HGH - Heartland Group Holdings

[winner (n)]

Those numbers on RBNZ website are for Heartland Bank only ........ not Heartland Group Ltd which they are part off

Mind you Heartland Group would want Hesrtland Bank to go broke

[Waltzing]

RBO is big on farming...

note the high NZ capital ratio's are those T1? and MS Hellen Dervan still wants deposit insurance ....

[Red Baron]

I heard from a cocky that they are only getting $60/lamb compared to $120+ over the last few years. Holding security of stock that has halved in value will be putting pressure on things... also the banks are also starting to put some real pressure on farmers.

How can an animal that vas not even born at ze last valuation date have 'halved in value'?

RB

[BlackPeter]

...

HGH is like any other stock - it has its supporters and its detractors. Each can point towards "metrics" to support their views. What is unarguable is that the market as a whole has become very wary of it and suspicious of the claims that "this time it's different." The TA doesn't lie. Nor does the share price - stuck just below or above the CR price, and less than half of what it was a couple of years ago.

...

Sure - nobody, neither me,  nor Beagle nor you has any clue how the stock will develop. This is the thing with trying to predict the future, its just a fools game.

However reading your comments re trend and TA with - hmm - interest. Are you sure you don't want to rethink that? What you are saying is that one should buy stocks when they are dear (in order to agree with the market) and sell them when they are low (just to keep this market agreement aligned), which is clearly non-sense, but so often postulated in share forums.

Lets face it - the market demonstrated often enough that it has no clue how it will move either. Just look at all these once have been market darlings and wonder how right the market was for the people who bought e.g. ATM or SML or MPG or FBU or ... at a premium (hey, market used to agree that $12 is a really good price for SML, didn't it? Just imagine - that's what the infallible market said. Lets face it - market is not made up of super intelligent people, but out of a bunch of random people controlled as much by chemistry and reptile brain than by intelligence. Quite random, actually.

Your argument is absolutely pointless and just designed to rise the fear for unexperienced investors. TA describes the historical movements of a stampeding flock of sheep. Not more, and not less. Yes, it tells you what these sheep used to do over the last handful of moves, but it does not know more about where they are going from here than the guts of a freshly slaughtered lamb.

So - yes, there are risks with HGH (as well as with any other stock) and there are opportunities. If you look into the past (as you seem to like to do) you will find that most investors with HGH had a quite satisfactory return. Not stellar, but quite satisfactory. Well, this is what I got so far from HGH. And yes, I typically sold some (or even all) when they have been dear and bought some more when they have been cheap (like now). Obviously - you, me or anybody else can find time windows where investors made losses with HGH as well as time windows, where investors made significant gains. Not different to any other investment.

I guess it all depends on our investment strategy. Some (e.g. momentum investors) like to chase the herd -  and yes, some of them even make money that way. Some like to invest based on fundamentals - and many make a satisfactory return that way. Some like to leave the investment decision to the market (index investors) - and they make as well (over time) a quite reasonable return ... and some like to follow the voices on some anonymous internet forum ... and I better don't share my view of how they are doing unless they add a ton of salt to the views. 

HGH is currently cheap. So - sorry for not following your advise of buying dear and selling cheap, but hey - it works better for me to do it the other way around. Buffet would agree, but what would he know?

[LoungeLizard]

Sure - nobody, neither me,  nor Beagle nor you has any clue how the stock will develop. This is the thing with trying to predict the future, its just a fools game.

However reading your comments re trend and TA with - hmm - interest. Are you sure you don't want to rethink that? What you are saying is that one should buy stocks when they are dear (in order to agree with the market) and sell them when they are low (just to keep this market agreement aligned), which is clearly non-sense, but so often postulated in share forums.

Lets face it - the market demonstrated often enough that it has no clue how it will move either. Just look at all these once have been market darlings and wonder how right the market was for the people who bought e.g. ATM or SML or MPG or FBU or ... at a premium (hey, market used to agree that $12 is a really good price for SML, didn't it? Just imagine - that's what the infallible market said. Lets face it - market is not made up of super intelligent people, but out of a bunch of random people controlled as much by chemistry and reptile brain than by intelligence. Quite random, actually.

Your argument is absolutely pointless and just designed to rise the fear for unexperienced investors. TA describes the historical movements of a stampeding flock of sheep. Not more, and not less. Yes, it tells you what these sheep used to do over the last handful of moves, but it does not know more about where they are going from here than the guts of a freshly slaughtered lamb.

So - yes, there are risks with HGH (as well as with any other stock) and there are opportunities. If you look into the past (as you seem to like to do) you will find that most investors with HGH had a quite satisfactory return. Not stellar, but quite satisfactory. Well, this is what I got so far from HGH. And yes, I typically sold some (or even all) when they have been dear and bought some more when they have been cheap (like now). Obviously - you, me or anybody else can find time windows where investors made losses with HGH as well as time windows, where investors made significant gains. Not different to any other investment.

I guess it all depends on our investment strategy. Some (e.g. momentum investors) like to chase the herd -  and yes, some of them even make money that way. Some like to invest based on fundamentals - and many make a satisfactory return that way. Some like to leave the investment decision to the market (index investors) - and they make as well (over time) a quite reasonable return ... and some like to follow the voices on some anonymous internet forum ... and I better don't share my view of how they are doing unless they add a ton of salt to the views. 

HGH is currently cheap. So - sorry for not following your advise of buying dear and selling cheap, but hey - it works better for me to do it the other way around. Buffet would agree, but what would he know?

I thought it was pretty obvious that all I was saying is "don't buy in a downtrend." - which HGH clearly is. TA isn't about a particular price point, cheap or dear. Those that tried to pick the bottom based on what they considered "value" but in doing so ignored the trend, have already been caught out. Staying out until the upswing is confirmed proved to be the right option. It still is.

 Buffet's method is about assessing value, which I guess is your preferred method. Fair enough, over time perhaps HGH will prove itself to be undervalued. Just at the moment the market, as demonstrated by the TA doesn't believe that story. That's why I'm not interested in tie-ing up funds in a stock that is clearly stuck in a trough.

I've said it before - the end of year report is critical to get a sense of where HGH 2.0 is heading - it will  either be a springboard for buying or it will deepen the trough. Happy to wait it out until then. 

[KW]

Just for another perspective.  There is probably no global stock market that is more invested in banks than the ASX. Every analyst in Australia is effectively a bank analyst, simply because of the dominance of the banks in the ASX indices.  If you want to know where the stock market is going, you have to know where the banks are going.  And nobody loves their banks as much as ASX investors.  Which is why they are always overpriced. 

https://www.morningstar.com.au/insights/stocks/247374/is-cba-the-most-expensive-bank-in-the-world

So you have to wonder, considering that HGH is ASX listed, why Australian investors are steering clear of it.  Why are Australian analysts not seeing what NZ retail investors are thinking they are seeing?  Why arent the Aussies buying it with bells on if its such a good prospect.  

Cant put it down to being a NZ company (like Turners or the retirement villages which also get no love on the ASX) as its primary business is now in Australia.  Its an Australian bank.  And in an overpriced and FOMO'd bank market, its being shunned.  Why?  I suspect we'll find out soon enough. 

[LoungeLizard]

Just for another perspective.  There is probably no global stock market that is more invested in banks than the ASX. Every analyst in Australia is effectively a bank analyst, simply because of the dominance of the banks in the ASX indices.  If you want to know where the stock market is going, you have to know where the banks are going.  And nobody loves their banks as much as ASX investors.  Which is why they are always overpriced.

https://www.morningstar.com.au/insights/stocks/247374/is-cba-the-most-expensive-bank-in-the-world

So you have to wonder, considering that HGH is ASX listed, why Australian investors are steering clear of it.  Why are Australian analysts not seeing what NZ retail investors are thinking they are seeing?  Why arent the Aussies buying it with bells on if its such a good prospect. 

Cant put it down to being a NZ company (like Turners or the retirement villages which also get no love on the ASX) as its primary business is now in Australia.  Its an Australian bank.  And in an overpriced and FOMO'd bank market, its being shunned.  Why?  I suspect we'll find out soon enough.

The reverse mortgage business aside, it may be that OZ investors are a bit wary of another digital bank given that a few have gone under and the SP of listed one's like Judo doesn't inspire much confidence (IPO of $2.10 in 2021 and currently trading around $1.40)
 Plus there is quite a few digital banks already on the scene, some offering better rates than HGH. It's an extremely competitive business and it's going to take time for HGH to prove itself as anything different to what is already there.
 

[winner (n)]

Shareprice tanking today

Maybe LayBuy going broke having an impact on sentiment

[KW]

The reverse mortgage business aside, it may be that OZ investors are a bit wary of another digital bank given that a few have gone under and the SP of listed one's like Judo doesn't inspire much confidence (IPO of $2.10 in 2021 and currently trading around $1.40)
 Plus there is quite a few digital banks already on the scene, some offering better rates than HGH. It's an extremely competitive business and it's going to take time for HGH to prove itself as anything different to what is already there.
 

Even JDO is trading around 52 week highs, not lows.  Its feeling the love 

[BlackPeter]

Just for another perspective.  There is probably no global stock market that is more invested in banks than the ASX. Every analyst in Australia is effectively a bank analyst, simply because of the dominance of the banks in the ASX indices.  If you want to know where the stock market is going, you have to know where the banks are going.  And nobody loves their banks as much as ASX investors.  Which is why they are always overpriced.

https://www.morningstar.com.au/insights/stocks/247374/is-cba-the-most-expensive-bank-in-the-world

So you have to wonder, considering that HGH is ASX listed, why Australian investors are steering clear of it.  Why are Australian analysts not seeing what NZ retail investors are thinking they are seeing?  Why arent the Aussies buying it with bells on if its such a good prospect. 

Cant put it down to being a NZ company (like Turners or the retirement villages which also get no love on the ASX) as its primary business is now in Australia.  Its an Australian bank.  And in an overpriced and FOMO'd bank market, its being shunned.  Why?  I suspect we'll find out soon enough.

Not quite sure your comparison with the big four holds any water. HGH is a finance business, operating in some banking  niches (reverse mortgages, business and agricultural finance) ... and yes, to supply the loans, they offer some savings accounts.

Apart from that - they are much smaller, they got their Australian banking licence only a handful of weeks ago - and they are still Kiwi based.

Clearly - anybody who holds ANZ, NAB and similar will immediately sell and run to HGH?

Not even sure - are they already in the ASX200?

[Basil]

HGH is currently cheap. So - sorry for not following your advise of buying dear and selling cheap, but hey - it works better for me to do it the other way around. Buffet would agree, but what would he know?

On the same page with you on this one.  HGH has a well-established pattern of highs and lows in sync with how the economy is performing.  Its not rocket science, buy in gloom and sell in boom.  It's been a very successful strategy so far, ask me how I know lol

[Forrestdun]

ACC has been buying the dip

[Scooter]

Does anyone know why heartland has changed the holding of harmony shares.

[Left Field]

Money in the bank.....

https://www.nzx.com/announcements/433688

[Basil]

Last week's substantial shareholder notification - ACC becoming a substantial shareholder.
My thoughts. Interesting that ACC bought 34m shares at an average price of $1.05 between February and June 2024.  They have VERY deep pockets and have been very successful investors over the years.  I think 96 cents may have been the bottom, but time will tell.