly open capital market. Over the past year, that’s been a better
bet, as GXC has outperformed CAF by more than 20 percent. | f*******e
发帖数: 5277 | 13 09年的文章了。里面两条原因现在基本都不成立。
不过我也不喜欢CAF
Street
【在 v****n 的大作中提到】
: 最好少碰CAF。 那个用QFII，是封闭基金。看下面：
: http://www.etf.com/sections/features/6636-caf-double-trouble-fo
: Morgan Stanley’s China A-Share closed-end fund (NYSEArca: CAF) gets a lot
: of attention. But that doesn’t mean investors should buy it.
: CAF popped onto my radar screen recently because Tom Lydon at ETF Trends
: highlighted the fund in this article. It gets called out in the Wall Street
: Journal from time to time as well, and we regularly receive questions from
: advisers who are interested in the product.
: It’s the one closed-end-fund that even people who hate closed-end funds
: like. And it’s easy to see why.
|
|
