1NVEST0R MAND1R1 maen SAHAM bener

belajar MANDIRI, akan JAUH LEBE SUKSES (SEJAK 210809)

tetaplah mencintaiku: PREDIKSI ga ada 100% akurat 22 Februari 2014

Filed under: Investasi Umum — bumi2009fans @ 1:11 am

Feb. 21, 2014, 2:53 p.m. EST
Don’t try to time the market
Opinion: Diversification may be dull but it works

By Chuck Jaffe, MarketWatch

Shutterstock
William in Reading, Penn., doesn’t think the market is crashing tomorrow, but he does think there’s a disaster ahead — and soon.

Like many investors, he’s been nervous for a while now. While he managed to participate fully in the market’s strong returns of 2013, he has also been reading some of the sentiment suggesting that trouble is coming, pieces that suggest the current market trend looks alarmingly like 1929, the “great crash” that didn’t feel so great.

A 40-something investor with a fund portfolio who does “not want to see my plans to retire in 20 years messed up by a crash,” William is nervous mainly because in 2008 — when he did not foresee a crash coming — he “stayed the course” and it took his portfolio about four years to recover.

So William asked what he should do as the market moves towards the minefield he has come to believe is unavoidable.

It’s a common question for investors who have been buoyed by the market’s recovery from 2008 but who are scared by what they are seeing at least in headlines and analysis.

Before the sale, WhatsApp CEO detailed freedom of being ad-free
Before Facebook bought WhatsApp for $19 billion, the messaging app’s CEO and founder Jan Koum spoke at a conference in Munich about the company’s success using an ad-free monetization scheme.

And while investors like William want names of funds to consider for bad market conditions, the real answer comes in a question: Have you considered what happens if you’re wrong and the market doesn’t implode?

I’m not a market forecaster or a market-timer, but I’m enough of a market historian to know that doomsayers have called for at least 20 or 30 of the last three market crashes, and that optimists have ridden to the lows of terrible markets like 2008 with a goofy smile on their faces.

The question is whether any nervous investor considered the opportunity costs and consequences of making the wrong call.

William

wants to miss out on a crash, but being too defensive and missing a rally can have just as much long-term impact on his portfolio.

Nervous investors have a strong case for adding a bear-market fund, but going all-in on that call is tough to live with. As bad as most investors feel when asked about the last decade, most probably fail to realize that, according to Morningstar Inc., the average bear fund has been up just one time in the last 10 calendar years.

That one year, of course, was 2008, when the average bear-market fund gained about 30%. But if that big one-year gain convinced people to buy into bear-market funds after the crisis of 2008 had ended, they suffered an annualized average loss of 33% over the five years since.
DIVERSIFIKASI yang BIJAK
If the pick, instead of a bear-market fund, is for gold, the category average is better but not fantastic. Morningstar shows the average gold fund as being up in five of the last 10 years, delivering an annualized average return of 4.25%.

Many investors — William among them — finished 2013 wondering if diversification worked anymore, simply because of how strong domestic stocks were compared to the rest of the world in 2013. And just around the time they were thinking that they should go whole-hog into U.S. equities, the market took the bloom off that rose (though William confessed to still being mostly in domestic stocks, which is why he is so concerned about a crash).

Making a market-timing call requires good timing — not perfect, but good — at both ends of the deal, because if you buy in late, after the rise has started, or sell out only after a decline becomes apparent, you’re not achieving the classic “buy low, sell high” paradigm.

There’s no denying the hero stories of investors who have made it work; those guys routinely crow about their successes on chat boards, but those wins are not the norm.

Likewise, the industry buzz has been on “alternative investments,” which sound exotic but basically translates to anything outside of stocks, bonds and cash. The category also includes strategies that, in theory, work in virtually all market conditions — absolute-return funds, long/short, managed-futures and market-neutral issues and more — but the reality is that those fund types have not proven to be consistent money-makers; they rise and fall with market trends pretty much like everything else.

There’s no real proof that an all-alternative portfolio is a good long-term strategy.

“There are valid reasons why you should have alternatives — and perhaps lots of alternatives — in a portfolio,” said Tom Courtney, chief investment officer at Exencial Wealth Advisors, “but most of the money that has gone into that space has gone in as a way to avoid markets and to pick up return somewhere else. You shouldn’t be investing in alternatives if you just want to avoid equity markets and gain return elsewhere.”

“Stay the course” and “diversify” may feel like unsatisfying investment advice, but if William — and others like him — was sure of the call he’s making, he wouldn’t be seeking out affirmation for his hunches. If he is unsure, sticking with diversification — missing out possibly on maximum gains but also avoiding potential maximum losses — is the right way to go no matter what he thinks will happen next.

catatan INVESTASI SUPERJANGKAPANJANG @IHSG sejak 2000 s/d 2013, sebagai indikator IMBAL HASIL REKSA DANA SAHAM kita
Jumat, 20 Maret 2009 | 12:55
OUTLOOK IHSG
BNI Securities: IHSG Berpotensi Ditutup Melemah Hari Ini
JAKARTA. Analis BNI Securities Asti Pohan mengatakan, keputusan the Federal Reserve (the Fed) menahan suku bunga acuan di level 0,25% setelah dirilisnya data inflasi Amerika yang melebihi survei disambut negatif oleh Wall Street dengan penurunan 86 poin. “Penurunan tersebut lebih disebabkan aksi ambil untung pada sektor perbankan. Selain itu, penguatan yen Jepang dan euro menyebabkan bursa regional pada menit pertama bergerak di zona negatif,” jelas Asti dalam hasil riset yang dirilis hari ini.Asti juga memprediksi, penguatan mata uang dolar sepertinya masih akan terjadi terhadap rupiah. “Untuk itu, diperlukan langkah antisipasi dari pemerintah untuk menstabilkan pergerakan mata uang,” tambahnya.

Asti juga menjelaskan prediksinya atas kinerja Indeks Harga Saham Gabungan (IHSG) pada hari ini. Dia menjelaskan, kemarin, indeks saham nasional ditutup menguat. Hal ini bisa menjadi alasan bagi investor untuk mengambil keuntungan dari penguatan kemarin. “Data pasar dari luar bursa saham nasional kami yakini masih sangat mempengaruhi di mana menunjukkan keberagamaan,” jelasnya. BNI Securities memperkirakan IHSG akan menguji penguatan yang terjadi kemarin dan tidak mustahil ditutup melemah dan diramalkan
akan bergerak di level 1.315-1.365.

Barratut Taqiyyah

… UDA DAH, YANG NAMANYA PREDIKSI MAH, GA USA 100% BULAT BUGIL DIYAKINI … bahkan gw sendiri juga ragu2 apakah gw pasti bener MARKET TIMINGNYA … namun gw berusaha mencari peluang contrarian aja dan berhati-hati (

YAITU BELI reksa dana berbasis saham SEDIKIT2 SAAT KERAGUAN DOWNSIDE TREND JUGA BESAR, 

TAPI KETIKA KERAGUAN DOWNSIDE [IHSG NAEK] LEBIH KECIL, MAKA GW BELI LEBIH BANYAK; 

JUAL SEDIKIT SAAT KERAGUAN UPSIDE TREND SEDIKIT, 

TAPI JUAL BESAR SAAT KERAGUAN UPSIDE TREND BESAR

)… CONTOH:

ihsg dalam tren turun beberapa hari DAN PERSENTASE PENURUNAN RATA2 HARIAN DI ATAS 0,5%, itu artinya KERAGUAN AKAN DOWNSIDE TREND LEBIH KECIL, ITULAH SAAT BELI DENGAN CUKUP BESAR BISA DILAKUKAN
ihsg dalam tren turun beberapa hari DAN PERSENTASE PENURUNAN RATA2 HARIAN DI BAWAH 0,5%, itu berarti KERAGUAN AKAN DOWNSIDE TREND LEBIH BESAR, itulah saat beli dalam jumlah kecil bisa dilakukan
ihsg dalam tren naik beberapa hari dan PERSENTASE KENAIKAN RATA2 HARIAN DI ATAS 0,5%, ITU BERARTI KERAGUAN AKAN UPSIDE TREND LEBIH KECIL, itulah saat JUAL (PROFIT TAKING) DENGAN CUKUP BESARBISA DILAKUKAN (LIHAT CUS/CARI UNTUNG SESAAT dengan TARGET 5% dalam maksimum 1 bulan)
ihsg dalam tren naik beberapa hari dan PERSENTASE KENAIKAN RATA2 HARIAN DI BAWAH 0,5%, ITU BERARTI KERAGUAN AKAN UPSIDE TREND LEBIH BESAR, itulah saat JUAL SEKADARNYA BISA DILAKUKAN

……………………………………………. KERAGUAN bukan KEYAKINAN

ekonomi tak serius: tetaplah mencintaiku: APA ENAKNYA CUS REKSA DANA…

ekonomi tak serius: tetaplah mencintaiku: THE FLOOD OF POSITIVE SENTIMENTS….

Nov. 4, 2013, 12:58 p.m. EST

You really can time the stock market

A few key statistics can help average-Joe investors buy low, sell high

By Brett Arends

Shutterstock.com

The idea of trying to “time” the market — of trying to get in before it goes up, and get out before it goes down — has a terrible reputation.

Timing “is a wicked idea — don’t try it, ever,” wrote Charles Ellis, one of the leading lights of indexing, many years ago.

According to conventional wisdom, any attempt to time the market is fundamentally flawed. Stock markets follow a ‘random walk’, they say. No one can predict the market’s next move, so trying to do so will end up costing you money. A lot of your long-term gains will come from a few big “up” days, and these are completely unpredictable — if you are out of the market when they happen you will miss out on a lot of profits.

Enlarge Image

Money managers often push this idea to the clients. It has, from their point of view, a side benefit: It helps keeps the clients fully invested at all times, which means their assets are generating more fees.

But is the idea correct?

The simple answer: No. artinya pandangan para pengelola investasi bahwa tren harga saham TIDAK BISA DIPREDIKSI SAMA SEKALI sebenarnya, menurut penulis artikel ini, TIDAK BENAR SAMA SEKALI 

Yes, most people who try to time the market end up screwing it up — they buy and sell at the wrong times — but that does not mean the idea is flawed. tapi banyak investor GAGAL memprediksi tren harga saham seh … 

On the contrary, historically, “smart” timing, based on market fundamentals, has been one of the soundest ways to beat the market and produce above-average investment returns over the long term.

What is smart timing? Simple: It is long-term timing, and it is based on following a few solid valuation metrics.

sebenarnya prediksi jangka panjang itu lebe mungkin berhasil, dan ada beberapa ukuran valuasi yang bisa dipakai 

It is not about trying to trade short-term. It is not about selling stocks on Wednesday and planning to buy them back on the following Monday. It is not about obscure market technicals like “head and shoulders” formations or Bollinger bands.

It is about cutting your exposure to stocks when the market is expensive in relation to fundamentals, and keeping your exposure down—if need be, for years—until the market becomes much cheaper. It then involves increasing your exposure, and keeping it high, again for years if necessary.

cara sederhana: valuasi harga saham MAHAL, JUAL, lalu balik beli lagi saat valuasi MURAH

The myth of ‘random’ returns

Techniques available to anyone have worked, and worked well, for over a century. That does not mean they will work in the future, but it is a strong argument in their favor.

First, let’s demolish the myth that the stock market produces entirely “random” returns—that some years it’s up, other years it’s down, that over time it just goes up, and no one can predict anything in advance.

According to long-term data tracked by New York University’s Stern School of Business, an index of the top 500 U.S. stocks has produced since the late 1920s an average return of about 9.3% a year, when you include reinvested dividends.

menurut penelitian Fakultas Bisnis Uni Stern, sejak 1920an, 500 saham teratas amrik memberikan imbal hasil 9,3% per tahun

That sounds like a great return, and it’s the sort of thing money managers often tell their clients. But it contains two hidden nasties.

The first is that it isn’t adjusted for inflation, which means that in real spending-power terms you made several percentage points less each year. And the second thing is that those returns did not come randomly. They came in long waves—bull markets followed by bear markets followed by new bull markets. They were not random at all.

persoalannya, imbal hasil 9,3% tersebut tidak memperhitungkan angka inflasi

Using Stern’s data and inflation numbers from the U.S. Labor Department, I stripped out the hidden inflation in the stock market returns and looked at the “real” returns, in other words the returns in actual purchasing power. This is what actually matters. Then I looked at these returns over ten-year periods. The reason for that is that if you are an ordinary investor — rather than a trader on Wall Street — what you are usually looking for is somewhere to grow your money soundly over the medium to long term.

You can see the results in the chart near the top of this article.

setelah disesuaikan dengan angka inflasi, maka imbal hasil tersebut terlukis pada grafik di atas

These results are not random. They are nothing like random. The waves are as clear as — well, as clear as a big wave at Sunset Beach.

If you invested in the stock market in the 1940s or early 1950s, you earned spectacular returns as you cashed in from the gigantic postwar boom.

And if you invested from the late 1970s to the early 1990s, once again you earned spectacular returns in the subsequent returns due to the huge boom from 1982 through 1999. Lucky you.

But what about at the other times?

Hmmm.

If you were unlucky, or foolish, enough to invest in the late 1920s, the later 1930s, or between 1963 and 1973, you were right out of luck. Your returns were terrible. In many cases you actually lost money on the stock market, after accounting for inflation.

Not just for one or two years. Over 10 years.

So even though since the late 1920s the average ten-year “real” return to U.S. stocks (after inflation) has been about 6.4% a year, a quarter of the time it was actually less than 1.3%–a number I chose because it happens to be the guaranteed “real” return on long-term inflation-protected U.S. bonds (I own a few) available right now. When you deduct taxes and investment costs—even in low-cost funds—the actual returns earned by most investors were lower still.

Remember how people tell you the indexes will never let you down if you stick with them for five to 10 years? It’s nonsense.

Note also, please, that these 10-year figures do not include any allowance whatsoever for volatility. Someone who invested in Wall Street in 1928 and held on for 10 years earned a real return of just 0.25% a year, after accounting for inflation. But just to earn that miserable payoff he had to stick with his stocks during the biggest crash in modern history, the 90% collapse of 1929 to 1932.

If he lost his job, or even just lost some of his nerve (understandable), and trimmed his position in the meltdown, he didn’t even get his 0.25% a year. He probably lost money.

The go-with-the-flow crowd pretends that these long periods of poor performance are basically costless. “Just sit there and wait,” they say, “and the next bull market will come along in due course. Don’t try to time these things.” But that’s deeply disingenuous. While you are earning nothing in stocks, you are missing out on gains in bonds or other assets.

The full cost of waiting out these bear markets is horrendous. When you factor in the fees, the taxes, the volatility, and the opportunity cost of what you could have been earning elsewhere, the investor gets hosed.

Knowing the wrong time to invest

OK, some will say. I understand that if I invest in the stock market at the wrong time I may fare very poorly for a decade. But what help is that knowledge? It would only be useful if I were able to work out in advance when those wrong times were.

The good news? You probably can.

I say “probably” because humility is the first virtue of investing, and we can never know the future for certain. We can only apply intelligence guided by experience, and trust to strong probabilities.

There are three measures which have a strong track record of predicting whether this is a good time to make long-term investments in U.S. stocks. Some of them may even have worked since the Victorian era, though I am skeptical of stock market data going back before the World War I. Certainly they seem to have worked well since the 1920s.

Those three measures are the Cyclically-Adjusted Price-to-Earnings Ratio, or CAPE; the Cyclically-Adjusted Book-to-Market ratio; and the “q” ratio. Two of these measures — the CAPE and the q — are readily accessible to the public.

Wielding the CAPE

The CAPE has been popularized by Yale University finance professor Robert Shiller, most notably in his book “Irrational Exuberance,” in which he predicted the bear market which began in 2000. It is popularly known as the Shiller PE ratio. It helped him just win the Nobel Prize for Economics. A summary of some of his research is available here.

This metric compares the current prices of stocks, not to this year’s or last year’s per-share earnings, but to the average per-share earnings of the past 10 years (adjusted for inflation). The argument for using this measure is that it smooths out short-term booms and slumps in profits. By this measure, the S&P 500 index has historically been on an average valuation of about 16 times cyclically-adjusted earnings. When share prices have fallen a long way below that level they have proven to be a really good deal over time: Investors who got in when stocks were cheap and hung on made super returns. On the other hand, when the CAPE or Shiller PE has been much above 16, the stock market has been a much less good deal. The subsequent returns have usually been mediocre or worse.

For example a recent analysis by Mebane Faber of Cambria Investments found that, from 1881 to 2011, if you had invested in the stock market when the CAPE was below 5 — a very rare occurrence — you would have earned a spectacular 22% a year over the next five years, even after accounting for inflation. You’d become rich.

If you had invested when the CAPE was between 5 and 10, you’d have earned on average 13% a year.

On the other hand, if you had invested when the CAPE was over 20 you would have earned just 5% a year, and if you had invested when it was over 25 you would have lost money, after accounting for inflation.

The correlations are strong. So, for example, during the two golden ages the Shiller PE was low. In the 1940s and early 1950s, and again from the late 1970s to the early 1990s, the Shiller PE averaged about 12. On the other hand, in the late 1930s, and in the later 1960s, the Shiller PE frequently rose above 20. In the late 1990s, when the go-with-the-flow crowd were cheering on ”stocks for the long run” and urging you to increase your allocation, the Shiller was flashing bright red warnings above 40.

Clifford Asness, co-founder of money firm AQR Capital and one of the smartest market analysts around, has also studied the performance of the Shiller PE as a predictive tool. His conclusion? Historically, the higher the Shiller PE when you invest in the market, the lower your likely 10-year returns. The results aren’t perfect — in the real world time and chance happen to us all — but they are remarkable. “Ten-year forward average returns fall nearly monotonically as starting Shiller P/E’s increase,” he wrote to clients late last year in a quarterly report.

It is not a perfect measure, of course. The CAPE would have gotten you into stocks too early in the mid-1970s, and out again too early in the mid-1990s. But overall someone who had used the Shiller PE to guide their investment allocation to stocks over many decades would have beaten the market.

Taking cues from ‘q’

The same is also true of the “q” measure, originally studied by economics Nobel laureate James Tobin. This compares the value of U.S. company stocks with how much it would cost to replace all their assets. Back in 1999-2000, when Shiller was using the CAPE to predict the stock- market bust, British financial consultant Andrew Smithers and University of London finance professor Stephen Wright were using the q to do the same thing. They published the results in a book, “Valuing Wall Street.” Some of the research is available here.

The q and the CAPE correlate remarkably closely. Both tend to rise and fall at about the same time and the same way. The q can be tracked by looking at the Federal Reserve’s quarterly reports on money flows in the U.S. economy.

Historically, the “q” ratio averages about 0.6 to 0.7, meaning that the total value of U.S. stocks has typically averages about 60% to 70% of the cost of replacing all those companies’ assets.

Today both the Shiller PE and the q show the market well above long-term averages. The Shiller PE is about 25 and the q is 0.96. This suggests that investors should be exercising a sharp degree of caution. The corollary of this idea is that these things can take years to play out. The market can go up a long way before it comes back down—if it does.

Oct. 16, 2013, 6:15 a.m. EDT

Portfolio killers: 7 market-timing myths

By Paul A. Merriman

marketwatch

Market timing is much too big a topic to cover in 1,000 words or less. However, so many investors are mixed up about it that I’m going to wade in with both feet to try to dispel some of the misinformation that masquerades as fact.

What is market timing? At its core, it’s the desire to find a good way to be invested in stocks when they’re going up and to be on the sidelines when they’re going down. (Timing can be applied to bonds too, but we’ll stick to stocks for this discussion.) What could be more logical than that?

That desire is the first half of market timing. The second half is the belief that “a good way” to accomplish that desire actually exists. But there’s no general agreement that there’s any such system. Otherwise, most investors would use it.

In fact, the most widely used timing system known is what I call ICSIA. That stands for “I Can’t Stand It Anymore.” This “system” trades permanent financial damage for temporary emotional relief.

ICSIA is just as simple as it is awful. When the market is going up, investors who aren’t fully invested see “everybody else” making money when they are not. Eventually their frustration is too great, and they buy — but only after prices have risen significantly. It works in reverse, too. When the market is falling, investors wait to sell until their losses become too much to bear. By that time, stock prices have fallen substantially.

Myth: Wall Street, the financial media and most investors don’t believe in market timing.

Reality: Most investors, whether they will admit it or not, believe in timing. Individuals? ICSIA is widely practiced. Wall Street? There are always lots of experts ready to tell investors why they should be in long-term bonds or short-term bonds or why they should be moving into or out of cash. Financial media? The media are always eager to quote those Wall Street experts who claim to know “what investors should be doing now.”

Of course investors, experts and the media would quickly deny they are engaging in or supporting market timing.

Myth: Market timing requires predicting the future.

Reality: Predictions aren’t reliable guides to future market performance. Much more effective are mechanical systems based on established trends. In a nutshell, the difference is this: Predictions are opinions, while established trends are facts. (See the following myth.)

Myth: Market timing, if done right, can make you a lot of money.

Reality: The “right” way to do market timing, using mechanical trend-following systems, isn’t likely to boost your returns. But it’s guaranteed to reduce your risk.

In simple terms, here’s how a mechanical trend-following system works. Once the market has been moving up or down enough to meet criteria built into the system, a buy or sell signal is generated. Imagine a voice inside the system calling out: “This is a real trend, and it’s likely to continue.”

There are two important things to note at this point. First, a “real trend” can be defined many ways, but to rise above the “noise” of the daily ups and downs, a real trend has to involve significant movement up or down. Second, that means the “little voice” never gives a buy signal until well after the market has started going up and never gives a sell signal until well after the market has started going down.

Myth: Market timing is more risky than buying and holding.

Reality: In fact, it’s just the opposite. Above, I said a mechanical trend-following system is guaranteed to reduce your risk. How can I make that guarantee? Simple: The system periodically will issue sell signals, taking you out of the market and into cash.

If you use a trend-following timing system, you are likely to be in cash 30% to 40% of the time. Every day your money is in cash, it is not exposed to the risk of the market. A buy-and-hold investor, by contrast, is exposed every single day to risk and volatility.

Myth: Market timing prevents you from losing money.

Reality: Again, the truth is just the opposite. No investment approach can eliminate the risk of loss. The primary goal of timing is to limit your losses. If you use a trend-following system, you are essentially guaranteed to lose money, because you won’t get out until the market has gone down enough to trigger a signal.

Likewise, on the upward side, you won’t get into the market until it has gone up enough to leave the bottom-of-the-market prices behind.

Myth: Because it protects investors against bear markets, timing produces higher returns than buying and holding.

Reality: It’s true that timing often produces higher returns when the market is falling. But historically, the market moves up about twice as much of the time as it moves down. Timing helps returns during bear markets, but during bull markets it is expected to produce lower returns — and it usually does.

Myth: Investors must decide to either be timers or practice buying and holding.

Reality: About half of my own equity investments are timed by mechanical trend-following systems; with the other half, I buy and hold. Sometimes one side of my portfolio does markedly better than the other. After navigating many bull markets and many bear markets, I have found that the long-term returns of each half of the portfolio are about the same.

I recommend this dual approach to long-term investors who understand timing enough to keep their expectations realistic. For me, it gives me comfort to know that when the market is going up, the majority of my equity investments are taking advantage of it — and when the market is going down, half of those investments have the ability to go to the sidelines to limit my losses.

If you want to learn more, one good place to start is with a 2011 book by Leslie Masonson called “All About Market Timing.

Richard Buck contributed to this article.

… bandingkan dengan :<a href=”http://wp.me/PCcNK-1JM”>1st Step CALON INVESTOR</a>: dalam artikel di atas, diADU ANTARA SISTEM MARKET TIMING (TRADING) dan BUY&HOLD (INVES)… tapi gw PAKE 2 CARA ITU lah 🙂

Myth: Market timing is more risky than buying and holding.

Reality: In fact, it’s just the opposite. Above, I said a mechanical trend-following system is guaranteed to reduce your risk. How can I make that guarantee? Simple: The system periodically will issue sell signals, taking you out of the market and into cash.

If you use a trend-following timing system, you are likely to be in cash 30% to 40% of the time. Every day your money is in cash, it is not exposed to the risk of the market. A buy-and-hold investor, by contrast, is exposed every single day to risk and volatility.

 

Myth: Because it protects investors against bear markets, timing produces higher returns than buying and holding.

Reality: It’s true that timing often produces higher returns when the market is falling. But historically, the market moves up about twice as much of the time as it moves down. Timing helps returns during bear markets, but during bull markets it is expected to produce lower returns — and it usually does.

Myth: Investors must decide to either be timers or practice buying and holding.

Reality: About half of my own equity investments are timed by mechanical trend-following systems; with the other half, I buy and hold. Sometimes one side of my portfolio does markedly better than the other. After navigating many bull markets and many bear markets, I have found that the long-term returns of each half of the portfolio are about the same.

I recommend this dual approach to long-term investors who understand timing enough to keep their expectations realistic. For me, it gives me comfort to know that when the market is going up, the majority of my equity investments are taking advantage of it — and when the market is going down, half of those investments have the ability to go to the sidelines to limit my losses.

Jumat, 20 Maret 2009 | 10:25

LIKUIDITAS PERBANKAN
BI Serap Likuiditas Berlebih Perbankan

JAKARTA. Sebagian bank kita tengah mengalami banjir likuiditas karena mereka enggan memberi pinjaman kepada bank yang membutuhkan. Kini Bank Indonesia (BI) sibuk menyerap kelebihan likuiditas itu agar tak berdampak buruk, menaikkan inflasi dan memerosotkan rupiah.

Dalam beberapa pekan terakhir BI mulai menggelar lelang reverse repurchase agreement (Repo) untuk menyedot kelebihan likuiditas di beberapa bank. Kamis (19/3) kemarin, BI kembali menggelar reverse Repo terhadap enam seri Surat Berharga Negara (SBN). Dari penawaran yang masuk Rp 6 triliun, BI menyerap Rp 2 triliun.

“Pesertanya tentu bank-bank yang selama ini masih kelebihan likuiditas,” kata sumber KONTAN di BI. Kemarin BI mencatat terjadi kelebihan likuiditas di perbankan sebesar Rp 36,9 triliun karena ada instrumen moneter BI yang jatuh tempo senilai Rp 36,1 triliun.

Direktur Utama PT BRI Tbk Sofyan Basir menganggap reverse Repo bisa jadi pilihan bank untuk menyimpan likuiditasnya. Pasalnya saat ini BRI mengaku kelebihan likuiditas dan memerlukan tempat menyimpan likuiditas dalam jangka pendek. “Sebab, kelebihan likuiditas menyebabkan bank jadi tidak efisien,” katanya (19/3).

Setelah melakukan transaksi ini, bank juga bisa memanfaatkan instrumennya. Bimo Notowidigdo, Director Country Treasury Citibank NA menambahkan, “Jika bank itu memerlukan likuiditas, ia bisa langsung menjaminkan surat reverse Repo itu di Pasar Uang Antar Bank (PUAB).

Tapi, ini baru satu sisi dari masalah. Kendati likuiditas di beberapa bank melimpah, beberapa bank masih susah mendapatkannya. Akibatnya, perang bunga simpanan juga belum mereda.

Arthur Gideon, Dyah Megasari, Ade Jun Firdaus KONTAN

Iklan
 

Tinggalkan Balasan

Isikan data di bawah atau klik salah satu ikon untuk log in:

Logo WordPress.com

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Logout / Ubah )

Gambar Twitter

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Facebook

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Google+

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Logout / Ubah )

Connecting to %s