JJMicro

@Diamond-Hands More like $81K net cash flow, since you need to reinvest 25% of dividend proceeds. I do not see much advantage to this policy but authors seem to think adding nominal shares at 25% reinvestment improves one's income profile. I remain skeptical, don't see how taking $27K less this year so you can gain $2.9K in added dividends next year improves your income profile.

@bo0bo0 The main point was the same week of this article came out there were in fact announced cuts on high dividend funds. They seem to be more frequent and significant when they do cut. I already agreed div. cuts in general are less frequent than market prices in the original post, was asking about the high dividend category this forum focuses on.

@Lake OZ Boater Thanks will check it out--The list on Portfolio Visualizer's front page is interesting because some float to the top as conditions change--but typically the plain vanilla total market 60/40 returns to the top three performers.

@BartAtTheRanch April 2025 has revealed which selections in this category are more volatile under current conditions and it looks like BXSL certainly is. Those influenced to purchase more recently now have a double-digit underwater position, something I try to avoid.

@Make good choices Was replying to your previous post's question, not agreeing with some 'all stock sell' scenario. If you use growth stocks and share sales, standard advice is to have a balanced portfolio with bonds and fixed income. The 1 and 3 year data showed no huge advantage vs. balanced during market pullback. So you collected a few automatic divvie checks while a balanced meant you used cash or bonds and left the growth stock alone in April. With all or mostly-dividend for cash flow you're automatically collecting, but with share sales you decide where you might pull income. Even if you pulled proportionally from a 60/40 stocks/bonds portfolio, the total returns look very similar vs. the dividend or high yield ETFs through 4/4. Thus, no huge difference, next question.

@Terrenovo I always hear that statistic implying it's extremely difficult to recover from a market price drop. But in absolute dollars you just need to get back to whatever your original share price was. Dividend reinvestment also buys you 100% more shares at that 50% lower price helping one 'get back' once prices do recover. It's not rare or unusual for stocks to go back to their original value then exceed it. Otherwise no one would invest.

@Janelle22 It's implied by glowing reviews/testimonials that extol the virtues of holding 42 high-yield picks+reinvesting 25% with a subscription. If the cash flow needed is actually 6% not 8%, and is mostly buy and hold as you now state, someone could alternately invest in corporate bonds, S&P 500 dividend stocks or other non-leveraged, less volatile selections that attain that level without having to 'reach' with 42+ higher risk 8-10.7% yielding picks + a 25% reinvestment policy.That's why I'm skeptical of the frequent mentioning of 25% reinvestment like it's some hard & fast rule. Retirees could lose a lot of money with many of the featured selections on the public forum even with 25% reinvestment.

So the message to dividend income investors is now...buy the *cut*? To repeat a bad analogy if your chickens are now making smaller eggs you should not cull them because farmer reassures us smaller eggs are good for the hens and eggs next year will be larger because of that. T was bound to improve after so many fails and long term investors lost money.

@Bucknfl Yes my bad- yahoo finance displayed 3- and 5 year numbers and didn't pay attention to the graph's time frame/inception dates. So the 1 year was +10.2%, YTD (as of 3/7) is -2.0% (tough 1st quarter so far). Will still say 'pass' based on negative YTD and last 2 quarters' not meeting EPS.

Problem is you can get into 'analysis paralysis' by making too many comparisons to earlier patterns like 1929-54, or over-relying on CAPE or similar calculations. Many SA columns have been declaring 'overvalued S&P' and completely missed the last 2 years' growth. Tactically, since February has been statistically a 'down' month in recent history, I saw nothing wrong with rebalancing/reallocating the last week, current column notwithstanding. I say have the portfolio allocated enough to low risk, fixed income and emergency cash, then go ahead and buy a dip.

@DRPJS There are good corporate 401(k) plans that offer Roth, matching money and/or profit sharing, so I wouldn't agree with your statement retirement plans are 'dead' except for municipal/government that still offer pensions. The 401(k) plans can work but one has to consistently invest and use low-fee stock index funds to capture long-term growth, and invest enough each paycheck.

Appears they're moving beyond mRNA shots into oncology and other diseases, should give the stock much better future prospects IMO.

I agree with hold recommendation, buying on dips and pullbacks. Amusing to read all the total market index-bashing columns lately despite the index doing better than pure S&P500 since '22. VTI is highly correlated to SPY or VOO anyway so it's just a personal preference whether one wants a bit more mid-cap/small-cap in their core stock market allocations.

@Treading Softly In fact dividend irrelevance was prominently included in their 1985 Nobel Prize announcement: "In a later paper, Modigliani and Miller formulated another theorem stating that, for a given investment policy, the value of a firm is also independent of its dividend policy. A dividend increase, for instance, certainly increases shareholder’s incomes, but this is neutralized by a corresponding reduction in share value." Here's the full announcement.
www.nobelprize.org/...
Plenty of applied papers have been published relating the theorem to public traded companies. Has not been shown to be misapplied or 'wrong', by anything I've read on SA or anywhere else so far. To the contrary it's a well-accepted theorum.

Basically the Zoetis livestock and poultry product lines (made up of the former Alpharma and Pfizer animal health divisions). Pfizer spun off Zoetis in 2012 as they wanted to focus on human drugs, then Zoetis spun out/sold to Phibro the livestock & poultry medicated feeds/vaccines products last year 2024, to focus on dogs and cats. These were designated essential businesses in 2020 during pandemics. With bird flu and other animal diseases, products ensuring herd/flock health are critical to healthy and affordable food supplies for people. Phibro should do well going forward with Zoetis' livestock products.

@BackAgain Am seeing value in BINC as a managed bond fund vs. say AGG--pay a bit more fee and let the experts (Rieder) decide which bonds, happy thus far.

@Millennial Dividends, @lakeozboater just posted additional data since 1998; VTI beats SPY (basically same as VOO) and DIA by not insignificant amounts. The main difference in this article was 2022 when VTI lagged a bit, otherwise the two fund types overlap, or it depends on the starting date. The recent VTI outperformance over VOO is further evidence there's not much difference.

If the whole market is overpriced as this analysis asserts, all the other highly correlated market indexes will respond similarly, there's nothing special about VTI other than it's a good core total stock market fund with a low ER. IMO it's a great core position on which to add other stocks and ETFs.

@thirdcamper At least you have more information to make an informed choice. More interested knowing more about the fixed income choices featured in this article at this time.

@alligatorjim Being a CPA he/she probably knows which ones can make >$64K net per year based on seeing the numbers such businesses can produce. IMO very good suggestions, but as you say more upfront work than just getting a job and saving money. Still better than just quitting and living off iffy dividend picks.