Do you like receiving dividends? Of course
you do. Everyone likes receiving checks in the mail.
People often tell us that they need their
dividends to live on. That they don't want to dip into their
capital. The problem is that by aiming at stocks with higher
dividends you may actually be destroying your capital at
an even faster rate.
It is true. By not selling your shares you
may not actually be dipping into your capital. But the overall
effect on your capital may be even worse.
When considering capital gains versus dividends
it is important to remember that money is money. They don't
ask you at the checkout counter at the supermarket whether
the money came form capital gains or dividends.
The terminology in this area is that dividend
yield is the ratio of dividends to the price of the stock.
Sort of like the rate on bonds except with the share price
instead of the face value of the bond. Even though there
are variations within each sector, each sector tends to
have its own general level.
Most years the sector with the highest average
dividend yield is Electric Utilities. The current average
dividend yield is around 6 percent. The sector with the
lowest dividend yields is usually Application Software.
Most of these companies pay little or no dividends.
Let us consider two investors, Jack and Mary,
brother and sister. Jack remembers hearing his father say
over and over not to sell shares. "They are your capital,"
he would say. "And you have to preserve your capital
at all cost."
With this idea drummed into him, back in 1998
he came across Duke Energy. For the previous 5 years it
had paid an annual dividend of around $1.00 with $1.08 in
the previous year. This has meant an average dividend yield
of between 3 and 5 percent.
At the start of 1998 the price was $27. Suppose
you bought 1000 shares for a total of $27,000. Each year
since then Duke paid a dividend of $1.10. So each year Jack
received a total dividend of $1,100 per year towards
his living expenses.
When you started back in 1998 this was a dividend
yield of 1.10 / 27 = 4%. Not bad, you are thinking. A certain
payment of each year at an initial rate of 4%.
The problem is that although Duke hit a high
of $47 a few years later, since then the price has crashed
to around $20.
This means that although you have received
your $1,100 each year, and although you still have the 1000
shares you started with, your net worth has dived from $27,000
to $20,000. Currently the dividend yield is 6 percent.
In contrast, Mary remembers her mother always
saying that "money was money. Make the best investments
you can. When you have to pay your bills, pay it with money
that is the 'cheapest' and will have least effect on your
Mary also had $27,000 to invest back in 1998.
She had been shopping at Bed Bath and Beyond (BBBY) for
the last ten years and liked what she saw. She talked to
a few of the people at the store. She also contacted the
company and found that it was expanding across the USA.
So Mary decided to invest her $27,000 in Bed
Bath and Beyond.
Jack also did some research on the company.
He discovered that it did not pay any dividends and was
not likely to pay any in the foreseeable future.
When he confronted Mary with this news, she
replied that she already knew that. "But I am still
going to invest in it," she told him.
"Well don't come to me when you need
money to live on," he flung at her as he left.
At the start of 1998 the price of BBBY was
$9.90 so she bought 2,727 shares. At the end of the year
the price was $16.00 so she sold 68 shares to get $1,100
in cash, the same amount that Jack had got from his dividends.
This left her with 2659 shares.
At the end of 1999 the share price was $13.60
so she sold another 80 shares to get another $1,100 in cash.
This left 2,579 shares.
Repeating this each year left Mary with 2,475
of her original 2,727 shares at the start of 2003. Here
is the table of Mary's transations.
Jack accused Mary of dipping into her capital
each year and forecasting a dire outcome because the number
of shares she owned had dropped by over 250.
But Mary was not worried. She saw that her
wealth had grown from $27,000 to over $80,000.
The moral here is don't confuse a decreasing
number of shares with decreasing wealth. Even if the numbers
go down because you need money to live on, your total wealth
may well be going up.
|Don't confuse a decreasing
number of shares with decreasing wealth. Even if
the numbers go down because you need money to live
on, your total wealth may well be going up.
Also, always make the best investment you
can in terms of total return meaning capital gains plus
dividends. And don't panic if you have to sell some shares
to live on.
You might think that I picked unfair examples
here and that, on average, it is better to choose stocks
with higher dividend yields. In that way, you could argue,
you are at least increasing the chances of getting a higher
Well even that is not true. Over the past
year, looking at the largest 1,500 USA stocks, approximately
half did not pay dividends and a half did. The average total
return of companies that did not pay dividends was 5.43
percent. In contrast, the average total return of companies
that did pay dividends was -0.98 percent. The money received
from the dividends was outweighed by the loss in capital.
Even within the companies that did pay dividends,
there was no correlation between their dividend yield and
their total return. In other words, a higher dividend yield
was no guide to a higher total return.
In Australia, things are much the same, even
though a slightly higher proportion of companies pay dividends
(55 percent compared to 50 percent). Of the 350 companies
that I studied, those not paying dividends out performed
the dividend-paying stocks by around 5.5 percent (27.29
percent compared to 21.67 percent ).
Furthermore, there was actually a slightly
negative correlation between dividend yield and total return
for those stocks that did pay dividends. This means that
a higher dividend yield actually indicated, on average,
a lower total return.
Two final points, transaction costs and taxes.
It used to be that you paid an extra fee to buy or sell
unusual numbers of shares. Odd lots they were referred to.
This is rarely the case now and does not occur with on-line
broking where transactions fees are very small. Regarding
taxes, there are differences in the way capital gains and
dividends are treated in both the USA and Australia. I will
talk about these differences in a later article.
To help you keep up with timely investment
news and information and with additions to the website,
you are invited to subscribe
to our Free Newsletter. Or view the Free Videos describing Conscious Investor.
Conscious Investing provides general advice
and information, not individually targeted personalised
advice. Advice from Conscious Investing does not take into
account any investor’s particular investment objectives,
financial situation and personal needs. Investors should
assess for themselves whether the advice is appropriate
to their individual investment objectives, financial situation
and particular needs before making any investment decision
on the basis of such general advice. Investors can make
their own assessment of the advice or seek the assistance
of a professional adviser.
Investing entails some degree of risk. Investors
should inform themselves of the risks involved before engaging
in any investment.
Conscious Investing endeavours to ensure accuracy
and reliability of the information provided but does not
accept any liability whatsoever, whether in tort or contract
or otherwise, for any loss or damage arising from the use
of Conscious Investing data and systems. Past performance
is not necessarily indicative of future results. Information
and advice provided here is not an offer to buy or sell
the full Disclaimer.