The Canadian Investor - 10 Costly Mistakes Canadian Investors Make

Episode Date: May 4, 2026

In this episode, Simon and Dan break down 10 common mistakes Canadian investors make, from treating the TFSA like a basic savings account to overconcentrating in Canadian stocks and real estate. They discuss why home-country bias can quietly increase portfolio risk, when CDRs and Canadian-listed U.S. ETFs may or may not make sense, and how withholding taxes, currency conversion, and account type can affect returns. They also dig into the psychology of chasing yield, the danger of focusing too much on dividends instead of total returns, and why high-fee funds should be judged on performance net of fees rather than fees alone. The episode wraps with a look at analyst price targets, investor pitch decks, and why relying too heavily on management presentations can lead investors to miss major red flags. Tickers of Stocks Discussed: V, RY, AAPL, GOOGL, AMZN, SHOP, CLS, CSU, FTS, VFV, VOO, BCE, MSTR, MSTY, ZLB, XIC, GSY, LSPD, WEED, CM. Subscribe to our Our New Youtube Channel! Check out our portfolio by going to Jointci.com Our Website Our New Youtube Channel! Canadian Investor Podcast Network Twitter: @cdn_investing Simon’s twitter: @Fiat_Iceberg Braden’s twitter: @BradoCapital Dan’s Twitter: @stocktrades_ca Want to learn more about Real Estate Investing? Check out the Canadian Real Estate Investor Podcast! Apple Podcast - The Canadian Real Estate Investor  Spotify - The Canadian Real Estate Investor  Web player - The Canadian Real Estate Investor Asset Allocation ETFs | BMO Global Asset Management Sign up for Fiscal.ai for free to get easy access to global stock coverage and powerful AI investing tools. Register for EQ Bank, the seamless digital banking experience with better rates and no nonsense.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Having cash on hand is essential for any business. Traditional business accounts hit you with high fees while paying little to no interest on the cash you need for day-to-day operations. That was our experience too, until we switch to the new EQ Bank business account. Now, every dollar earns high interest with no monthly fees and no minimum balance. You also get free everyday transactions like EFTs, bill payments, mobile check deposits, and 50 outgoing and 100 incoming free interackey transfers. And to sign up quick and fully online, no branch visits because, let's be honest, no business owner has time for that.

We use it for our own business and it's the first account that actually helps our money work harder while keeping operations simple. Check it out today at eCubank.ca slash business. Investing is simple, but don't confuse that with thinking it's easy. A stock is not just a ticker. At the end of the day, you have to remember that it's a business. Just my reminder to people who own cyclicals. Don't be surprised when there's a cycle. If there's uncertainty in the markets, there's going to be some great opportunities for investors. This has to be one of the biggest quarters I've seen from this company in quite some time.

Welcome back to the Canadian Investor podcast. I'm Simone Benaj. I'm back with Dan. Can't we have a fun episode here? So we're going to be going over 10 common mistakes Canadian investors. Make now, to be fair, there are some of these that you could find that investors in the US or elsewhere in the world probably make as well. But there are definitely some Canadian-specific ones. And we'll be talking also about some surveys that will illustrate some of these mistakes. So should be a fun episode. I know I've done, you know, in the past, not recent past, but in my younger days, I definitely

did a few of these mistakes. I would be lying if I said no. Yeah, I think I've made, well, eight out of 10, I would say I probably made. But yeah, that's kind of where I pulled the list from was, you know, stuff I used to do that I don't really do anymore. But yeah, it should be a lot of these are going to be ones that you, you might have never thought of or maybe things you're doing out of convenience that, you know, there might be a little bit better of an option.

But yeah, it should be a good episode. Yeah, exactly. So let's get started. The first one I have is treating a tax free savings account. to a TFSA like a savings account. And this one, unfortunately, it seems to be reoccurring. I thought over time there'd be more awareness, but for whatever reason, I keep seeing surveys that are done and just shows that a lot of Canadians are still really confused as to what a TFSA is.

So a TD survey that was conducted in late 2025 found that 65% of Canadians hold a TFSA, but 39% of them are not investing the money inside of it. It's even worse when you start thinking about Jan Z's and millennials, or 41% of them are not investing the money inside their TFSC. And this lines up. I search some older surveys because I'm like, okay, my memory can't just be my memory. I'm pretty sure I've seen these kind of surveys time and time again. And sure enough, I found one from 2019 showing that people either didn't understand

what type of investment can be held in a TFSA or just use it as a savings account. And for Jensie and Millennial who don't have a TFSA, three quarters of them stated that the biggest barrier preventing them from opening a TFSA is their lack of knowledge for that type of account. It's not, they didn't say it was because they had no money to put in it, which I'm sure a portion of them, that might be the reason, but they said it's their lack of knowledge. they don't know how to get started. So that's still pretty alarming, considering that the account has been around for some time and there's a lot of documentation out there. The actual costs of not investing the money can just be really massive.

So just as a quick example, and I made this relatively low because if we have, you know, younger listeners that are listening that may not have thousands and thousands of dollars to put in a TFSA that would apply a bit more to them here. So say you put $1,000 in a TFSC and add $50 a month for 20 years. At 2% interest, which I think it's probably fair for a savings account, 2%, because that's pretty much what you'll get, especially when you're looking at the banks that always give you the best interest rates when it comes to just savings account. Well, that $1,000 with the $50 monthly for 20 years would be a bit more than $16,000. But say you get a conservative 6% per year return by investing the money instead. So instead of afting $16,000, you'd get a bit more than $26,000 at the end of the same period. So it's a massive difference. Of course, if you have even better return, 7, 8, 9, 10% annually, then it's even more start than the example I gave.

But I wanted to show that it's really, you know, the difference can be large even if you don't have massive return. on your investment. And the other issue with using it as a savings account is if you are close to your contribution limit and then start really using it functionally as a savings account. So you would draw a bit of money when you need it, add it back in and so on. You can actually find yourself with an over-contribution. And that's pretty salty. It's a 1% penalty per month for the excess contribution. And then that can quickly eat into your return. It might not sound like a lot, but it could easily wipe out a whole lot of the returns that you've had for a given year just because you over-contributed. I mean, it's even more painful if you're getting hit with an over-contribution penalty and you're not even using it to invest. You're using it to save.

Then it's like, it's actually like leading to less money. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah, it's crazy. We've been, and I mean, a lot of people who are probably listening to this, this like, you know, this might not apply to them, but we're also. in, you know, an investing circle. Whereas, you know, it's crazy if you look outside of that circle, how many people don't know functionally how this account works. I mean, I get tons of questions a lot, not from my audience overall here, but just like, you know, outside of this of people that don't even know you can invest in these accounts, which is crazy.

They've been around for, yeah, we're going on 20 years almost, 18 years. Yeah, exactly. It's wild. And I mean, before we get on to the next one, It is something I'm slowly trying to build. So I'm looking probably towards the end of the year, early 2027. I'd be looking to build like really an investing course from A to Z, a really complete course looking at all the different investing accounts,

obviously having even a module on taxes, the different type of investments, how to get started to have a broker is like really everything you need to know and not just on stocks, but also bonds, a crypto, precious metal. So a really complete course. I've noticed there's not that much really out there in Canada.

There are some courses, but they're more like kind of specific. So it's something I've started to start planning. Feel free to reach out to us. You can or reach out to me. You can just send an entry form on our website. So the link is in the show know. If that's something you'd be interested in, it would not be a cheap course, just to be clear, but it would be, of course, I'd be very hands-on on.

a more premium course, but I think I've had friends and family, like literally mentioning this to me, like, smart people too and say like, oh, I'd want to get out of my mutual funds with the bank, but I just, I don't know how to get started. It's really overwhelming. So that's kind of one I'm targeting. So it's that something you'd be interested in it. I'm just gauging interest for now, but just shoot us an email and I'll respond myself. So anyways, shameless plug here. Yeah. It's been a, it's been a mountain. I've been asked to climb numerous times, but good on you for going down that route. It's a, it's a ton of work. Yeah, exactly. It's a, it's a lot of work up front. So that's why I would be targeting more late

this year, maybe as a beta. So for those interested, maybe you're part of the beta where I'd be doing some testing and then launching it maybe in early 20, 27. So that's kind of what I'm thinking. Again, these are just the early stage. I'm trying to gauge interest because it's a big time commitment to create the content early on. So before. I go and spend too much time, I want to gauge the interest here. So, anyways, having said that, I thought it kind of fit in well because TFS is kind of the basic to get started investing, especially for a lot of people or just starting. They'll have plantar room. What's your second mistake here for Canadian investor?

So it is owning CDRs versus the U.S. You want to explain what CDRs are? So it's a Canadian depository receipt. So these are very similar to ADRs, which are, you know, the American version where you can own international stocks on a U.S. exchange. So CIBC came out with these, God, it's got to be probably five years ago now. I think it was in like the midst of the pandemic. Yeah. With the Neo-Exchange back then, I think it was.

Yeah. So what they'll do is they'll buy, let's just say, for an example, visa stock. They'll kind of hold that visa stock in trust. then they issue units of that and you know you can buy them so visa is what 350 US dollars or something like that and typically when these CDR started they were 20 Canadian so you can buy them you know you kind of get I guess you could say fractional ownership of those US stocks and you also can keep them in Canadian dollars so a caveat to this is like CDRs are not bad products whatsoever like they're actually you know they make sense for some people the one the

One group that I think it makes sense for is if you're in retirement or nearing retirement and the bulk of your spending in retirement is in Canadian dollars. In this case, I think they are a solid option. I'll kind of go out, you know, as to why. But I think if you have a longer time horizon, personally, I think it makes, it does not make much sense to own these CDRs. If you're going to buy, like, say you're buying a Visa CDR and you're like, I'm going to buy this, I'm going to hold it for 10 years, 20 years, whatever the case.

may be, I think you're just better off owning the US dollar version. Well, especially now with fractional shares that are available for US stocks for the most part on like most brokers. Like you, you really, it's hard to make a case for owning those CDRs. Yeah, it's the main reason is the hedging cost. So these products are not inherently bad, but they have costs because CIBC hedges them. So the issue with this is if your time horizon is long, long, currency fluctuations tend to just level out.

So, for example, let's just say these CDRs existed and you bought one 10 years ago. They charge around 0.6% hedging fee every year. They don't, that's the max they can charge. They can charge less. You're not going to see this. It'll just kind of be kind of hidden in the returns, but they can charge you 0.6%. So if you bought this 10 years ago, you paid 0.6% hedging fee every single year to effectively get to the exact same Canadian US dollar exchange. change. So yes, you were hedged against the fluctuations along the way, but if your time horizon is long,

like, why would you care that you've been hedged over that volatility? If you're holding period is that long, it doesn't really make sense. Like, hedging really only makes sense to me if the volatility would be detrimental for you. And in this case, that is why I do think these CDRs make sense for specific people. In this case, like, the one event that would be impacting you is if you're in retirement and you needed to sell, you know, sell some units to fund spending. In that case, you don't want those currency fluctuations. And I think most investors own these because they're easy. But again, like, there's no free lunch in finance. Like, you are paying for it. And I mean, this is not something that's going to burn you all that hard, but it's definitely one that can

kind of chisel away at returns. I mean, if you have half your portfolio in U.S. stocks and most of them are CDRs, like that 0.6% adds up. And I mean, And like, nowadays, like with how cheap it is to just convert to U.S. dollars with Norbert's Gambit, it just makes sense to me if your time horizon is long to kind of avoid that fee. Whereas where they do make sense in some regard is, as I had mentioned, like say you're in retirement, you don't travel the U.S. very much. Like Canadian is like your primary currency. You get that Canadian dollar nomination so denomination so you can sell them.

You get Canadian back. your hedge against volatility and in addition of this you get Canadian dollar dividends whereas if you own Visa in US dollars you'd have to convert them back to Canadian and then withdraw to spend so they do make sense for some people but I think like I know a ton of people who own these CDRs they're very very popular products and I think it's just kind of a situation where people just don't want to exchange currencies yeah or I think sometimes they just get excited that they have like a hundred shares more shares yeah visa versus like, you know, 2.5 shares.

Like, I'm just, or yeah, I'm just making up numbers here, but that would be an example. But no, that's definitely a good one. There is an old saying in investing. It's not about timing the market, but time in the market. The most successful investors aren't usually the ones trying to catch every top and bottom. They're the ones who spend the most time in the market. I've been a quest trade user for over five years, and the reason I stick with them is that they remove the friction of regular investing. With no commissions on stock and ETF trades, you don't have

to wait until you have thousands of dollars saved up to make a move. You can contribute small amounts regularly and keep your portfolio growing consistently, removing the stress of trying to time the market. And they keep making it easier to build a well-rounded portfolio. Soon, you'll be able to trade precious metals through Questrade, giving you even more ways to diversify. Questrade makes the whole process seamless, allow you to focus on what really matters your investment strategy, not trying to avoid fees. Ready to invest, head over to questray.com, open and fund your account with code TCI and receive $50. Conditions apply. You know that moment when you're on the couch, shopping online, ready to checkout, and then you realize you don't have your credit card nearby,

and you have no idea where it is. And then you see that purple button. That's ShopPay from Shopify. It completely changes the experience. One tap and you're done. No forms, no hassle. Honestly, it's happened to me plenty of times where I just abandoned the purchase

because of that extra friction. From a business perspective, that really matters. Less friction means fewer abandoned cards and higher conversion. But Shopify isn't just about checkout. You can build your, store with customizable templates, manage inventory and payments all in one place, and even use

built-in AI tools to speed up product uploads and content creation. Plus, you can run marketing campaigns directly through the platform to reach customers where they already are. See fewer carts abandon and more sales go chiching with Shopify. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.ca. Go to Shopify.ca. That's Shopify.ca. Che-chain.

If you're a DIY investor ready to take control of your portfolio, BMO All In One ETFs simplify the process. Whether you're new to investing or looking to streamline your existing holdings, these all-in-one solutions are designed to help you invest smarter. With management fees on popular portfolios now reduced to 0.15%, you get professional diversification at a lower cost. Check out the asset allocation ETFs at bemoetifs.com. I'll move on to my next one here.

This is a classic one for Canadians. One that I think I'm a little bit guilty of, but home country bias. So too many Canadian stocks in your portfolio. A 2024 study by Vanguard found that Canadian investors have about 50% of their portfolio allocations. to Canadian equities and 50% to the rest of the world. It's hard to know exactly where the other 50% is by country.

Estimates are that, you know, the other 50% is obviously going to be predominantly in U.S. stocks. But I'd say as a total of their portfolio, the numbers I've seen is like 30 to 40% in U.S. stocks, but it's hard to say there. And this is while the Canadian stock market, at least in this study, was 2.6% of the global stock market. So typically, I think, just a number, I would say, is like 3% that's kind of use of what the Canadian stock market represents compared to the global start market in terms of market cap. And the study by Vanguard doesn't suggest that Canadians should only have 3% of their portfolio in Canadian stock actually says that they believe around 30% would be a reasonable target with the rest being in international stocks.

And there's also the factor of investing in companies that get their revenues primarily domestically versus companies that are global in nature. So think about a Canadian tire or TELUS compared to a Brookfield or Shopify. Very different. They're all Canadian companies, but they'll be getting a part, like Canadian Tire and TELIS will be getting a big portion of their revenues from just Canada or the midfielder. of it. Yeah, I'd say almost 100%.

Whereas Brookfield and Shopify, it's still going to be a decent portion, but it's much more diversified across the world. So they do make that distinction. And it's something that we've talked about before, Braden and I have talked before, where you can still have a pretty heavy Canadian portfolio. But if you pick the companies carefully, you can still have some good exposure internationally. The other issue with having too high of a home bias is that you end up being super concentrated in a few sectors.

So it's pretty simple here. Financial energy materials will be the sectors where you're going to be very concentrated. You won't have a lot of tech and your tech will mainly be Shopify, Celestica and Consolation at this point. Yeah. Celestica making its way there. So there's not that many names and a portfolio with less home bias will really typically be better diversified across sectors, give you more flexibility because some countries just have more exposure to different types of sectors. And keep in mind here, just to understand how insignificant the Canadian stock market is compared to the global stock market.

I'm not making this to take a jab at the Canadian stock market. I think it's the sixth largest globally. It just got passed by Taiwan. And I'm sure, you know, obviously Taiwan is because of one specific company. Taiwan Semiconductor, that's the big driver. there. So it's still the six largest in the world. So it's not to, you know, make any fun of Canada or anything, but it's still very insignificant because Royal Bank, the largest company in Canada by market cap, depending on, you know, the value of Royal Bank on any given day and what figure you're using for the global market cap, it's around like 0.15 to 0.2% of the total global market cap. And this is like what is considered a behemate in Canada. And it's still quite insignificant where you have companies like Apple, Google, Amazon, and all the big mega cap in the U.S., they're closer to 2 to 3% for the market cap on a global basis.

So just to keep that in mind, obviously, we're a Canadian investing podcast. I have plenty of Canadian stocks as well. But 50% is a lot. And I've seen people that are almost 100% invested in Canadian equities. And that can be very, very dangerous, very concentrated. Yeah, I think I'm about 50%, maybe slightly under 50% in terms of Canadian stocks. But if I were to... Did you listen to my segment carefully?

Got to get that down to 30. If I were to gauge, like, how many of my Canadian stocks get most of their revenue from Canada, I would say it's like it's got to be under 5%. Like most of the companies I hold on the Canadian exchanges, the vast majority of their revenue will be outside of Canada. So that's another important thing to take into consideration too. But if you're bank heavy, bank heavy,

like utility heavy, but even like a lot of the utilities have like even Fortis has a ton of operations in the United States. But bank heavy, telecom heavy is probably going to be that situation where you're generating a ton of revenue from Canada and just kind of exposed to that Canadian economy. But even if the.

These Canadian companies, like you buy a Canadian company that has the vast majority of revenue coming from the United States. I'm pretty sure they did some studies to find that those stocks tend to trend downwards or upwards with the index they trade on regardless. So that's another thing to take into consideration. But yeah, that's all I got for that one. You want me to move on to the- Yeah, go to your next one. So this would be holding Canadian wrapper ETFs and an RSP. So by wrapper ETF, I mean like VFV.

So it's a, it's a Canadian listed S&P 500 ETF, but all it really is doing is buying VO and then giving you a Canadian currency option to buy it. So I think this mistake, and I don't know if I mentioned an RSP or not, that's a pretty important part there in an RSP. So I think this mistake comes from the same kind of mentality as CDRs. A lot of people are just kind of kind of. owning investments in their own home currency. So they never convert it. They choose VFV over VOO for convenience. VFV is not hedged.

So you have done historically better than owning the U.S. one because the dollar is kind of, you know, softened over the over the last while. But because this is a Canadian rapper fund, the fund manager is who owns the U.S. assets, not you as an investor. So if you buy VFV, they don't see it as you owning VOO. They see it as Vanguard owning VOO.

So you still get charged at 15% withholding tax, even in RSP, because a lot of people are under the impression you want to own U.S. stocks in your RSP, dividend payers, which is true, but these don't really fall under that area. So again, this is kind of one of the mistakes that is highly unlikely to break you over the last while. I mean, the withholding tax would just be on the dividend portion of the distribution. So it's fairly tiny. And these ETFs do make sense, the wrapper ETFs in some cases, like from a tax perspective, I won't really get into it.

But I mean, when you start owning a lot of foreign property, there's some tax implications. So that'd be something way beyond the scope of this podcast. But for an RSP, like the optimal situation is to kind of utilize Norbert's Gamb to get those funds in U.S. dollars and just buy VOO instead. You're probably like, you're probably losing like maybe $30 to $40 a year maybe on a $10,000 investment. I would say that would be how minimal the impact would be. But, I mean, it's a small mistake nonetheless. Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, it's still, I mean, it's still not nothing, right? Like, it's probably, yeah, because it impacts really just the dividend payment is right at the end. So the SMP 500, for example, is not yielding a whole lot. So you're probably, you're probably, yes, like losing 0.3, 0.4% of returns every year, but it does compound. So if you're, you know, we talk about fees all the time and you want to limit those, you can almost see this as a fee that you're kind of paying, right? Yeah. So that's a way to see it. But, no, that's a good one.

Let's move on to the next one, just so we don't go on for over an hour. Here, we'll try to keep it under an hour. My next one here is one we've talked about before. chasing yield versus total returns. This one is really common in Canada. I don't know exactly why this is the case, but my best guess has always been that it's a bit of a byproduct of Canadian loving real estate because it's easy to, like, I think we all know someone who owns real estate or has income property and say, wow, like wouldn't be nice to just

have assets that passive income, exactly. that give me a nice steady income, but the problem from a purely mathematical standpoint, the yield just doesn't matter. As an investor, your goal should always be achieving the best whole return on a risk-adjusted basis. I think that's the big reason, like just to get back to the real estate kind of mentality that we have as a country or history. I think, I don't know, I feel like that's a big driving force where people are just looking for ways to generate that passive income that they've seen their their cousin, their uncle, whoever built over years owning real estate. And they're like, wow, I can actually recreate that with just owning stocks or ETFs. I have a few other ideas as to where I think it came from.

But I mean, I think for the most part, like dividend growth stocks coming out of the financial crisis, especially when rates were so low. like they crushed the market over that time period and a lot of the investors who came into the market over that time period adopted a dividend growth strategy myself included and did quite well for a while um the second one i think and is why it went from you know being popular to absolutely exploding is during covid like during lockdowns um like the passive income craze just blew up. And I don't know whether it would be from, you know, a lot of people losing their jobs and, and, you know, a lot of people thinking, you know, if I held funds like this, they would pay me every month, even, you know, if that situation didn't come up. And I say that because a lot of people

are saying, you know, like, oh, I don't, I don't need to rely on anything else because I'm generating this income. So the strategy kind of shifts to generating the most income possible so you can leave your job or don't need your job anymore. Like, I think that was all pandemic fueled. Yeah, that's a good point. That's a good point. Yeah, that's a very fair point. But from a purely mathematical standpoint, like really,

yield doesn't matter. And it's easy to say, okay, I'll withdraw the money I get from dividends and keep the rest invested. I think a lot of people just get reassured, right? They basically say, oh, I don't have to sell. I can just collect the income. And whatever happens, whether it goes down 20, 30, percent, the underlying price of the asset doesn't matter. I can just rely on the income,

but mathematically it doesn't matter. You're still withdrawing capital, whether it's taking the dividend out or simply selling part of your portfolio to pay yourself. And it really comes down to the psychology behind it. And for some investors knowing that they can still get income from the investment, regardless of the value of the portfolio, is a resuring and grounding feeling. I think it just comes down to that. And it helps them to stay investors. it even when the market experiences correction. The problem is that a lot of the content around this on YouTube that you might find without zeroing it on any specific content creators is they sell this strategy as guaranteed income.

Yeah. So, and that's what really bugs me is that's what you see with, especially with those covered call ETFs. And the reality is that income that you get from dividends or from covered call products is not guaranteed at all. And sure, the fund managers are probably trying to market it in some way, although they'll never promise anything because they'd be offside from a regulatory perspective, but it's not guaranteed. It could be reduced. It could stop coming in altogether. Sure, there are ways to invest in dividend stocks and try to minimize the risk of those dividends

being cut, but it's not guaranteed. You can have an adverse event, and it can happen. If you told someone five, six, seven years ago, that Bell would be cutting its dividend by what, like 40, 60%, 40, 50%, I can't remember the exact thing that they cut. They probably wouldn't believe you. So it can happen even to businesses that seem extremely stable. So I think that's really important. To me, it's always going to be total returns. I'll try to achieve and maximize the total returns.

And look, and sure, it may be a bit more volatility, but at the end of the day, I have still many years in front of me in terms of investing. So I think total returns is definitely the way to go. Investing just purely for dividends, but I think the biggest issue is just, it's really those who are chasing the high yields, like those posts that you see that people are trying to get 25,000 worth of income per year on an account that's $100,000. That's the one that I find really alarming. and the lack of understanding that they could just get really wrecked with that kind of strategy. It works until it doesn't and then it really blows up in your face. I mean, look to MSTY, which is like the micro strategy yield max fund.

If you bought $10,000 of it in midway through 2024, you have about $1,000 left. That's just an example. You've got that income paid out to you, but so it would be a bit better than that, but like make no mistake that thing is so deep underwater it's crazy but uh then that's an extreme example like some may have performed closer to the market benchmark but again it's still there's no free lunch in investing what you're getting at income you're losing somewhere else so just keep that in mind so let's go for your next one on the list here yeah so i have putting fees first and this one kind of seems wild to say but it's true but

I do find a lot of investors tend to focus on fees first. And then they kind of cast aside many strong funds because they're too high fee. And the one I can think of right off the top of my head is BMO's low volatility Canadian ETF, which would be ZOB. So the fund is underperformed recently because it has no energy or material exposure, which makes absolute sense. Like you're not going to put energy or material names in a low volatility fund because they are not low volatility.

But the fund has performed exceptionally. well on a risk-adjusted basis prior to this, but a lot of people overlook it because of its high fee. So it charges, I think, 40 or 45 basis points. So I think what investors should be looking at is performance net of fees. So it doesn't matter, you know, if a fund charges five basis points or 200 basis points, the only thing that really matters is the overall returns of a fund. So if a fund that charges 2% has provided higher net returns than a fund charging, you know, five basis points, your money is still better placed in the fund that charges 2%. You know, I mean, obviously, there's a hypothetical situation. The fund charging 2% could underperform the one charging five basis

points moving forward. But the main point here is, you know, fees are kind of irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Like when you're, you know, ignoring performance. So don't just avoid, you know, stronger funds because they're high fee and gravitate towards, you know, weaker funds because they're low fee. And this can kind of even be taken to an ETF versus, you know, individual stock standpoint. So there's a lot of commentary on people ditching their high fee advisors and going the DIY route only to underperform the very funds they left on a net basis. So, you know, if your fund manager was making you 9% a year and charging you a 2% fee, you'd better, You'd better be sure as a DIY investor, you're making at least 7% a year or else, you know, you would have been better off leaving your money where it was.

I find this is something that's often overlooked. Like a lot of people will take their money out of their manager and then underperform substantially compared to what they were earning before. So for many, though, this won't be an issue because they'll ditch their advisor. They'll buy some low-cost ETFs and very likely come out ahead. But I've watched countless investors, you know, ditch their advisor and just kind of signage. significantly underperform the broader markets with their own own strategy, sometimes even just completely blowing up accounts. So yeah, I mean, I'm not saying that fees don't matter, but really performance net of fees is what matters. Yeah, exactly. And I'm just showing here a difference

between ZLB and XIC. So the S&PTSX fund from BlackRock versus ZDLB you're talking about. So ZELB has underperformed in the last five years, but it's more because of the recent performance since maybe the last eight, nine months where you have X-I-C that really outperform. I think mainly, like you said, because of precious metals and natural resources and energy that have done extremely well. But if you look back at the whole five-year periods, there's like big chunks of it where ZLB was actually outperforming X-I-C.

So it just goes to show that, yes, Now five years it's underperforming, but there were significant periods where ZLB actually perform better. Yeah. And if you factor in, you don't want a risk adjust a risk adjusted basis. Like you're, you're talking about the way you get to those returns. You know, if two funds get to the exact same returns, ultimately the one with lower volatility would be the one that has a better returns on a risk adjusted basis. Like ZLB typically leading up until now because of, you know, energy and materials going through the roof. has gotten there with lower volatility. But a lot of people ignore it because it's an actively managed fund with a 40 basis point fee. So they choose XIC, which is probably what, five basis points, 10 basis points. Yeah, I think it's pretty low.

I don't know if it's that low, but maybe the last thing I'll mention here regarding advisors, I think you can, if you find like a good advisor, that still will put you in, you know, broad base index funds that are low fees and will provide you. you good advice and they'll actually earn their fee and provide you other services like retirement planning, tax planning, like all these other kind of services that good financial advisors will provide. You can really get value, even if you get charged 1.5%, whatever it is, if there's enough value provided, advisors can make a whole lot of sense. And where I think they also provide a whole lot value is for people who may not have the best temperament for investing, who may do some panic

moves where a good financial advisor can really help them stay grounded and avoid some really massive mistakes and earn their fees that way. So I'm not saying it's the right approach for everyone, but I think there's a lot of, a lot of people listening to this are obviously self-directed investors, but I think it's just important to remember that, you know, it may not be for everyone. It might not be suited for everyone to do everything self-directed. Or maybe you have a financial advisor and sure, they'll manage a bunch of different things, but you also talk with him or her and say, okay, well, I'd like to actually also put a bit of money in these companies and they kind of, you know,

they manage that for you too. So there is, I think it's more nuanced than I think a lot of people want to admit. Yeah. Yeah. But it's, you know, it's generally the, the best thing to say you ditched your advisor, but make sure you're earning more or else. Yeah. I mean, I think there's also a difference between a good advisor and a lot of the people that you would go to and talk to at one of the big banks, right? Oh, yes. Just basically mutual fund salespeople that, you know, if you've been listening to this podcast for a little bit, you're probably more qualified than them. So yes. Yeah. So I think there's a, big difference between that and actual, especially independent. Like a fee-only planner, whatever it may be. Fee-only or independent, so just keep that in mind. Yeah. There is an old saying in investing. It's not about timing the market, but time in the market.

The most successful investors aren't usually the ones trying to catch every top and bottom. They're the ones who spend the most time in the market. I've been a quest trade user for over five years, and the reason I stick with them is that they remove the friction of regular investing. With no commissions on stock and ETF trades, you don't have to wait until you have thousands of dollars saved up to make a move. You can contribute small amounts regularly and keep your portfolio growing consistently, removing the stress of trying to time the market. And they keep making it easier to build a well-rounded portfolio. Soon, you'll be able to trade precious metals through Questrade, giving you even more ways to diversify.

Questrade makes the whole process seamless, allow you to focus on what really matters your investment strategy, not trying to avoid fees. Ready to invest, head over to questrate.com, open and fund your account with code TCI and receive $50. Conditions apply.

You know that moment when you're on the couch, shopping online, ready to checkout, and then you realize you don't have your credit card nearby, and you have no idea where it is. And then you see that purple button. That's ShopPay from Shopify. It completely changes the experience. One tap and you're done.

No forms, no hassle. Honestly, it's happened to me plenty of times where I just abandoned the purchase because of that extra friction. From a business perspective, that really matters. Less friction means fewer abandoned carts and higher conversion.

But Shopify, isn't just about checkout. You can build your store with customizable templates, manage inventory and payments all in one place, and even use built-in AI tools to speed up product uploads and content creation. Plus, you can run marketing campaigns directly through the platform

to reach customers where they already are. See fewer carts abandon and more sales go chiching with Shopify. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.ca. Go to Shopify.ca. That's Shopify.ca. Cha-chain. Smart investing doesn't have to be complicated or time-consuming. With BMO all-in-one ETFs, you get a complete, diversified portfolio wrapped up in a single ticker. It's easy. Whether you're a conservative investor or more aggressive, BMO has an all-in-one solution for you. And now, it's even more cost-effective.

BMO has cut management fees to just 0.15% on select asset allocation ETFs, helping you keep more of what you earn. Simplify your investing today at BMOetifs.com. So let's go for my next one here is relating to housing here a little bit. So staying uninvested while saving for a down payment. So I think this is a really big mistake, especially with the price of housing in Canada not being cheap. So if you don't invest the money while you're trying to build that down payment,

you could be swimming upstream for a very long time to build that down payments. And I've seen people do this firsthand. So they're just saving for a down payment for a house and all goes, all the money goes to a savings account. First of all, if you're saving for a home, your first home, you should definitely start a first home savings account, FHSA. If you don't have one right now and you're saving for a home, pause this, go open an account because it's the best account in Canada combines the tax credit that you would get with an

RSP and the tax-freeness of a TFSA when you withdraw the money provided that you actually buy a home with it. If not, then the money has to be transferred into an RSP without going into all the inner workings of the account. But in a big kind of big brush, that's a small. essentially how it works. And depending on what you're looking to buy, you can be looking at a down payment that could easily be upwards of $50,000, even more if you don't want to pay mortgage insurance and you want to pay a 20% down payment. So you might be thinking 100, 150K, depending on

where you're living in Canada. And investing that money into stocks and other assets can really help you achieve that down payment faster. Of course, you have to be smart about it. You have to be careful. You don't want to be fully investing in stocks if you've reached your down payment goal and you're actively looking to purchase a home. That would be foolish. That would be a recipe to not be able to purchase a home if you have a big correction. That's at that point when you reach that or when you're close to reaching it, you definitely want to start derisking a little bit, have more into cash or cash-like investments. And then when you have your full down payment, then you would definitely want to start being on the safe side and pretty much have all of it

into cash or cash like investments like short-term treasury bills or something like that where you do get a little bit of interest on it because the worst thing that you could do is you have your money it's invested in the stock market fully you're looking for home and then there's a liberation data happens and you lose 5 10% and now you don't have enough money to put on your down payment But until you reach that point, not investing the money will slow you down in achieving your goal. There is no question about it. I mean, it depends the length of time. But typically if you're, you know, saving the money for five plus years, I mean, you're going to, in most scenarios, you're going to be better off with investing the money.

Sure, you could get unlucky and we could face a big bear market for a prolonged period of time. But the probabilities is that chances are you'll be better off if you invest the money while you'll. you're building that down payment. Yeah, when I was younger, I kind of used because I had employee, employer matching on my RSP. Yeah. So I would kind of max out my RSPs and then I use the first time home buyer to end up getting into a home.

But same thing. It probably took me, I don't know, I want to say two or two years to get there. I just kind of maxed out my RSPs and then they topped them up to the to the maximum amount. It was also a lot easier to buy a home. back when I first bought it, like back in 2011, I think I needed like $20,000 down. That was it. The situation is a lot different now with how much real estate is, has launched up, which makes it even more important now that.

Exactly. I think that's a reality of things. Like home prices have gone up so much that it's for a lot of people. Like, if they don't invest the money, it's going to be very hard to get that down payment unless they have a gift from their parents or something like that. So, yeah, I think that's. That's just a reality of where we're at right now. Sure, I mean, you can face some drawdowns and it could put you back for that goal.

But I think, again, if you repeat that scenario a whole lot of times, I think in general, you'll end up in front by investing the money. But of course, I think keep in mind and I can't reinforce this enough, when you have the desired amount and you're actively looking, you want to be in something that's very liquid. and cash like that's when you do not want to be invested because then that's a recipe for disaster. So move on. Let's move on here to your next one. We have what? You have two to go and I have one more. Yeah.

Yeah. So I have two left. You have one left. So using price targets in your research. So I mentioned this quite a few times on the podcast. We went over it on Thursday with, you know, the telecom price targets. But the sell side industry, you know, analysts sell sides who put all these targets, it is notoriously bullish. And I mean, this, this isn't because they're truly bullish on stocks,

though. That is the thing. It's because there is large scale incentives for the underlying firm they work for to be bullish. They're bullish on their careers. Yes. Yes. And I mean, if you miss the Thursday episode, you can go back and watch it. But effectively, somebody downgraded the telecoms and then the exact same analyst three weeks later upgraded the telecoms. So, yeah, that should, that should kind of tell you something about this space in general. But companies are not going to give investment banking work to institutions that have poor targets or bad outlooks on the company. Or at least they won't give as much. I mean, there's plenty of institutions that can go seek, you know, a debt issuance or an equity issuance for. So generally, the more bullish you are,

you know, they might give you a bit more money. So this is why buy ratings outpace, hold or sell ratings at a near 5 to 1 ratio. So targets follow prices. Prices don't follow targets. So it is very, very rare to see a downgrade in target on a rising stock price. So in addition to this, I mean, most targets are 12 to 18 months out. So like guessing stock prices 12 to 18 months out, it's pure guesswork. You don't have any idea where a target will be in 12 to 18 months.

So. Yeah, I mean, I know we talked about Go Easy a lot, but based on a lot of analyst targets back in September after there was that short report, Go Easy should be around $200 a share right now. Well, and that's what I'll get into is like they generally only turn bearish when it is absolute when it's an absolute necessity, like to the point where it would be borderline, they would look borderline ridiculous for them to not do so. And again, Go Easy Prime case. When the short report came out, most analysts retained their targets. They said there was nothing wrong. They reported a soft quarter after. They cut targets a little bit, but were still very bullish on the company.

And it was pretty much only when they needed to write off an entire year's worth of net income. And it's charge off rate triple to where they said, okay, we have to turn bearish now. Okay, we'll lower it by five percent. You got us. We'll lower it by five percent. Not doing so would have made them look absolutely outrageous. when in reality, they looked absolutely outrageous, reaffirming targets at that time. But, I mean, if you look to any struggling stock, price targets are often at peak levels right as the

stock collapses. Like, they aren't any sort of indicator for trajectory of a stock. In fact, like, there's a lot of evidence that highlights they are complete guesswork. So they ran a 20-year study of analyst price targets. So 30% of them were accurate over, I believe they did the next 12 months, but it might have been 18 months. So, like, you could take a retail investor. I would argue a brand new retail investor, give them a hundred stocks, tell them to make targets on them and check back in 12 to 18 months. I wouldn't be surprised if they got 30% of them right. I mean, it's really, I mean, you need less than one and three, right? So just kind of the quicker you get rid of these price targets, I think the better, or I don't want to say you can't

look at them, but I mean, if they're forming any basis of your research, I don't really think they should be. You know, you don't have any underlying motives to be biased or bullish. These analysts do in a big way. So yeah, I look at them. You know, if anybody downgrades a company, it's immaterial to me. Although stock prices move huge on upgrades and downgrades. It's just kind of the way the industry works. So a lot of people rely on these. Yeah, exactly. Like oftentimes I'll just see it and I'll be like, oh, why is it up like 5% and then an analyst just upgraded the company. But then, And again, it's always short term. It really does not have much of an impact on the prices as soon as you go beyond a few months. So it's very reactive and not much of an impact long term. Yeah. And I mean, they are using models. I don't want to say like they're just completely guessing.

They use valuation models and all that. They use a dart board and they have price targets on and they throw a dart wherever it lands. Have you seen the video? Yeah. Yeah. Shooting darts. I mean, that's, yeah. That's pretty much the accuracy.

I mean, if you have. 20% accuracy or 25% like you may be using a model but it's a pretty shitty model like let's be honest what I think the difficulty is you can't model something 12 months out like I could see them being a bit more accurate if they gave

five year price targets but you know you know what doesn't get retail to buy is five year price targets what gets them to buy is where this stock is going to be in a year for sure no exactly so no that's a good one the last one here is again tied to real estate a little bit.

So this one, it's just putting all of your wealth into real estate. And that is definitely a very Canadian thing to do. Oh, yeah. Very patriotic. And a lot of people that I'm sure you know someone listening to this, whether it's friend or extended family member that has made a fortune in real estate, whether it's having income properties or buying real estate decades ago and now they're millionaires on paper because of the appreciation.

I mean, a lot of baby boomers, and I know we have some listening, but I always shuckle when I listen to a couple of baby boomers that are close to me that thing, they're real estate geniuses because they bought real estate in the 1990s. It's kind of funny that I've seen that happen quite a few times. And the issue with that is Canadian real estate has really underperform equities massively over the last 50 years. I was looking at Mayor M-A-W-E-R for those looking for it. And all the studies I actually mentioned here are the surveys.

I'll put them in the show notes. So if you're interested in just having a look, go for it. But essentially what they showed is real estate has returned 6.2% over that last 50 years where it has equities, depending on the mixture of equities, whether you have just kind of mix. So I think it's 50-50, Canadian. U.S. equities are a bit more Canadian, depending what it is. You've at least achieved 7.5% or higher, depending on the type of equities that you've had during that period of time. It's underperform

almost every single decade during that period of time, with the exception of 2000 to 2010, which is pretty obvious why, especially if you have a mix of Canadian U.S. equities. I mean, you had the dot-com bubble and then the GFC in that time period. And this is all based on the Canadian oil pricing index, which is, of course, not the perfect measure, but it still give us a good idea. Also, doesn't factor in other cause that would eat into your returns for owning real estate that you would not have into equities. But I think it's a decent gauge here. And just the point being that if you're 100% in real estate and you have no other investment, then you're really concentrated in one asset type and really from a geography

fee standpoint as well. I'm not saying don't invest in real estate, but having other investments, it's really important because owning an income property can make a whole lot of sense, especially if you're handy and you can do most of the repair and you have the time to do it, but it's even more powerful when it's just one of your investment. So sure, have that income property, but also have a good diversify investment portfolio that is at least close in value to what your equity is in that property because just think about it. Right now I think it's easy to make this point. Someone who put all of their wealth in real estate really embrace that FOMO in 2021 or early

2022. Depending on where you were in Canada, there's a high chance it has underperform versus equities. And I would say a really good chance that it might be underwater currently if they wanted to sell. So they'd be completely wiped out. least losing quite a bit of their down payment if they decided to sell right now, especially when you factor in the fees.

And then you can factor in all different kind of things that are negatives from real estate to it's illiquid. So depending on where your real estate is located, it could take you months, if not years, to sell it. If you want a certain price, obviously, you know, everything will sell quickly at the right price and quickly is a big term because real estate quickly is probably like a couple months with closing the transaction, but you can still sell it relatively quickly, but you won't get the price that you want.

And one other thing that I think a lot of real estate owners, especially when it comes to income properties, are seeing. And I don't know if it's like this in Calgary, but in Canada and Ottawa right now, I mean, it must not be easy having an income property because rents are definitely taking a hit. Like you see all these new, brand new buildings coming up that are full on. massive building, rental building, and they are offering, like, it's pretty common for them to offer like two, three months of free rent to get you to rent now. So which, it's something you would never have seen three, four years ago. Yeah, I mean, if I were to go back to 2011 when I bought,

I would not buy all day, every day. I would just invest that money instead. I would be so far ahead because, yes, I, like, I live there for two years and then I rented it out for seven, but, Still, I mean, I would have been much better off just using that down payment, put it in the market and renting instead. Because, I mean, I rented it out no problems for around seven years. And then the last tenant I had absolutely destroyed the place. And like you said, the only reason I did not have to sink $30,000, $40,000 into that place is because I was handy. I did all the work myself, paint, floor, cabinets. I mean, it's, I exited that space.

It's really, I mean, I think my money is just much better. are off in the markets and it would have been looking back to my down payment relative to what that would look now. In some markets, it does a little bit better. I mean, I guess the caveat is I'm in Alberta. Yeah. Real estate has not been all that good here, but real estate has not been all that good for people 2021, 2021, 2022 in the hotbed markets either.

Yeah, it's a very regional market. And of course, I'm not saying don't own real estate. I mean, you own your home. I own my own too. I don't really see that as an investment. I own it to live in it. Like, yeah, exactly. I own it to live in it,

and have stability, and make sure we don't constantly move for my daughter. So there's different reasons that are non-financial. So it's something to keep in mind. But I think it's just important to be diversified because when you're entering a real estate bare market, which I think you can argue that we're in right now in most Canadian markets,

while if you're not 100% in real estate, it helps you weather that bear market, right? But I know a lot of people are just 100% in real estate. So they, unfortunately, they're probably hurting right now. But let's move on here enough about real estate. Yes, last one. Last one here before we wrap this up. So my last one is paying too much attention to investor pitch decks, which I think like this is. I know exactly who you're thinking about. We'll not mention any names, but I know a well-known YouTuber that has a tendency to do

this. There is, and it's not just that, like so many. people use these. And I mean, the thing about these pitch decks, nothing in there is wrong. But I mean, they are designed to do one thing. And that is draw investors into the stock. So they're produced by the investor relations team in coordination with management. Like these are not a thesis building tool. They are a marketing tool for the company. So it's good to look at them, but that should be about as far as it goes. I mean, every chart metric time frame chosen in these pitch decks. is to maximize the positive impression given to investors.

So again, like I said, the companies aren't doing anything they shouldn't be in these documents. They're just kind of lining it up to make it look the most bullish as possible. And one of the main areas you'll see in a ton of these pitch decks is Tam or total addressable market. This is probably the most inflated and blown out proportion of any pitch deck possible. And I mean, this is because Tam is often, you know, it's substantially higher than total revenue of a company. and it gives kind of the easiest outlook as a potential path to growth. And I mean, what they won't explain to you a lot is the difficulty of capturing any of this total market.

Or they'll say some pretty crazy things about how easy it will be to capture. Lightspeed, prime example of this. Like back in the day, they were, you know, 40 billion plus total addressable market, but zero long-term strategy to capture that market. Or at least they had a strategy, but it ended up being a very poor one. This is a company I owned,

I ended up, you know, taking the, the loss on it, but pot companies, prime example, like pot companies total address, massive total addressable markets. Yeah, according to them back in 2018, like every one was going to smoke weed and take weed in Canada for, you know, multiple times a day for the next 20 years. Yeah, that was, I'm exaggerating a little bit, but the amount of weed they were assuming Canadians would consume was pretty wild. I remember canopy growth, which is a company that I owned.

I ended up getting out of that one, like near peaks, luckily, but their market cap was larger than the total addressable market in the entire country. And they were one company. So I'll take another one as an example, and that would be Shopify. And this is nothing against Shopify. It's a quality company. But if you were to do a quick Google search and look at their 2021 pitch deck, you're going to see a big 41% compound annual growth rate on revenue chart. And, you know, not once is it mentioned that the. pandemic provided like massive, massive tailwinds that were unlikely to be ever maintained moving forward.

Like how many times, like how many small businesses were forced to go to Shopify because they didn't have the brick and mortar shop anymore. So, you know, from 2021 onwards, Shopify has grown at around 25% versus 41. So, but it doesn't really look as good for Shopify to post that chart with a 41% compound annual growth rate and put at the bottom that they expected to slow. Right. So, and then the other one would be like, go easy. Go easy's pitch deck. was I found it to be, it was bad. So they kind of talked about the industry leading charge off rates for a lot of areas. And then they took a bunch of a wide variety of like US based economic issues.

And they kind of showed how well GoEasy did during them. So I mean, it was the ultimate pitch deck to make investors think the company can get through anything. And I mean, what was left out was the fact that every time like people would push back at us for like raising red flags. and people will say, oh, it's hindsight 2020. Go back to like September of last year when even before that we were like just kind of confused as to how they were able to keep the charge off rates so low. Like we just, it just didn't really make sense with everything we were seeing economically and peers, how they were so much lower.

And then we started seeing more and more red flags in the fall of last year. So it's not like we were just, you know, in hindsight 2020. No, we started like raising that a wild bag. But what Bulls were saying, they would always get back to the freaking pitch deck. Yeah. That's all they would look at and believe management like on everything. And then as soon as you started digging into the actual financial statements, that's when you saw some head scratching stuff that wasn't really explained by management. Yep.

Like one of the main things in Go Easy's pitch deck was how well it did during the great financial crisis. And I mean, obviously Canada was. hit in the great financial crisis. But I mean, if you were to slap go easy in the United States during that time, I mean, it might have been a lot uglier. And I mean, they talked about their success during COVID as well, like the results they put up. I mean, you have to be kidding yourself if like COVID was anything short of just government

stimulus. Like that would have been, you imagine if the government didn't dish out all those checks, like all that money, it could have been an absolute disaster. So just like there's things you need to figure out as an investor. company is not going to give them to you. So, um, you know, these are, these are good reads, but they are not like they're the start, not the finish line. And yeah. And also sometimes it's just using logic, right? Like we just, like, go easy is an easy example. But, you know, another thing that sometimes people will say, like,

see as like, they'll state as like, oh, this company, like the dividend is safe. Like, look, I mean, in their pitch deck or whatever, they've raised a dividend for the last 30, 40 years. And, and oh, like, you know, they've never cut the dividend or people will say like, oh, well, look at them, like, they manage the great financial crisis so well, this management so good. Well, who is still there from that management team? Yeah. Like, it's just these kind of things that you're seeing. And a lot of the times companies will use like the pitch deck or, yeah, like the slide deck to kind of use that. But I will be devil's advocate. There is sometimes some good information and easier to digest. Yes. I always think of like CIBC, for example, in their slide deck, their investor presentation, they always have the proportion of their loans. So whether it's like mortgages, heel lock. So they give you like a nice diagram of where the loans are located. Like to me, that's just it's good information, easy to digest. Like there's no issue with that. It's just certain things like you said that sometimes they try to highlight the really good stuff only and not. put anything that could remotely be negative. I think the banks are actually in Canada not too bad for the investor present. Well, I think like once you get larger and you don't need to chase capital as much, you probably have less incentive to kind of, you know, market this pretty hard. I mean, you look at like a pre-revenue exploration companies pitch deck. Like by the end of reading

that, you think you've won the lottery with how... You're already a millionaire. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, you haven't invested. You're rich already. Yeah. So, uh, yeah. I mean, just, you know, another example would be, and maybe I'll eat my words, maybe they have this, but I would guarantee if you were to go into the telecoms, pitch decks, they'll show a chart of their dividend growth, but they will not show a chart of their payout ratios. Maybe I will be wrong on this, but I would guarantee that they, you know, they'll just throw, show the, you know, 20 plus whatever, it may be years of growth, but they won't show that, you know, the dividends been underwater as a, you know, in relation to free cash flow for the past three years.

it just doesn't look as good. No. Yeah, no, that's fair. Well, I think that's a good point to wrap it up here. Hopefully, yeah, these common mistakes. I mean, definitely some that I've made before, the real estate ones, definitely guilty of that where pretty much all my investment in younger years was all in real estate. The TFSA, when I first started investing, definitely made that mistake where it was like just a cash account,

where it really, when it just came out as an account, I had no idea what it was used for. so but I was to be fair I was in my early 20s that's like almost 20 years ago but hopefully people you know you learn something here and even if you didn't really learn much hopefully it can help you help someone you might know that is starting to invest and I will just say it again if you're interested potentially interested in the course I'm looking to build you can reach out on the website or you can reach out to me if you'd like on X just send me a DM if that's something you'd be interested on. I'll probably just keep an email list of people that are interested. And then when I do have the beta, I'd reach out to the ones that are interested. So we'll wrap it up as

that. Thanks for all the support. And we will be back for another episode this Thursday for more news and earnings. The Canadian Investor Podcast should not be construed as investment or financial advice. The host and guest featured may own securities or assets discussed on this podcast. Always do your own due diligence or consult with a financial professional before making any financial or investment decisions.