Opinion – Grain in Grain: Direct Treasure sins in the simulator to attract investors

I constantly search through the websites of institutions to look for news and test their features. This weekend, I was disappointed when I tried to use the investment simulator on the Tesouro Direto platform. The standardization of parameters in the simulation induces individuals to make wrong investment decisions.

The Treasury Direct platform is an excellent initiative by B3 in conjunction with the National Treasury to allow individuals access to federal government bonds.

In addition to the above objective, another one described on the platform is to “promote the financial education of Brazilians”. However, in the case of the simulator, this objective is failing.

I believe that there was no bad faith and no intention to deceive small investors with ignorance about the platform and the financial market. But it deserves attention and correction.

I will address just one case, but the same example extends to other titles.

Suppose an investor intends to simulate the investment in the 2025 Selic Treasury that remunerates Selic + 0.0929% per year.

The failure occurs in two parts.

First, in estimating the return on investment alternatives. It is known that on brokerage platforms, it is possible for small investors to invest with daily liquidity in CDBs, guaranteed by the FGC, with a return of 100% of the CDI or more. The CDI yields the same as the daily Selic. The investor who intends to invest for a longer period, for example, three years, can have returns of up to 120% of the CDI.

However, on the Tesouro Direto platform, the standard return on this security is 82% of the CDI. Even in large banks it is possible to have higher rates of return.

The same occurs with the standard return of an LCI presented by the Treasury website. The standard return of this would be 74% of the CDI, on the Treasury website. I consulted one of the two largest national banks, where, supposedly, the rate would be lower. I found LCA and LCI rates above 90% for bonds with daily liquidity after 90 days.

If these securities were placed with an adequate return, the simulation of the Selic Treasury would be completely different. He would lose badly, contrary to what is presented as “standard return” by the Direct Treasury.

The second flaw is in the way of presenting the return. It is well known that Treasury bonds have a B3 custody rate of 0.20% per year. This should be subtracted from the security return. In the case of funds, CDB and LCI that are used in the comparison, the return is already net of fees.

However, the same pattern is not followed by the Treasury Direct bond in the simulation.

This effect makes the Treasury bond return appear relatively even higher.

With the custody rate of 0.20% per year, mathematically, a security that yields Selic + 0.0929% per year will obviously yield less than the CDI.

Therefore, all the alternatives presented on the site, except savings, should have a higher return than the Selic Treasury.

One might ask, what harm does it do to put these lower returns if the investor can adjust it himself?

If an investor learns that he can invest better, he will look for where this can be found. However, if the one who should educate says that the standard is lower, it makes the investor comfortable and content with less.

I hope that those responsible for the platform read this article and correct it for the sake of financial education for Brazilian investors.

Michael Viriato is an investment advisor and founding partner of Investor’s House

(Follow and like De Grão em Grão on social networks. Instagram.)

If you have questions or suggestions for topics that you would like to see commented on here, please feel free to send them by email.