Wikinvest Wire

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Sunday Morning Coffee

I wanted to carry the dividends idea forward a little bit. There are some enormous dividends out there to be had. What I thought I would do is construct a portfolio where for each sector there is one very high yielding stock and one ETF. For compliance reasons I need to shy away from specific percentages allocated to each holding as the rules around this stuff assume that people add 2+2, get 22 and go out an implement the portfolio.

Financials
Westpack Banking (WBK) yields 5.80%
iShares S&P Global Financials (IXG) yields 2.16%

Healthcare

Merck (MRK) yields 4.40%
Pfizer (PFE) yields 4.50%

Energy

YPF Sociedad Anonima (YPF) yields 7.10%
Energy Sector SPDR (XLE) yields 1.87%

Industrials

Nordic American Tanker (NAT) yields 8.90%
Industrial Sector SPDR (XLI) yields 1.91%

Staples

Kimberly Clark (KMB) yields 4.10%
Staples Sector SPDR (XLP) yields 2.74%

Discretionary

VF Corp (VFC) yields 3.20%
Time Warner (TWX) yields 2.80%

Tech

Intel (INTC) yields 3.40%
Taiwan Semi (TSM) yields 3.90%

Utilities

National Grid (NGG) yields 6.70%
Utilities Sector SPDR (XLU) yields 4.14%

Materials

Lafarge (LFRGY) yields 5.74%
BASF (BASFY) yields 4.28%

Telecom

AT&T (T) yields 6.30%
NZ Telecom (NZT) yields 9.80%

For a couple of the sectors I used two stocks instead of one stock and one ETF. A couple of the yields are very high, it would make me very nervous if every stock I owned yielded more than 7%. The way I did the math the mix yields 4.2% but you can play around with the numbers and weight this out however makes sense to you or better yet look at names in the context that are of interest to you. In general terms the payout ratios are very reasonable other than maybe NZT and WBK. The debt levels for these companies is generally decent except for sectors where you typically see high debt levels like telecom, utilities and financials.

A rundown of sorts on these stocks; WBK did not go down anywhere near as much as a broad financial sector ETF during the worst of the bear market and is now much farther ahead, both PFE and MRK did much worse than a broad sector fund during the worst of the bear and are still quite a ways behind, YPF did about the same as XLE in terms of decline but on a slightly different timetable and has come back much quicker, NAT went down much less than XLI but both are down the same 30% from the peak, KMB has done a little worse than XLP since the peak, VFC did a little better than a broad sector fund and TWX has done a little worse, INTC had performed very similarly to a broad tech fund trailing off lately while TSM has done much better, NGG has done quite a bit worse than XLU, LFRGY has done much worse and BASFY about the same as a broad materials fund and finally T did a little better and NZT quite a bit worse than IYZ.

The purpose of that last paragraph is to demonstrate how a portfolio of semi randomly chosen (I believe all of them are decent companies even if I don't own any of them) high yielding stocks chosen as the Red Sox were losing in extra innings fared through what might turn out to be the worst stretch for equities for a long time. So using the bear market as a barometer of sorts. Assuming none of the are fraudulent companies and there are no dramatic changes to the structure (good or bad) of these companies what you'd see if you charted all of them could give a reasonable idea in the event of another top down market scare.

With a little more time and thought there should be more foreign names in the mix more specifically better country diversification. There are more and more CIVETS stocks with ADRs such that maybe one or two could be worked in. I would note that a portfolio full of American and Western European dividend payers bears out as not being very desirable here. Other than NZT this is were most of the laggards are from (I was surprised that KMB lagged a little).

This really was just a thought exercise, notice no need for any ownership disclosures, as many people seem to love the idea of buying "great companies with high dividends" and just holding on which I disagree with. Buying and hoping to hold is valid but market conditions sometimes dictate reducing net long exposure.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

TY for keeping this line of thought going, Roger. For my two cents, don't let the Permanent Portfolio trail go cold, either!

It seems to me, if market conditions warranted lightening up on equities, I'd look first at the non-dividend payers, assuming no sector specific issue like financials. But that's just me, and I'm retired.

Anonymous said...

Roger,
great article yestarday.
Roger, perhaps PE is a good gage of expectations. Are there ather measurments that you could think of that captures expectations.
TX,
Jeff from Milan, Italy

WH said...

Ben Graham says to compare the inverse of the P/E, what he calls the earnings yield, as a percentage to the yield of high quality bonds. The ratio of the earnings yield to bond yields gives you a margin of safety. Currently using this metric, the scales are tipped in favor of equities significantly. This is from the his book, "The Intelligent Investor."

Also, along these lines, Vanguard has a very interesting paper comparing the income approach of holding equities (i.e. high dividends) to the total return approach. Their conclusion was: "...the total return approach to spending is identical to the income approach for investors whose portfolios generate enough cash flow to meet their spending needs. For those investors who need more cash flow than their portfolios yield, the total-return approach is the preferred method."

Title of paper is: "Spending From a Portfolio: Implications of a Total-Return Approach versus and Income Approach for Taxable Investors."

Sorry I don't have a link, but the paper is on their website.

Roger Nusbaum said...

thanks WH.

Jeff I would say that for every statistic that exists there are plenty of people who swear by it.

being top down i look for the best way to capture a given segment, valuations become part of that process but not really make or break in selection.

RW said...

Vanguard form and report URL's can be complex and direct links tricky to execute but this one - http://tinyurl.com/273y2hm - should get you to the page pointing to the report WH cites.

You'll need to click the link to the report and, if you have a popup blocker active, disable it for vanguard.com in order to view/print it.

Anonymous said...

Roger,
I especially enjoy thought provoking posts like this one.

I am one of your daily followers that reads a lot and writes little. 70, retired, living within means, now have time to work at going up a little as opposed to down a lot with my investments. I am not a buy and hold investor.

I would like to read more about the USA - Europe economies versus the BRICA (Africa ) economies from you and the others on this blog. I sense a big disconnect as the BRICA construct trade agreements, and make large investments in each others industries. Minerals, Ethanol, beef and produce shipping from Brazil to China and high speed train products, consumer staples and discretionary products and technology from China to Brazil. Do the BRICA really need the USA and Western Europe to develop?

Thanks - Richard

crm said...

Roger,

I'd look at SDRL for the energy stock. Yielding about 10%, relatively well priced. Most modern drilling rig fleet. CPL for utility and TLSYY for telecoms.

These give greater yield and more international diversification.

Proud Member Of