NAV
Navistar International
stock NYSE

e the price drop looks like a gift but the headwinds around office exposure still make me twitchy. 6% yield is nice on paper but if occupancy slips any further that payout starts looking less like a king and more like a court jester

I grabbed a tiny starter when it touched 54 because the premium to NAV was basically nonexistent, but I’m not scaling in hard until I see what the earnings call actually says about leasing pipelines. The market’s already priced in some pain so any green shoots could send it bouncing, but the flip side is if guidance gets cut again you’ll be glad you waited

The 50-52 range feels like the real support zone if things get ugly, maybe worth setting a limit buy there and letting the algos do the work while you sleep

One thing to know: AGNC doesn't collect rent. It's a mortgage REIT that owns government-backed mortgage bonds and funds them mostly with borrowed money (about 88% borrowed), so the debt is the business, not something it pays off. Right now the payout isn't covered either, cash flow covers about 0.4x of it, and debt grew 40%+ last year. Risk is 4/5. NAV held up last year, which is why it's flagged "watch" rather than eroding. Fine as a small high-risk bet, just don't own it for the rent story.

I’m comparing an Activity Flex Query XML report with IBKR PortfolioAnalyst’s “Change in NAV” breakdown for the same cash account, date range (Aug 25–Sep 25, 2026), and base currency (CNH).
The MTM values differ:
• Flex XML mtm: 840.5028271 → 840.50 CNH
• PortfolioAnalyst MTM: 848.14 CNH
Beginning NAV, ending NAV, deposits/withdrawals, dividends, interest, and combined fees/commissions match.
The adjustment breakdown also differs. PortfolioAnalyst shows Other = −20.14 CNH. Flex has other = 0, with separate fields for withholding tax, changes in dividend/interest accruals, and FX translation. Those adjustment fields together total approximately −12.50 CNH.
Both breakdowns reconcile to the same ending NAV, but MTM differs by approximately 7.64 CNH, offset by the adjustment categories.
Does anyone know the exact classification difference between these two IBKR reports? Could cash FX effects or option exercise/assignment be allocated differently? Which Flex fields would let me reproduce PortfolioAnalyst’s MTM and Other separately?
I’d appreciate a documented mapping or a reconciliation example.

Why not go with SPYI or QQQI over MLPI? With covered call ETF's the stability of the underlying is very important (see BTCI for example). SPY and even QQQ are much more stable than the MLP space and importantly have track record of consistent capital appreciation to offset NAV erosion. You aren't getting higher distribution with MLPI but taking on more a lot more risk IMO.

Yeh that has positions , including cash balance , but unless I’m wrong , it doesn’t have an NAV/ closing daily balance / liquidation balance that is found on the graph in Summary.
For now I have to click on each day on the Summary graph and get the NAV and literally write it down.

Your dashboard looks incredible.
Are you tracking your Total Return (including NAV erosion and taxes) against a simple baseline like VOO or QQQ over the same timeline?

It's a steady 15% of capital. So as the NAV drops, so does the distributions. This is the same with basically every synthetic income fund.

NAV goes down, div goes down. Yield stays the same.

They are NOT designed to outperform their index. They are generally designed to produce income with stable NAV. This is such a misconception about these funds. I invest in them for income and my growth is in the index itself (or stocks, or growth funds etc).

nice to see you locking in those GTCs during the July pullback – that’s the sweet spot for a steady coupon without huge NAV hits. keep an eye on total return versus the weekly payout, especially once the reference index bars get close; the protection kicks in but upside gets capped.

QQQ has been basically sideways since May. Since May 14th QQQ is up 5% while QQQI’s NAV is down -2%. Total returns are dead even.

There's some NAV erosion, but it depends at the period of time you're viewing it. Overall most of their funds actually have NAV appreciation. Yes, some are eroding, but the underlying assets are eroding, not the fund. And sometimes, depending on the period of time, the underlying assets could be depreciating and the fund NAV is depreciating, but to a lesser extent, and that's how the funds usually work, they do ok in a bear, but lag the bull, while still paying you distributions. I know because I own and track BTCI, IAUI, NEHI.

Found this article: [https://www.gurufocus.com/news/9100134/saba-opportunistic-hedged-closedend-funds-cefs-declares-monthly-dividend-with-1214-forward-yield](https://www.gurufocus.com/news/9100134/saba-opportunistic-hedged-closedend-funds-cefs-declares-monthly-dividend-with-1214-forward-yield)
Looks like they've finally decided to increase the distribution. It was a long time coming, IMO, as the fund started paying around 9% and was now down below 7%.
This increase takes the forward yield up to 12%, though, which is high. I would have appreciated a more moderate increase just to bring the yield back to the 8-10% range, but perhaps they're optimistic about the future. Or maybe the yield on NAV is closer to that 8-10% mark since the funds they hold trade at a discount.

3 reason but they are minor
1. No expense ratio on T Bill so T Bill will pay higher
2. Zero Principal risk while the etf has a NAV so there is principal risk with SGOV
3. T BIll locks in a set rate In know exactlly what I will be getting at maturity
Again I was just playing with treasuries as it was my first time actually buying them on my platform. It add a level of complexity but I dont mind I am trying to learn how treasuries work. In the end it only added a few bucks to my return so to some the juice may not be worth the squeeze. I dont mind for now but sgov for short term is just fine. Longer term 1-5 year I definitely want stick with individual treasuries.

It works, and a parent isn't covered by the clubbing rules the way a spouse is, so once the units are hers, gains on them are taxed in her hands. Gifts from a child to a parent aren't taxable for her either. A few things to get right though:
1. She takes over your cost and your holding period. No fresh cost price, so her gain is counted from your original purchase NAV, but your years of holding count, so it's long-term straight away.
2. She gets her own ₹1.25L LTCG exemption per financial year. Any other shares or equity funds she sells in the year use up the same limit.
3. Mechanics: she needs PAN and KYC. In demat, it's an off-market transfer with "gift" as the reason. For non-demat folios, check with the RTA or MF Central whether your units can be transferred.
4. Keep a simple gift letter/deed, and don't route the redemption money back to your account. If the money comes back to you, the gift starts to look like it was only on paper.
Your CA can confirm the paperwork, but none of this is complicated.

I model ASX gold developers, and AUE keeps coming out as the cheapest-ranked study on the board. I lurk a lot, so I thought I'd throw a name in that I don't see mentioned often.
**What it is**
Boundiali gold project (3.22Moz), northern Côte d'Ivoire, 88% owned, same greenstone belt as Perseus' Sissingué and Resolute's Syama, plus the 1.16Moz Napié project down the road. Run by Dr Caigen Wang (The Wang), who founded Tietto Minerals in 2010 and took Abujar (also Côte d'Ivoire) from IPO in Jan 2018 to first gold in Jan 2023, then sold the company to Zhaojin in 2024. Mark Strizek (exec director) was on that build too. Same team, same country, next project.
**Yesterdays announcement**
Project-best hole at BST1: 28.8m @ 22.92 g/t from 204m, including 17.95m @ 36.57 g/t (BSDD0152). Same batch: 57m @ 2.87 g/t and 22m @ 4.70 g/t with 2m @ 45.86 g/t inside it. That's inside a 1 g/t open-pit resource. The drilling program just got expanded to 150,000m for the year.
**The rig fleet**
Aurum owns 16 diamond drill rigs outright. They drilled 151,450m in FY26 with their own gear, which is why a A$266m company can afford a 150,000m program and still bank A$95m. Tietto did the same thing. Owned rigs is how you grow a resource at a fraction of contractor rates, and it's why the ounces keep coming.
**Who's in on it**
* Perseus Mining (PRU) cornerstoned the March placement and is now \~10% (9.9% then, took its share in September). A neighbour and a multi-billion producer sitting at 10% of you is not nothing, and they are running out of their own ore...
* Zhaojin Capital \~7%. The people who bought Tietto.
* Board and management \~9.5%. The Wang personally put in $840k at 60c in March (1.4m shares, shareholder-approved, settled June) and holds 4%. He also bought in the 2024 placements!
**PFS**
* 1.21Moz probable reserve (maiden, June 2026)
* 1.52Moz produced over 11 years, 923koz in the first five (\~185kozpa)
* AISC US$1,951/oz
* Capex US$342m (AACE Class 4, includes US$34m contingency), \~A$480m
* Post-tax NPV5 US$1.49B (\~A$2.15B) at US$4,076 gold, IRR 119%
* DFS due late CY2026, FID targeted Dec 2026, first gold H1 2028
**Numbers**
* 511m shares x A$0.52 = \~A$266m market cap
* Cash >A$95m after the Sep 23 placement (95m shares at 55c, A$52.5m firm)
* EV \~A$170m
* EV / post-tax NPV at spot gold (A$6,050): \~0.07x
* Median across ranked ASX gold developer studies: 0.17x. AUE is under half that.
* EV per resource ounce: \~A$40
**What I think it's worth (fully diluted, today's numbers)**
I don't value it on today's 511m shares, because the build raise hasn't happened yet. The model dilutes first, then values.
1. the NPV at today's gold. Spot A$6,055 blended 65/35 with a A$6,250 long-run (median of four published forecasts) = A$6,123/oz, about US$4,350 at the study's 0.71 FX. Read off the PFS post-tax NPV5 sensitivity curve, not the headline: A$2,422m
2. \*what's actually Aurum's. Reserve ounces weighted by tenement ownership (BDT1/BDT2/BMT3 at 85%, BST at 90%): 85.6% attributable
3. a construction-stage multiple. Developers with a dated FID trade at 0.7-1.0x NAV. FID is dated (20 Dec 2026) but permits and financing aren't done, so the bottom of the band: 0.7x P/NAV
4. cash.\* A$95m after the September placement settled on the 30th, no debt.
5. the dilution. Capex \~A$480m still to fund, 50% equity, +20% overrun allowance, less the cash on hand beyond a six-quarter working-capital reserve, means a \~A$230m raise around FID at a 12.5% discount to a flat 52c. That plus a rights leg (the raise is over the 25% placement cap) and in-the-money options takes the register from 511m to \~1,110m shares.
**My Base Target**
(A$2,422m x 85.6% x 0.7 + A$95m) / 1,110m shares = $1.39 per share
That's the base case at 52c today. On spot alone, no long-run blend, it's A$1.36. At the PFS deck of US$4,076 it's A$1.22.
What breaks it: a 40c FID raise instead of \~45c adds another \~70m shares and takes \~8c off the base. Permits not granted and no FID at all, and P/NAV goes back to a study multiple and you're at 70-80c.
**Why it's cheap**
1. The build is \~1.8x the market cap. US$342m capex on a A$266m company. Debt will carry some, but the model has \~A$230m of equity needed around FID. That's the whole story of the discount.
2. It's Côte d'Ivoire, and no one even knows where that is... Jurisdiction discount is real. The mining exploitation permits are still outstanding (environmental approval came in May).
[This is the place](https://preview.redd.it/voku7h9tyush1.png?width=1761&format=png&auto=webp&s=8d9daebd578b4cd6d3393f198c8fb9f8a0cb39a5)
1. Price action has been dogshit. -27% over 12 months while the ASX gold index did +16%. Gold beta is 1.2 so gold did +3% for it and the sector +14%. The company's own contribution was -30%. It has raised twice into that (March at 60c, Sep at 55c).
**Why it might not stay cheap**
* PFS to reserve in one go, DFS in a few months, FID by Christmas. Catalysts stacked, and A$95m funds the DFS, the 150,000m program and early works without another raise before FID.
* Today's hole says the high-grade is there under the pit shells. 16 owned rigs means they will find more of it cheaply before the DFS closes.
* 119% IRR at US$4,076 with spot higher. The NPV restated at today's gold is \~A$2.4B.
* Two strategic holders who build and buy mines in this exact belt, at \~10% and 7%, plus the MD buying at 60c. If FID financing comes with a Perseus or Zhaojin cheque attached, the equity gap closes without a 40c placement.
* The reserve and the raise discounts (tight, basically at market) both argue for a higher value than peers. The only factor that explains it is capex against market cap.
* Management has done exactly this before, in the same country, and got taken out for it.
**TL;DR**
Cheapest ranked gold developer study on the ASX on EV/NPV, for one reason: it needs to raise most of its market cap to build. Base case A$1.39 fully diluted after a \~A$230m FID raise, bull A$2.75 if someone else writes that cheque. At 52c the market is pricing the raise at a price that doesn't exist yet. If you think The Wang's team, 16 owned rigs and a register with Perseus and Zhaojin on it can finance Boundiali like they financed Abujar, this is the cheap end of a 2027-28 producer that i think gets bought out before they produce a thing.
40% of my portfolio and increasing.

What NAV you will get for this, NAV date? Today or Monday?

Theyre ok in my opinion. NAV is ok.
Im in rocq with a nice cushion of about 9 % It would have been nice to see another .70

With a lower rate sure, but 14% is a really high rate. If the market went sideways for a year it wouldn’t be able to pay out that return without NAV eroding some, even if it’s just a few % points.

Per TRADE is the part I dislike here, if you do short term trading you can easily put your whole portfolio's NAV in and out 10x in a year, making this 5% or more. Long term holdings are barely affected, short term trading becomes completely nonviable though