Selecting Dividend Aristocrats Using SCHD Methodology - Mounting A Comeback
Summary
- I propose leveraging the stock selection criteria from the underlying index of SCHD to build a portfolio with a subset of Dividend Aristocrats.
- I am tracking two portfolios built using this process and comparing the results to NOBL and SCHD.
- Thus far, one portfolio is beating both benchmarks while the other is beating NOBL but not SCHD.
bpawesome
Quick Recap
On October 18, 2022 I published an article on Seeking Alpha that covered the stock selection methodology used by the Dow Jones US Dividend 100 Index, the underlying index for Schwab's U.S. Dividend Equity Fund (SCHD). In that article I proposed a theory, to leverage this stock selection process and apply it to the Dividend Aristocrat universe of stocks. On November 1st, 2022, I launched two mock portfolios doing just that, one is an exact replication of stock selection process and the other has a slight twist that I will get to a little bit later.
Both portfolios were built using the criteria laid out in the original article. A total of 30 dividend aristocrats were chosen for each portfolio based on their ranking using the 4 factor stock selection process for the Dow Jones US Dividend 100 Index. The asset allocation was generated using a float adjusted market capitalization, with the maximum allocation capped at 6.67% (twice the equal weight allocation). Initially I intended to launch these portfolios on January 1st, 2023, but given that NOBL the most popular Dividend Aristocrat ETF was launched in November of 2013, I decided to launch my portfolios in November as well. Both portfolios will reinvest all dividends back into the issuing stock based on the market open price for the day following the dividend payment, and the asset allocation will remain unchanged for 1 full year. On November 1st, 2023, I will re-run the stock selection process for each portfolio and re-allocate based on the results. The intention is to see whether there is any merit to such a stock selection strategy, both portfolios will be measured against NOBL and SCHD to see if they can generate superior total returns. I will also be tracking the dividend income each portfolio generates to provide additional color on yield and growth measures. Each portfolio was funded with $10,000 of hypothetical money and no further contributions will be made.
Here are the results for both portfolios thus far.
First Portfolio - Exact Replication
This portfolio followed the exact criteria used by the Dow Jones US Dividend 100 Index. The criteria were.
- Free Cash Flow to Total Debt Ratio
- Return on Equity
- Forward Dividend Yield
- 5 Year Dividend Growth Rate
Here is a snapshot of the portfolio as of March 27th, 2023.
| Symbol | Shares | Market Value | Cost | Gain/Loss | % Gain/Loss |
| ABBV | 4.593068 | 723.59 | 667.00 | 56.59 | 8.48% |
| ABT | 6.727683 | 662.41 | 667.00 | -4.59 | -0.69% |
| JNJ | 3.884836 | 595.55 | 667.00 | -71.45 | -10.71% |
| CVX | 3.692519 | 582.13 | 667.00 | -84.87 | -12.72% |
| PG | 4.984644 | 727.51 | 667.00 | 60.51 | 9.07% |
| PEP | 3.709803 | 665.87 | 667.00 | -1.13 | -0.17% |
| XOM | 6.039493 | 638.98 | 667.00 | -28.02 | -4.20% |
| KO | 11.189039 | 686.45 | 667.00 | 19.45 | 2.92% |
| MDT | 6.111042 | 486.68 | 530.00 | -43.32 | -8.17% |
| CAT | 2.224665 | 484.98 | 484.00 | 0.98 | 0.20% |
| ADP | 1.887312 | 404.56 | 455.00 | -50.44 | -11.08% |
| TGT | 2.174966 | 346.65 | 357.00 | -10.35 | -2.90% |
| MMM | 2.557504 | 259.56 | 316.00 | -56.44 | -17.86% |
| GD | 1.103457 | 248.31 | 275.00 | -26.69 | -9.71% |
| ITW | 1.28165 | 298.18 | 274.00 | 24.18 | 8.82% |
| CL | 3.670924 | 272.20 | 269.00 | 3.20 | 1.19% |
| APD | 1.033746 | 279.31 | 260.00 | 19.31 | 7.43% |
| SYY | 2.320803 | 176.47 | 197.00 | -20.53 | -10.42% |
| KMB | 1.531451 | 199.58 | 189.00 | 10.58 | 5.60% |
| AFL | 2.818758 | 177.89 | 181.00 | -3.11 | -1.72% |
| CTAS | 0.389106 | 171.47 | 166.00 | 5.47 | 3.30% |
| NUE | 1.211183 | 180.83 | 163.00 | 17.83 | 10.94% |
| TROW | 1.047008 | 113.66 | 112.00 | 1.66 | 1.48% |
| WST | 0.378548 | 127.13 | 87.00 | 40.13 | 46.12% |
| CLX | 0.559223 | 88.22 | 81.00 | 7.22 | 8.92% |
| EXPD | 0.746863 | 78.74 | 73.00 | 5.74 | 7.87% |
| CINF | 0.690511 | 74.84 | 71.00 | 3.84 | 5.41% |
| HRL | 1.321274 | 51.49 | 61.00 | -9.51 | -15.59% |
| BEN | 1.375346 | 36.36 | 32.00 | 4.36 | 13.64% |
| AOS | 0.563229 | 38.07 | 31.00 | 7.07 | 22.82% |
| Total | 9,877.68 | 10,000.00 | -122.32 | -1.22% | |
| NOBL | 113.230838 | 9,993.75 | 10,000.00 | -6.25 | -0.06% |
| SCHD | 135.538082 | 9,642.18 | 10,000.00 | -357.82 | -3.58% |
As you can see the portfolio is performing better than SCHD but trailing NOBL, with some components seeing more favorable returns than others. The best selections thus far have been.
- Procter & Gamble (PG) +$60.51 +9.07%
- AbbVie (ABBV) +$56.59 +8.48%
- West Pharma (WST) +$40.13 +46.12%
- Illinois Tool Works (ITW) +$24.18 +8.82%
- Coca Cola (KO) +$19.45 +2.92%
Here are the monthly returns of this portfolio (labeled LFDAS), NOBL and SCHD.
| LFDAS | |||||||||||||
| YEAR | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual |
| 2022 | 4.90% | -1.79% | 3.03% | ||||||||||
| 2023 | -0.23% | -2.93% | -1.01% | -4.13% | |||||||||
| Combined | -1.22% | ||||||||||||
| NOBL | |||||||||||||
| YEAR | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual |
| 2022 | 6.28% | -4.12% | 1.90% | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 3.23% | -2.36% | -2.70% | -1.93% | |||||||||
| Combined | -0.06% | ||||||||||||
| SCHD | |||||||||||||
| YEAR | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual |
| 2022 | 6.03% | -3.44% | 2.39% | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 2.08% | -3.32% | -4.57% | -5.82% | |||||||||
| Combined | -3.58% | ||||||||||||
The portfolio got off to a slow start with a gain of 4.9% in November which was worse than NOBL that gained 6.28% and SCHD that gained 6.03%. During December, the portfolio weathered the market pullback much better, losing only 1.79% versus a loss of 4.12% for NOBL and 3.44% for SCHD. Unfortunately this streak has not extended into January, the portfolio finished the month with a loss of 0.23%, compared to a gain of 3.23% for NOBL and a gain of 2.08% for SCHD. February was a difficult month across the board with the portfolio losing 2.93%, while NOBL fell 2.36% and SCHD 3.32%. March has thus far been a continuation of this downfall, however, the portfolio has seen a much smaller decline this month compared to both benchmarks.
The combined since inception return places the portfolio 1.16% behind NOBL and 2.36% ahead of SCHD. So it has quite some ground to make up in the coming months.
Here is a breakdown of the dividend income thus far as of March 27th, 2023.
| LFDAS | NOBL | SCHD | ||||||||
| MONTH | 2022 | 2023 | MONTH | 2022 | 2023 | MONTH | 2022 | 2023 | ||
| January | 16.20 | January | January | |||||||
| February | 23.95 | February | February | |||||||
| March | 23.07 | March | March | |||||||
| April | April | April | ||||||||
| May | May | May | ||||||||
| June | June | June | ||||||||
| July | July | July | ||||||||
| August | August | August | ||||||||
| September | September | September | ||||||||
| October | October | October | ||||||||
| November | 0.07 | November | November | |||||||
| December | 29.11 | December | 67.54 | December | 94.49 | |||||
| TOTAL | 29.18 | 63.22 | TOTAL | 67.54 | 0.00 | TOTAL | 94.49 | 0.00 | ||
| LIFETIME | 92.40 | LIFETIME | 67.54 | LIFETIME | 94.49 | |||||
My portfolio did not capture most of the dividends from November and missed out on October income as well. Therefore this initial dividend income comparison is not really apples to apples. The portfolio currently has generated more dividend income than NOBL and is not far off from SCHD. However both ETFs are slated to pay a dividend this week and will once again gain a comfortable cushion on the portfolio. SCHD will pay a dividend of $0.5965 per share on March 27th, $80.85 in this scenario, and NOBL will pay a dividend of $0.3539 per share on March 28th, $40.07 in this scenario.
As of right now my portfolio has a dividend yield of 2.90% compared to 1.98% for NOBL and 3.71% for SCHD.
Since inception the portfolio has drifted away from its starting allocation by 7.11%, which is an increase of more than 1% from the absolute drift a month ago (5.98%). The table below shows the absolute drift for each individual position. I imagine that after 12 months the total drift could be much higher. There are two schools of thought on rebalancing a portfolio to its target allocation. On the one hand you can forego rebalancing and let your winners run, on the other hand you can capture short-term gains and reallocate them to worse performing positions in the hope that they will perform better down the road. I have opted to forego rebalancing this portfolio on a fixed schedule or at a specific drift target. The portfolio will be rebalanced after the first full year comes to an end and new aristocrats are selected using the original stock selection method.
| Symbol | Starting Allocation | Current Allocation | Drift |
| ABBV | 6.67% | 7.33% | 0.66% |
| ABT | 6.67% | 6.71% | 0.04% |
| JNJ | 6.67% | 6.03% | 0.64% |
| CVX | 6.67% | 5.89% | 0.78% |
| PG | 6.67% | 7.37% | 0.70% |
| PEP | 6.67% | 6.74% | 0.07% |
| XOM | 6.67% | 6.47% | 0.20% |
| KO | 6.67% | 6.95% | 0.28% |
| MDT | 5.30% | 4.93% | 0.37% |
| CAT | 4.84% | 4.91% | 0.07% |
| ADP | 4.55% | 4.10% | 0.45% |
| TGT | 3.57% | 3.51% | 0.06% |
| MMM | 3.16% | 2.63% | 0.53% |
| GD | 2.75% | 2.51% | 0.24% |
| ITW | 2.74% | 3.02% | 0.28% |
| CL | 2.69% | 2.76% | 0.07% |
| APD | 2.60% | 2.83% | 0.23% |
| SYY | 1.97% | 1.79% | 0.18% |
| KMB | 1.89% | 2.02% | 0.13% |
| AFL | 1.81% | 1.80% | 0.01% |
| CTAS | 1.66% | 1.74% | 0.08% |
| NUE | 1.63% | 1.83% | 0.20% |
| TROW | 1.12% | 1.15% | 0.03% |
| WST | 0.87% | 1.29% | 0.42% |
| CLX | 0.81% | 0.89% | 0.08% |
| EXPD | 0.73% | 0.80% | 0.07% |
| CINF | 0.71% | 0.76% | 0.05% |
| HRL | 0.61% | 0.52% | 0.09% |
| BEN | 0.32% | 0.37% | 0.05% |
| AOS | 0.31% | 0.39% | 0.08% |
| Total | 7.11% |
Second Portfolio - My Modification
This portfolio modified the criteria used by the Dow Jones US Dividend 100 Index, replacing one of the factors. The criteria use was:
- Free Cash Flow to Total Debt Ratio
- Return on Capital
- Forward Dividend Yield
- 5 Year Dividend Growth Rate
The one factor that was changed was the return on equity, and it was replaced with the return on capital. I personally like this metric better as I think it does a better job of measuring profitability.
Here is a snapshot of the portfolio as of March 27sth, 2023.
| Symbol | Shares | Market Value | Cost | Gain/Loss | % Gain/Loss |
| ABBV | 4.593068 | 723.59 | 667.00 | 56.59 | 8.48% |
| ABT | 6.727683 | 662.41 | 667.00 | -4.59 | -0.69% |
| CVX | 3.692519 | 582.13 | 667.00 | -84.87 | -12.72% |
| XOM | 6.039493 | 638.98 | 667.00 | -28.02 | -4.20% |
| JNJ | 3.884836 | 595.55 | 667.00 | -71.45 | -10.71% |
| MCD | 2.464781 | 674.96 | 667.00 | 7.96 | 1.19% |
| PG | 4.984644 | 727.51 | 667.00 | 60.51 | 9.07% |
| LIN | 2.191848 | 760.79 | 664.00 | 96.79 | 14.58% |
| LOW | 2.765981 | 527.00 | 545.00 | -18.00 | -3.30% |
| CAT | 2.164918 | 471.95 | 471.00 | 0.95 | 0.20% |
| SPGI | 1.455456 | 488.67 | 471.00 | 17.67 | 3.75% |
| ADP | 1.837545 | 393.90 | 443.00 | -49.10 | -11.08% |
| TGT | 2.120117 | 337.90 | 348.00 | -10.10 | -2.90% |
| MMM | 2.492842 | 253.00 | 308.00 | -55.00 | -17.86% |
| GD | 1.071358 | 241.09 | 267.00 | -25.91 | -9.70% |
| ITW | 1.244223 | 289.47 | 266.00 | 23.47 | 8.82% |
| APD | 1.005897 | 271.78 | 253.00 | 18.78 | 7.42% |
| AFL | 2.756469 | 173.96 | 177.00 | -3.04 | -1.72% |
| CTAS | 0.386181 | 170.18 | 161.00 | 9.18 | 5.70% |
| NUE | 1.181432 | 176.39 | 159.00 | 17.39 | 10.94% |
| TROW | 1.018992 | 110.62 | 109.00 | 1.62 | 1.49% |
| GWW | 0.185934 | 124.88 | 109.00 | 15.88 | 14.57% |
| GPC | 0.608495 | 96.77 | 108.00 | -11.23 | -10.40% |
| BF.B | 1.554618 | 98.03 | 106.00 | -7.97 | -7.51% |
| CAH | 1.178818 | 83.98 | 89.00 | -5.02 | -5.64% |
| WST | 0.369858 | 124.21 | 85.00 | 39.21 | 46.13% |
| EXPD | 0.726343 | 76.58 | 71.00 | 5.58 | 7.86% |
| HRL | 1.299746 | 50.65 | 60.00 | -9.35 | -15.58% |
| BEN | 1.33245 | 35.23 | 31.00 | 4.23 | 13.65% |
| AOS | 0.544993 | 36.84 | 30.00 | 6.84 | 22.81% |
| Total | 9,999.00 | 10,000.00 | -1.00 | -0.01% | |
| NOBL | 113.230838 | 9,993.75 | 10,000.00 | -6.25 | -0.06% |
| SCHD | 135.538082 | 9,642.18 | 10,000.00 | -357.82 | -3.58% |
As you can see the modified portfolio is thus far performing better than the first portfolio and both benchmarks. The best selections thus far have been.
- Linde PLC (LIN) +$96.79 +14.58%
- Proctor & Gamble (PG) +$60.51 +9.07%
- AbbVie (ABBV) +$56.59 +8.48%
- West Pharma (WST) +$39.21 +46.13%
- Illinois Tools Works (ITW) +$23.47 +8.82%
The best selections are similar to the first portfolio with the exception of the inclusion of Linde plc in this portfolio, whereas the first portfolio had Coca Cola amongst the top 5.
Here are the monthly returns for this portfolio (labeled LFDAM), NOBL and SCHD.
| LFDAM | |||||||||||||
| YEAR | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual |
| 2022 | 6.05% | -2.45% | 3.45% | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 1.04% | -2.72% | -1.66% | -3.35% | |||||||||
| Combined | -0.01% | ||||||||||||
| NOBL | |||||||||||||
| YEAR | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual |
| 2022 | 6.28% | -4.12% | 1.90% | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 3.23% | -2.36%% | -2.70% | -1.93% | |||||||||
| Combined | -0.06% | ||||||||||||
| SCHD | |||||||||||||
| YEAR | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December | Annual |
| 2022 | 6.03% | -3.44% | 2.39% | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 2.08% | -3.32% | -4.57% | -5.82% | |||||||||
| Combined | -3.58% | ||||||||||||
This portfolio got off to a much better start, gaining 6.05% in November, outperforming SCHD and only slightly trailing NOBL. The portfolio fell in December but finished the month better than NOBL and SCHD, losing only 2.45% compared to losses of 4.12% and 3.44%, respectively. This portfolio weathered January much better than the first portfolio, picking up a gain of 1.04%. It still trailed both benchmarks by quite a bit and did not perform much better in February. While it is underperforming the first portfolio during March it is still doing considerably better than both benchmarks.
Comparing both portfolios the second strategy is 1.21% ahead of the first.
Here is a breakdown of the dividend income by month as of March 27th, 2023.
| LFDAM | NOBL | SCHD | ||||||||
| MONTH | 2022 | 2023 | MONTH | 2022 | 2023 | MONTH | 2022 | 2023 | ||
| January | 5.75 | January | January | |||||||
| February | 24.29 | February | February | |||||||
| March | 28.24 | March | March | |||||||
| April | April | April | ||||||||
| May | May | May | ||||||||
| June | June | June | ||||||||
| July | July | July | ||||||||
| August | August | August | ||||||||
| September | September | September | ||||||||
| October | October | October | ||||||||
| November | 0.07 | November | November | |||||||
| December | 31.78 | December | 67.54 | December | 94.49 | |||||
| TOTAL | 31.85 | 58.28 | TOTAL | 67.54 | 0.00 | TOTAL | 94.49 | 0.00 | ||
| LIFETIME | 90.13 | LIFETIME | 67.54 | LIFETIME | 94.49 | |||||
This portfolio got off to a better start compared to the first portfolio, generating more dividend income in partial 2022 ($31.85 vs. $29.18). But since it has a lower dividend yield it was only a matter of time before the first portfolio moved into the lead.
What will be interesting to see is which portfolio will achieve a better dividend growth rate and how dividend reinvestment will differ between the two portfolios.
Since inception the portfolio has drifted away from its starting allocation by 7.66%, which is an increase of 1.5% from a month ago (6.16%). The table below shows the absolute drift for each individual position. This is the first time since inception where this portfolio has a higher absolute drift than the first portfolio. The same rebalancing rules will be applied to this portfolio as to the first portfolio.
| Symbol | Starting Allocation | Current Allocation | Drift |
| ABBV | 6.67% | 7.24% | 0.57% |
| ABT | 6.67% | 6.62% | 0.05% |
| CVX | 6.67% | 5.82% | 0.85% |
| XOM | 6.67% | 6.39% | 0.28% |
| JNJ | 6.67% | 5.96% | 0.71% |
| MCD | 6.67% | 6.75% | 0.08% |
| PG | 6.67% | 7.28% | 0.61% |
| LIN | 6.64% | 7.61% | 0.97% |
| LOW | 5.45% | 5.27% | 0.18% |
| CAT | 4.71% | 4.72% | 0.01% |
| SPGI | 4.71% | 4.89% | 0.18% |
| ADP | 4.43% | 3.94% | 0.49% |
| TGT | 3.48% | 3.38% | 0.10% |
| MMM | 3.08% | 2.53% | 0.55% |
| GD | 2.67% | 2.41% | 0.26% |
| ITW | 2.66% | 2.89% | 0.23% |
| APD | 2.53% | 2.72% | 0.19% |
| AFL | 1.77% | 1.74% | 0.03% |
| CTAS | 1.61% | 1.70% | 0.09% |
| NUE | 1.59% | 1.76% | 0.17% |
| TROW | 1.09% | 1.11% | 0.02% |
| GWW | 1.09% | 1.25% | 0.16% |
| GPC | 1.08% | 0.97% | 0.11% |
| BF.B | 1.06% | 0.98% | 0.08% |
| CAH | 0.89% | 0.84% | 0.05% |
| WST | 0.85% | 1.24% | 0.39% |
| EXPD | 0.71% | 0.77% | 0.06% |
| HRL | 0.60% | 0.51% | 0.09% |
| BEN | 0.31% | 0.35% | 0.04% |
| AOS | 0.30% | 0.37% | 0.07% |
| Total | 7.66% |
Portfolio Differences
Now that we have taken a closer look at each portfolio let's go over the differences between them and what impact these differences have made.
First up let's go over the 8 unique aristocrats found in each portfolio. The first portfolio owns the following unique aristocrats.
| TICKER | % GAIN | STARTING ALLOCATION | IMPACT ON PORTFOLIO |
| PEP | -0.17% | 6.67% | -0.01% |
| KO | 2.92% | 6.67% | 0.19% |
| MDT | -8.17% | 5.30% | -0.43% |
| CL | 1.19% | 2.69% | 0.03% |
| SYY | -10.42% | 1.97% | -0.21% |
| KMB | 5.60% | 1.89% | 0.11% |
| CLX | 8.92% | 0.81% | 0.07% |
| CINF | 5.41% | 0.71% | 0.04% |
| 0.66% | 26.71% | -0.21% |
On average these 8 aristocrats are up 0.66% since November 1st. Their combined starting allocation in the portfolio was 26.71% and as a result their impact on the overall portfolio return thus far has been a loss of 0.21%. Even though on average these 8 aristocrats have a positive return, the ones that make up a sizable allocation in the portfolio are not performing well.
Here are the 8 unique aristocrats in the second portfolio.
| TICKER | % GAIN | STARTING ALLOCATION | IMPACT ON PORTFOLIO |
| MCD | 1.19% | 6.67% | 0.08% |
| LIN | 14.58% | 6.64% | 0.97% |
| LOW | -3.30% | 5.45% | -0.18% |
| SPGI | 3.75% | 4.71% | 0.18% |
| GWW | 14.57% | 1.09% | 0.16% |
| GPC | -10.40% | 1.08% | -0.11% |
| BF.B | -7.51% | 1.06% | -0.08% |
| CAH | -5.64% | 0.89% | -0.05% |
| 0.90% | 27.59% | 0.96% |
We can clearly see these 8 aristocrats on average have performed better than the 8 unique aristocrats in the first portfolio. They also made up a slightly larger initial allocation of the portfolio and as a result played a more significant role in the overall return, +0.96%.
I believe these 16 aristocrats will be the main drivers of the long term difference between these two portfolios. Of course there are more allocation differences between the common aristocrats shared by both portfolios and that will play a role as well.
Dividend Increases
Since the last update 5 more dividend aristocrats have announced higher dividend rates, bringing the running total to 13 since inception. The first portfolio, LFDAS, has seen 10 increases while the second portfolio, LFDAM, has seen 9. The average dividend growth rate for LFDAS has been 4.36%, while the average dividend growth rate for LFDAM has been a slightly better 5.27%.
| Dividend Schedule | Portfolio | Ex Date | Pay Date | Dividend Rate | LFDAS | LFDAM | |
| AFL | Both | 11/15/2022 | 12/1/2022 | 0.4000 | |||
| AFL | Both | 2/15/23 | 3/2/2023 | 0.4200 | 5.00% | 5.00% | |
| APD | Both | 12/30/2022 | 2/13/2023 | 1.6200 | |||
| APD | Both | 3/31/23 | 5/8/23 | 1.7500 | 8.02% | 8.02% | |
| CINF | LFDAS | 12/15/2022 | 1/13/2023 | 0.6900 | |||
| CINF | LFDAS | 3/16/23 | 4/14/23 | 0.7500 | 8.70% | ||
| CVX | Both | 11/17/2022 | 12/12/2022 | 1.4200 | |||
| CVX | Both | 2/15/23 | 3/10/2023 | 1.5100 | 6.34% | 6.34% | |
| KMB | LFDAS | 12/8/2022 | 1/4/2023 | 1.1600 | |||
| KMB | LFDAS | 3/9/23 | 4/4/23 | 1.1800 | 1.72% | ||
| KO | LFDAS | 11/30/2022 | 12/15/2022 | 0.4400 | |||
| KO | LFDAS | 3/16/23 | 4/3/2023 | 0.4600 | 4.55% | ||
| MMM | Both | 11/17/2022 | 12/12/2022 | 1.4900 | |||
| MMM | Both | 2/16/23 | 3/12/2023 | 1.5000 | 0.67% | 0.67% | |
| SPGI | LFDAM | 11/25/2022 | 12/12/2022 | 0.8500 | |||
| SPGI | LFDAM | 2/23/23 | 3/10/2023 | 0.9000 | 5.88% | ||
| CL | LFDAS | 1/20/2023 | 2/14/2023 | 0.4700 | |||
| CL | LFDAS | 4/20/23 | 5/15/23 | 0.4800 | 2.13% | ||
| GD | Both | 1/19/2023 | 2/10/2023 | 1.2600 | |||
| GD | Both | 4/13/23 | 5/12/23 | 1.3200 | 4.76% | 4.76% | |
| GPC | LFDAM | 12/1/2022 | 1/3/2023 | 0.8950 | |||
| GPC | LFDAM | 3/2/23 | 4/3/23 | 0.9500 | 6.15% | ||
| LIN | LFDAM | 12/1/2022 | 12/16/2022 | 1.1700 | |||
| LIN | LFDAM | 3/13/23 | 3/28/2023 | 1.2750 | 8.97% | ||
| TROW | Both | 12/15/2022 | 12/29/2022 | 1.2000 | |||
| TROW | Both | 3/14/23 | 3/30/23 | 1.2200 | 1.67% | 1.67% | |
| AVERAGE | 4.36% | 5.27% |
Future
The long term goal is to determine whether this stock selection strategy has merit. This will be measured by whether or not either of these portfolios can achieve and sustain long term alpha over NOBL. I am also comparing the results to SCHD but since this ETF uses a different universe of stocks it isn't really a fair benchmark in this test. I would like to see both portfolios outpace NOBL and remain competitive when measured against SCHD. I'll be providing updates throughout the year and when the time comes to select new constituents for each portfolio.
This article was written by
Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of ABBV, CTAS, EXPD, HRL, JNJ, LOW, PEP, PG, TROW, WST either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.