dpk: re: "I am now looking to open brokerage accounts with full service brokers to get institutional-quality research."
Unless you are opening an account with 5-10 million $ minimum, do not expect to get timely institutional-quality research. Assume that, even if you do get good info, the institutional investors will get it weeks to days before it's available to you. The fundamental problem is that brokerages (and everyone who works for them) do not make their money by providing you (a retail/individual/small investor) with good advice. There is an inherent conflict of interest, and the playing field is not level.
I have an account with E-Trade, which provides me with cheap trades, an online database of info., and no live brokers. I'm thinking of establishing an account with DLJdirect. For accounts over 100,000$, you have access to their research reports online. For smaller accounts, there is a large amount of fundamental info available, which is probably more useful than the analyst's opinions. When I have had access to "institutional-level research", I haven't found it any more useful than the best posts on this thread, or the WSJ, or listening to conference calls during earnings season. As far as which analysts do a good job with AMAT: none of them. A year ago (mid-1997), the consensus earnings estimate for 1998 was about $2.70. The actual results are turning out to be less than half that number. Every one of them was way off the mark. In July 1997, noone issued a sell recomendation, or cut earnings estimates.
There is no substitute for thinking for yourself. If you're going to depend on an (expensive) broker's advise, then you should put your money in a mutual fund. At least a mutual fund manager's interests are fairly closely aligned with yours; a broker's are not.
I realize this sounds quite cynical, but it's the truth. |
