Seeking Alpha

Market Map

View as an RSS Feed
View Market Map's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Market Map: Style Diversification With Dividend Growth Portfolio Part 2 [View article]
    part 1 is here: http://seekingalpha.co...

    Quality Dividend stocks are popular dividend growth stocks mentioned numerous times in dividend growth articles: In our analysis, we used : 3M (MMM), Exxon (XOM), Merck (MRK), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), McDonald's (MCD), Procter & Gamble (PG), ConEdison (ED), General Electric (GE), Altria (MO), Coca-Cola (KO). They are part of the "dividend" champions (U.S.Companies with 25+ Straight Years Higher Dividends) listed here: http://bit.ly/OGv0mJ

    The methodogy would be to buy equal shares of these individual 10 stocks and "rebalance" them every year.

    VTI is the Vanguard Total market Index ETF and VTSMX is the mutual fund version of it. We reference it only as a performance comparison as it is one of the more popular options available.

    Apr 9 11:29 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Actually It Is All About Total Return...Totally! [View article]
    And this is a basic point that transcends all of the nuanced arguments that come up. And another basic point being that total return for a 20+ dividend champion stock portfolio over 20 + years won't be greater than 9 - 11%
    Apr 8 10:57 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why This Dividend Aristocrat ETF Isn't So Noble [View article]
    A majority of the public doesn't have the time or inclination to manage a portfolio the way that it is portrayed in the DG literature. NOBL is a great way to alleviate this deficit and the fees are reasonable (vs. popular long track record mutual funds that charge .50 %+ annual fees).
    Apr 4 11:57 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Most Important Article I Could Ever Write On Dividend Growth [View article]
    "The S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats has gained an annualized return of 9.7% since its May 3, 2005 inception, compared to the S&P 500′s 6.7% return."
    This confirms our research and many studies calculating total CAGR for holding a large diversified portfolio of "quality" (aristocrats) stocks with div reinvestment. If you are / were lucky enough to pick some of the "rising stars" in their early growth and hold them in a smaller 10 stock portfolio for 20 + years, then an investor could do better then that 9 - 10% return ( see chart 2 here http://seekingalpha.co...). However, since we don't know which are the "rising stars" and portfolio management wisdom tells us to hold 20+ DG stocks, then we'll most likely be back at the 9 - 10% total return ( and the rising stars probably wouldn't be on the aristocrats list anyway). The point to get across is that 9 - 10% annualized return should be written in stone as it is what an investor has gotten no matter how much we argue about the nuances of whether the dividend payout reduces the companies value, whether a stock is overvalued of undervalued using discounted cash flows, PE ratios, etc. And NOBL makes it MUCH easier for the average DG investor to in "quality" stocks without having to do the portfolio management legwork.
    Apr 4 11:47 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • I Love My 'Magic Pants' And My Partners Wear Them Proudly [View article]
    On another note, but but somewhat relevant to the "selling shares for income" topic .... Here's an analysis that I performed (to satisfy my curiousity) showing the performance of dividend paying stocks vs. non dividend paying stocks. Being a successful growth stock portfolio manager in the pre ETF 90's era, I dug up lists of High RS and EPS rank "leading" stock candidates screened usinfg my old stock selection methodolgy*. Then I looked for stocks that have 20 year price histories (to alleviate survivorship bias) and I randomly selected a 10 stock portfolio. For the dividend paying stocks, I selected 10 of some the popular dividend growth consistency "favorites". I ran each portfolio through a dividend reinvestment calculator** and rebalanced annually. Each portfolio starts in 1994 at a $10K value. http://bit.ly/1gIyeRt
    The volatility is greater for the non div payers, but hey, we don't pay attention to that because we're in it for the long term, right? And if we combined a non div growth portfolio and a dividend paying portfolio, then we would still come out pretty well.

    * Daily Graphs by William O'Neil and Co.
    ** calculator: http://bit.ly/H8xh6y
    Mar 19 09:52 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking The 'Dividends Don't Add Shareholder Value' Myth [View article]
    The average Joe doesn't need to know about all of these nit picky arguments. They just need to know that, if they hold these stocks as long term holds over the accumulation years, they will be shortchanging themselves if they DON'T reinvest the dividends ....
    Mar 13 09:23 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Dividends Matter: A Review Of Recent Research [View article]
    Hard to beat the QQQ for sure. http://bit.ly/1jV8jGD
    Mar 6 09:47 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • How Strong Is The Bearish Case For Stocks? [View article]
    You'll notice that many contributors seem to generate content, but aren't necessariy present to answer questions. In this contributor's case, he's written 500+ articles and has commented 13 times ... I wonder if he returns his clients phone calls ...
    Mar 2 12:20 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Equity Curves, A New Sharpe* Ratio, And 20-Year Testing Of The Modified GMR [View instapost]
    Refreshing work !... We appreciate articles that actually present research vs. 1000+ word missives using words such as "taper, QE, sentiment, emerging markets, top(ping)" in them.
    Feb 18 09:48 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • About That 1929 Chart... The Details Matter [View article]
    We perused the site and, indeed, it does seem like an "interpretive" site. But not one that provides any definitive robust historical statistics towards actionable asset allocation decisions...
    Feb 12 09:19 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Hussman: Double Trouble [View article]
    Assets under management have been falling yet annual management expenses of .90 on 1.27B assets isn't too shabby for lousy performance ( probably has nice tenured position at U of M to boot ! smart guy ! ....)

    AUM .....
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 12/2013 $1.27B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 11/2013 $1.58B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 09/2013 $1.76B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 08/2013 $1.90B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 06/2013 $2.05B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 02/2013 $2.60B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 01/2013 $3.01B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 12/2012 $3.28B
    Hussman Strategic Growth fund (HSGFX) Asset as of 11/2012 $3.63B
    Feb 10 03:20 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Daily State Of The Markets: A Sell Signal Worth Noting [View article]
    Our model tends to confirm negative Januarys when it indicates negatively correlated risk years, and overrides negative Januarys when it indicates "Favorable" risk years http://seekingalpha.co...
    Feb 6 09:26 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Statistical Analysis Of The January Effect [View article]
    We performed analysis on the January barometer as we were curious as to how our model would correlate : http://seekingalpha.co...
    Feb 5 10:07 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bearish Market Breadth On S&P 500 [View instapost]
    Historical return statistics point to increased volatility http://seekingalpha.co...
    Jan 26 09:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Improving The Performance Of A Portfolio Of DFA Funds [View instapost]
    As we have done extensive testing ( as presented in one of our SA articles ) on using DFSVX vs. QQQ in our strategy, we weren't planning on using DFA funds any time soon. The performance disadvantage of using a fund with a management fee even as low as 1% vs.a similarly performing fund with a "low" fee in a strategy over a 20 year period has been well documented ...
    Jan 18 08:09 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
131 Comments
56 Likes