Three and a half more months to continue contributing to my CC portfolio before moving onto building up my cash wedge as part of my early retirement plan. One important date along the way, October 8th my private equity funds liquidate and I’ll be contributing those dollars to the current portfolio. They’re held under the RRSP umbrella so I’m anticipating the monthly distributions of my RRSP to double. Two other factors to help me reach my end goal will be crypto recovery (potential distribution increases on a couple holdings along with potential sells for capital gain opportunities to redeploy) along with continued portfolio allocation rebalances in the name of distribution consistency/stability. My cash wedge investing will take 6 months so by the end of June 2027 I’ll know if I’m on track for retirement or if I’m still a little ways away. Either way the wedge will be in place for when that date happens. I’m thinking of a 50/30/20 ish split of my cash wedge into the following investments: 50% - Save Account (2.5% interest) 30% - $SPLT (6% yield) 20% - $CLSA (15% yield) More thinking to go into this % allocation, I think I’m set on the holdings and accounts.read more
Great to see all 5 Canadian Financial CC ETF with Leverage use different Strategy to generate income... $CBNK : https://www.mulvihill.com/cbnk Holds 6 Banks & $PIC-A 9% (using the leverage). Writes CC & puts only on the Leveraged portion of 16% & holds $PIC-A on the leverage portion of 9%. 100% growth upside just like DayMax Series. In fact they are the OG of generating income only on the Leveraged Portion. Current Yield of 9.15% (Monthly Distributions). $BANK : https://evolveetfs.com/product/bank/ Only ETF in this list that Holds 6 Banks & 4 Life Cos. Use 25% leverage and write calls upto 33% of the portfolio. Current Yield of 15.94% (Monthly Distributions). $SIXY : https://evolveetfs.com/product/sixy/ Holds 6 Banks. Use 33% leverage and write calls upto 50% of the portfolio. Current Yield of 21.94% (Semi-Monthly Distributions). $BKCL : https://www.globalx.ca/product/bkcl Holds 6 Banks. Use 25% leverage and write calls upto 33% of the portfolio. Current Yield of 11.48% (Monthly Distributions). $HPYB : https://harvestportfolios.com/etf/hpyb/ Holds 6 Banks & Canadian T-Bills. Use 25% leverage and write calls & puts to generate income. Holds 31% in T-bills in order to write puts. Current Yield of 13.18% (Semi-Monthly Distributions).read more
The reality is: a CC ETF limits my upside, but pays me monthly. I'll have a lower total return, but is that so bad given my goals? https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/qqqi-holders-gave-19-700-210529914.html If you're new to this: Covered call ETFs will LIMIT your upside, but it doesn't mean you don't get any. $19,700 is nothing to ignore, but this is besides the point. Income focused investors (from what I've seen) are always considering TIME. We know it's limited, it's fragile & we try not to take it for granted. If I bought the underlying, I would have made an additional 19.7k on a 300k investment, yes. The key? I'd have to wait a year. What happens/changes in a year? A lot of stuff. Hell, what can happen in a day even? For me, I always consider ''Yeah, in 10 years time my money could be worth more if I bought the underlying but, what if I don't make it?''. Sounds dull, but it's life. I plan to be around for as long as I can, but life is not guaranteed for any of us. People die in their sleep, in freak accidents, or get given a health diagnosis that cuts life in half. Ultimately, you have to ask yourself: Are you willing to risk & wait 10+ years in hopes to make more money & one day enjoy it? Or, are you ok with saying ''I'll take a lesser total return, but every month I'll get paid in a way that can change not only my life, but those around me'' Just food for thought. read more
Two funds. Two income strategies. Both paid this week. 🔒Ex-date Thursday 💰Paydate Friday $ODTE$0.068⬇️ $VAIE$0.0750⬇️ Last week : $ODTE$0.069⬇️ $VAIE$0.0770⏸️ 2 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.069⬇️ $VAIE$0.0770⏸️ 3 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.071⬇️ $VAIE$0.0770⏸️ 4 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.072⬇️ $VAIE$0.0770⬇️ 5 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.075⬆️ $VAIE$0.0780⬆️ 6 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.075⬆️ $VAIE$0.0780⬆️ 7 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.074⬇️ $VAIE$0.0760⬇️ 8 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.075⬆️ $VAIE$0.0780⬇️ 9 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.074⬆️ $VAIE$0.0783⬆️ 10 weeks ago : $ODTE$0.073$VAIE$0.07702read more
🚨 NEW FREE NEWSLETTER IS LIVE! I’m 55 with a portfolio of about $366,000, currently projected to generate $65,000+ in annual income. But can I really retire on it? In my latest FREE newsletter, I break down: • My current portfolio & projected income • My Four Horsemen: $OVL , $TDAQ , $GPIQ , $QQQI / $XQQI • Growth + income with $OVL • Satellite positions including $BLOX , $XBCI , $XLEI , $ISSB , $TMGN , $NVII & $EGGY • What happens if the market drops 30% • My plan to get to 59½ • The biggest risks I'm watching as retirement gets closer 👉 Read it FREE: https://myretirementtrading.substack.com/p/can-i-really-retire-with-366000-the?r=87vvyh&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true Would you feel comfortable retiring with $366K if it were generating $65K+ in projected annual income? 👇 Let me know what you think! ⚠️ Not financial advice. This is my personal portfolio and experience. Do your own research and consider your own risk tolerance. #Retirement #PassiveIncome #IncomeInvesting #ETFs #DividendInvesting #RetireAt55read more
Added more shares of $XSHP today to increase my $SPCX exposure while adding more income potential to the portfolio. 📈💰 Continuing to build my income-focused portfolio and looking for ways to balance market exposure with cash flow. What are you adding to your portfolio today? Not Financial Advice. #XSHP #SPCX #IncomeInvesting #DividendInvesting #ETFs #RetirementPlanning
Added more shares of $OVS today! 📈💰 I’m continuing to build my income-focused portfolio and increase the amount of cash flow it can potentially generate over time. More shares = more exposure + more potential income from distributions. Building for the long term and staying focused on the goal. 💵📊 Not Financial Advice. #OVS #IncomeInvesting #ETFs #Retirement #PassiveIncome #MyRetirementTradingread more
🔥 NEW VIDEO IS LIVE! 🔥 I’m breaking down my 5 satellite “Hot Sauce” positions that I’m using to add extra income to my portfolio: 💰 $EGGY 🚀 $XSHP 📈 $NVII 🔥 $TMGN ⚡ $TDAX Plus an honorable mention: $AMDY 👀 I share why I own them, the income they’re generating, and how I’m thinking about these positions going forward. 🎥 Watch here: https://youtu.be/MGwBnhgDxx8?si=BPpth1FKSCyqGVPB What high-income ETF are you watching right now? 👇 ⚠️ Not financial advice. This is my personal investing journey. Do your own research. #PassiveIncome #IncomeInvesting #ETFs #DividendInvesting #Retirementread more
For those following $BTC / $FBTC / $MSTE / $BDAY Bitcoin ($BTC ) is trading around USD $76K–$77K, and perhaps the most interesting thing about Bitcoin right now is NOT how much it has gone up, but how difficult it has been to push it significantly lower. This may be an interesting point for investors “with higher risk appetite and conviction” to do “their own research” and evaluate whether it may be an appropriate time to assess/increase their $Bitcoin exposure directly or through their preferred Bitcoin-related ETF ($FBTC / $BDAY / $MSTE / etc.) - This is NOT financial advice. In simple terms, Bitcoin is currently sitting in a “decision/consolidation” zone. In other words, the current $75K–$77K is the actual battleground. · If Bitcoin continues holding this area, the next challenge is approximately $78K–$79K. Above that, $80.5K–$82K remains the REALLY important resistance area. A sustained move through ~$82K would materially improve the technical picture and could reopen the path toward approximately $85K, followed eventually by the $90K+ region. · And if the market decides to go on the other direction: Watch ~$72K–$73K, for technical support zone; watch ~$69K–$71K, for strong technical support zone; and if it breaks below ~$70K = Medium-term technical structure becomes considerably weaker --- Personal Interpretation --- Bitcoin has faced quite a list of headwinds recently: • The Federal Reserve raised interest rates by 0.25% and indicated that additional tightening may still be necessary. • U.S. Treasury yields have moved sharply higher, with the 10-year around 5%. Higher bond yields generally create competition for capital and pressure risk assets such as Bitcoin and technology stocks. • The CLARITY Act failed its procedural Senate vote, delaying comprehensive U.S. crypto-market legislation. • U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs experienced roughly $750M of combined net outflows over Sep. 15–16. • Corporate Bitcoin buying has slowed considerably. – This value is estimate and it is hard to get a precise number at this point, please take this number with a grain of salt. • The U.S.–Iran conflict and broader Middle East tensions remain a major geopolitical risk. • U.S. efforts to further isolate Iranian oil exports create additional uncertainty around global energy supply. • Continued tensions involving the Houthis, Red Sea shipping and the broader U.S./UAE regional posture add another layer of geopolitical and energy-market risk. • Higher oil prices can feed inflation expectations, potentially keeping bond yields and interest rates higher for longer. And despite all of this... Bitcoin is STILL trading around $76K–$77K. And although it does NOT mean Bitcoin is necessarily about to rally up, it tells us something important: Sellers have been given plenty of reasons to push Bitcoin substantially lower…and, so far, they haven't been able to do it. That resilience is becoming increasingly interesting and relevant from market-structure perspective (medium/long term). The Psychology Is Also Getting Interesting… There has been a fairly widespread narrative within the Bitcoin community that the current Bitcoin "winter" could end around October/November 2026, roughly following Bitcoin's historical four-year cycle. And even though, markets don't have calendars, expectations themselves can affect investor behaviour. There may be considerable money sitting on the sidelines waiting for an anticipated October bottom before buying, leading to inevitable interesting question “What happens if that lower price never arrives? “, the psychology can gradually change from "I'm waiting because Bitcoin is going lower" to "Why isn't Bitcoin going lower?" then "Maybe I shouldn't bet against it." and eventually to "Am I going to miss the recovery?". And yes, we're NOT there yet, but I believe this potential sentiment transition is worth watching, particularly considering how many negative catalysts Bitcoin has recently absorbed without another major breakdown. --- TECHNICAL DETAILS --- For those who want to dig a little deeper · True Market Mean: approximately $76.7K. Bitcoin is currently fighting around this important on-chain cost-basis level. Holding/reclaiming it would be constructive, particularly if accompanied by improving spot demand. · 50-day SMA: approximately $72K. This roughly aligns with the $72K–$73K support region, making it an important area if $75K fails. · 200-day SMA: approximately $70K. A sustained move below this area would weaken the medium-term technical structure considerably. · $80.5K Corporate Cost Basis: Glassnode estimates the aggregate cost basis of publicly listed corporate Bitcoin treasuries around ~$80.5K. That creates another reason why the $80K–$82K region may act as significant resistance. - Please note that it is not possible to validate the “$80.5K Corporate Cost Basis“this point, please take this number with a grain of salt. The main BTC levels I’m watching now · $80.5K–$82K: This remains the major breakout zone I'm watching. I would prefer to see Bitcoin move convincingly above it AND subsequently hold/retest the area, rather than simply spike above it intraday. · $85K: Potential next resistance area following a successful ~$82K breakout. · $58K–$64K: This remains an important longer-term structural support region. However, I would NOT consider $60K the immediate downside target from here. Bitcoin would first have to break several important support areas around $75K, ~$72K and ~$70K. ETF FLOWS: U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded approximately $750M of combined net outflows over Sep. 15–16. That makes BTC holding around $76K particularly interesting, although renewed positive ETF/spot flows would provide much stronger confirmation that fresh demand is returning. - This net outflow number is estimate and it is hard to get a precise number at this point, please take this number with a grain of salt. MINING COST / "FLOOR" MODELS: Some current models place average Bitcoin mining production costs around ~$50K and use this to estimate potential cycle floors. I consider these useful reference points, but I do NOT hard Bitcoin price floors. Bitcoin can trade below estimated mining production costs, and actual costs vary significantly among miners. ---Disclaimer --- - Although I hold $MSTE , it is important to highlight that MSTE adds another layer of risk on top of $MSTR through approximately 25% leverage and covered calls. Leverage can amplify both gains and losses. Weakness in MSTR can therefore put additional pressure on MSTE's NAV, while a sustained MSTR recovery can have an amplified positive impact on NAV. - Although I do not hold $BDAY , it is important to highlight that it also employs approximately 25% leverage and an actively managed primarily ultra-short-term/0DTE options strategy. Its performance therefore should not be expected to perfectly track Bitcoin. - This post was created with assistance from AI tools including ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini and based on publicly available market, ETF-flow, macroeconomic and fund information. It is for informational and discussion purposes only and is NOT financial advice. read more
NAV erosion is somewhat of a scary term, and people use it almost like a scare tactic when speaking about high-yield investments. They proclaim “that fund has NAV erosion” but there is no explanation as to what it is or how someone might deal with it if they are choosing to invest in these funds. That isn’t very useful, and it doesn’t help anyone who might want to look at investing in income funds. Understanding NAV erosion is actually pretty simple. If a fund consistently pays out more than its portfolio is generating in total return, the difference has to come from somewhere. Over time, that can result in the fund's NAV declining. We don't need a bunch of financial jargon to make it sound more complicated than it is. Just spending more than you make will eventually erode the capital, and that is a concept nearly everyone can understand. Where it gets a little more nuanced is with the distribution itself, because a distribution is not automatically erosion. This is why sometimes you hear people say NAV erosion is a myth. They're looking at the fact that a distribution causes NAV to fall and correctly pointing out that the investor received that money. When a fund pays a distribution, its NAV normally drops by roughly the amount of the distribution because money has left the fund and gone to the investor. You had $10 in the fund, the fund paid you $1, and you now have roughly $9 in the fund and $1 in cash. You didn't suddenly lose $1. The value simply moved from inside the fund into your hands. That is not NAV erosion. A fund going down because market conditions changed and the underlying investments are worth less is not NAV erosion either. That's simply a market loss. So if the distribution itself isn't NAV erosion, and the market going down isn't NAV erosion, then what actually is? The issue starts when the fund does not generate enough total return over time to support what it is paying out. Say a fund starts with a NAV of $10. Over the period, the portfolio generates $0.50 of total return but pays out $1.00. After the distribution, the NAV would be around $9.50. You received $1, but the fund only generated $0.50 to replace what it paid out. Where did the other $0.50 come from? It effectively came out of the fund's capital. That might not look like much over one or two months, but keep doing it and it starts to add up. The fund is distributing more than its portfolio is generating and is left with a smaller asset base working inside the fund. A smaller asset base generally means less capital available to generate future income and capital gains. That is NAV erosion: spending more than you are generating in total return. For individual investors, there isn't anything you can do to repair NAV erosion because it is happening at the fund level. You don't control the investments, the option strategy or how much management chooses to distribute. What you do control is what happens after the distribution reaches your account. Spend all of it and that money is gone from the portfolio. If the fund keeps eroding and eventually cuts the distribution, you can end up with both a lower investment value and lower future income. You could choose to reinvest some or all of the distribution which will change how you individually experience that erosion. It does not repair the fund's NAV, but it does buy you more units. If the distribution per unit stays the same, more units means more cash distributions. Maybe your original investment was paying you $100 a month. By reinvesting, you gradually increase your unit count enough that the monthly distribution grows to $150. If the fund later cuts the distribution per unit by roughly one-third, your larger unit count could still leave you receiving around the original $100 a month. You could also take that distribution and buy other funds and that gives you some diversification and potentially other cashflows. The point is not that reinvesting somehow fixes the original fund. It doesn't. You are simply putting some of that cash back to work instead of consuming all of it. Ultimately, we come back to the same point: the distribution yield doesn't really matter by itself. Total return is what matters. It doesn't really matter how the return is packaged. One fund might give you most of its return through price appreciation while another gives you a large portion through distributions. If your intention is to preserve your capital over time, the basic rule is the same: you have to spend less than your portfolio generates in total return. And if you are fine with consuming your portfolio, there is nothing inherently wrong with that either. A high-distribution fund can do it in a very similar way to periodically selling units yourself. When more money is leaving the portfolio than the portfolio is generating, capital is being consumed either way. read more
Income investing has been around for decades, but the recent rise in popularity of covered-call funds has brought a lot more attention to the space. For many investors who are newer to income investing, covered-call funds have become almost synonymous with income investing itself. In the U.S., we have started to see far more variations of funds using derivatives to generate cash flow. You have everything from traditional covered calls and cash-secured puts to spreads and other more complex option strategies. Canada is still lagging behind somewhat when it comes to the variety of derivative-based income products available, although Canadians can choose to buy U.S.-listed funds. I’m curious how many people here are primarily using covered-call funds versus holding other types of income-producing assets as well. Things like REITs, bonds, dividend-paying companies, or other assets that naturally generate cash flow from their underlying operations rather than manufacturing a large distribution through derivatives. Do you diversify where your income comes from, or is most of your portfolio income generated through covered calls?
