ValueBuddies.com : Value Investing Forum - Singapore, Hong Kong, U.S. › ValueBuddies.com › Personal Finance v
CPF was "100 per cent safe''

CPF was "100 per cent safe''

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
freedom Offline
Posting Freak
*****
Posts: 2,113
Threads: 19
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 5
#54
26-06-2014, 11:34 AM (This post was last modified: 26-06-2014, 11:38 AM by freedom.)
If you look at CPF as a company, it is very safe. It has a much better financial statements than almost all companies in the world.

http://mycpf.cpf.gov.sg/NR/rdonlyres/275...ements.pdf

The balance sheet is clean with no debt. Most of the investments are in Singapore government bonds, AAA rated.

So what's there "not safe"?

Plus, the investment is into Singapore government bonds, not "PAP" bonds. Even if PAP is voted out, the Singapore government should continue to honor the bonds, or it would not be voted in.
Find
Reply


Messages In This Thread
CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Lancelot - 23-06-2014, 01:54 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 23-06-2014, 02:18 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by GPD - 23-06-2014, 03:25 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by weijian - 23-06-2014, 04:00 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by DP28 - 23-06-2014, 04:08 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 23-06-2014, 05:05 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by tanjm - 23-06-2014, 11:21 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by LionFlyer - 23-06-2014, 05:33 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by weijian - 23-06-2014, 10:26 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 09:35 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by kagemusha - 23-06-2014, 03:20 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by GPD - 23-06-2014, 03:28 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by touzi - 23-06-2014, 11:34 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 09:39 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 23-06-2014, 05:37 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 09:46 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 24-06-2014, 09:38 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by corydorus - 24-06-2014, 11:06 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 24-06-2014, 12:29 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by investor101 - 24-06-2014, 03:05 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by izam - 24-06-2014, 07:38 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Zelphon - 24-06-2014, 07:58 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by WolfT - 24-06-2014, 08:13 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by izam - 24-06-2014, 10:53 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by corydorus - 24-06-2014, 11:37 PM
CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by ksir - 24-06-2014, 12:37 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 24-06-2014, 03:03 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 03:35 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by ksir - 24-06-2014, 04:05 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 04:29 PM
CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by ksir - 24-06-2014, 03:21 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 24-06-2014, 03:30 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by kagemusha - 24-06-2014, 04:43 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Lancelot - 24-06-2014, 04:55 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 04:58 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by GPD - 24-06-2014, 05:04 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 05:10 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by GPD - 24-06-2014, 05:29 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 24-06-2014, 08:46 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 24-06-2014, 09:17 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 25-06-2014, 02:42 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by kagemusha - 25-06-2014, 01:30 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 25-06-2014, 10:08 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by ksir - 24-06-2014, 05:07 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by thefarside - 25-06-2014, 08:00 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 25-06-2014, 10:34 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 25-06-2014, 10:52 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by chialc - 25-06-2014, 04:30 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 25-06-2014, 04:34 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 25-06-2014, 08:13 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 11:34 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 02:07 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 03:02 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 26-06-2014, 03:27 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 03:37 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 26-06-2014, 04:19 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 03:42 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by corydorus - 26-06-2014, 02:23 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 03:30 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 03:43 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 26-06-2014, 07:08 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 03:54 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by kagemusha - 27-06-2014, 02:01 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 27-06-2014, 04:12 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 04:03 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 04:22 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 04:41 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 05:02 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 04:33 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 04:40 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 04:49 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 05:14 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 26-06-2014, 05:40 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 05:58 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 09:42 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 27-06-2014, 02:20 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 09:33 PM
CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by chialc88 - 26-06-2014, 10:35 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 26-06-2014, 10:56 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 27-06-2014, 08:31 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 27-06-2014, 08:40 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 27-06-2014, 09:33 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 09:45 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 27-06-2014, 09:54 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 10:06 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 27-06-2014, 10:22 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 10:26 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 27-06-2014, 11:13 AM
CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by chialc88 - 27-06-2014, 12:21 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 27-06-2014, 09:56 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CY09 - 27-06-2014, 10:47 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 10:52 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 27-06-2014, 11:02 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 11:03 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 11:21 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 27-06-2014, 11:40 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 27-06-2014, 11:58 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 27-06-2014, 11:46 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by yeokiwi - 27-06-2014, 12:58 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by corydorus - 27-06-2014, 01:20 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 27-06-2014, 01:23 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by tanjm - 27-06-2014, 10:35 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 02:00 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 27-06-2014, 02:30 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 27-06-2014, 02:42 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CY09 - 27-06-2014, 10:44 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by tanjm - 28-06-2014, 12:10 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by egghead - 28-06-2014, 09:43 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 28-06-2014, 11:35 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by corydorus - 28-06-2014, 12:08 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by NTL - 28-06-2014, 12:27 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by corydorus - 28-06-2014, 12:35 PM
CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by chialc88 - 28-06-2014, 12:35 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by NTL - 28-06-2014, 12:59 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Porkbelly - 28-06-2014, 01:57 PM
CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by chialc88 - 28-06-2014, 02:33 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 29-06-2014, 11:43 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by NTL - 29-06-2014, 12:08 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Fish Head - 29-06-2014, 12:10 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 30-06-2014, 12:18 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by corydorus - 09-07-2014, 09:27 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 09-07-2014, 09:32 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by HitandRun - 09-07-2014, 09:39 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 09-07-2014, 10:10 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by HitandRun - 09-07-2014, 01:27 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 09-07-2014, 01:35 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by HitandRun - 09-07-2014, 01:53 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 09-07-2014, 11:03 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 09-07-2014, 03:45 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Freenasi - 09-07-2014, 04:32 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by CityFarmer - 09-07-2014, 05:04 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 09-07-2014, 04:49 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by nsengkia - 09-07-2014, 05:15 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by tanjm - 09-07-2014, 06:14 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 09-07-2014, 06:50 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by aspeed - 09-07-2014, 05:25 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 09-07-2014, 05:35 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 09-07-2014, 05:46 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 09-07-2014, 05:54 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 09-07-2014, 06:01 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by specuvestor - 09-07-2014, 06:49 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by freedom - 09-07-2014, 06:05 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 09-07-2014, 06:40 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by SincereKen - 26-03-2015, 01:15 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by NTL - 27-03-2015, 04:23 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by vesfreq - 27-03-2015, 11:36 AM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by SincereKen - 01-04-2015, 05:49 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Porkbelly - 26-03-2015, 08:41 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by Temperament - 27-03-2015, 05:22 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by tikam tikam - 27-03-2015, 05:50 PM
RE: CPF was "100 per cent safe'' - by SincereKen - 01-04-2015, 06:01 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)