How are long-term bonds and preferred stock similar, and different from one another?

Preference Shares will outrank ordinary shareholders (most common type of shares) should a company wind up. They carry no voting rights usually and also allow a preference in dividend payments should one be paid. These would usually cost more than ordinary shares due to better “guarantees”.

Bond holders would get paid out firstly and thereby offer greater security although capital is still at risk. These would produce income by ways of coupons (interest) and also chance for capital growth.

Disclaimer:

The answers above are for guidance only and should not be acted upon without you receiving independent financial advice relevant to your circumstances. To find and IFA please call 0800 085 3250 or go to http://www.unbiased.co.uk./

First - if you own a 1 million dollar house by the beach, and do not have a mortgage, which I hope is your goal for when you retire, your net worth has to be more than 1 million dollars. Typically I would say that real estate is not a better investment than stocks in the long run, because the risk with real estate is much lower, therefore you would expect a lower return. Real Estate may be comparable in risk to high grade corporate bonds and therefore the return there should be similar. Again, we are talking long term, not 'a few years'. The best policy will be a balanced investment strategy that includes stocks, bonds and real estate. For a period of 2-5 years, everything is possible. Real Estate does look like an attractive investment right now, especially in some areas.

1. similiar. the "preferred stok" is kalled "stok" kauz it is permanent. Bonds gotta hav an end date.

big konfuze is that "preferred stok" is NOT like kommon stok.

It pae fixed % interest like a bond. Market pries go up & down

based on market rates.

2. But the "permanent" mae not be. Kumpanee kan kall in stok.