Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I'll try to keep it short and sweet:
1) we can use moving averages (any stock market site gives it, for example finance.yahoo.com) or trend lines. Otherwise to make it simple, we look at the market with a little time perspective in a macro way and normally it is still obvious. No need to be an expert in technical analysis.
2) the PER in particular yes… let’s say 10 = cheap, 20 = be careful… but take it with a pinch of salt because growth or quality companies have by definition slightly higher PERs. Otherwise we can also use the dividend yield. Let’s say 5% be careful. Not as easy to interpret, because it depends on the distribution ratio. See here: http://www.dividendes.ch/2011/12/le-ratio-de-distribution-payout-ratio/
3) or by the distribution ratio precisely, see link above
4) same explanation as above.
5) yes, by the PER and the yield. Here I use the yield, linked to the distribution ratio… as we have seen, the three are closely linked. What actually matters is the dividend first and foremost, so as long as the price rises and the company continues to produce profits to ensure the payment of the dividend and to make it grow, no problem. Be careful, however, if the dividend stagnates: http://www.dividendes.ch/2011/10/investir-dans-les-dividendes-quels-sont-les-risques/
6) Again, nothing bad on its own as long as the payout ratio is low, like Emmi. That's why I'm not selling for now.
7) For raw materials it is more complicated because it does not depend on their intrinsic value, but on supply and demand. So here I am only speaking from a historical point of view.
8) Ben in the members section of the site, or on financial sites like Yahoo Finance, Morningstar, Fool.com, Financial Times… or even on company sites.What I've been thinking about it for many months: it's going to crash. I just don't know when and what the trigger will be.
Here the situation is very clear: http://www.dividendes.ch/evaluation-du-marche/uh… yes… you log in and you can see your status of the securities… ??? you can also see the history of the dividends that come into your account…
I still don't understand...what is the point
Postfinance is not complicated, just a little confusing I findTransmission of thoughts… I am preparing an article on a similar subject…
There will always be rentiers, even with negative rates. You just have to choose the right investments
and then I'm not against euthanasia of the rentier, some people have to work... as long as it's not me
Well, you'll have to be patient.
The goal is to build up a nice portfolio over time, primarily through your savings (see tutorial).
At first the dividends received will be modest, but over time they will grow, thanks to the purchase of new shares and thanks to the growth of dividends.
The more you progress with your portfolio, the more the share of available cash that will come from your dividends will grow (in proportion to your savings).
The goal is that you can ultimately live off it, and that you no longer need to save… and work.
Some use their dividends to buy back shares they already own.
I prefer to buy new stocks, in order to diversify the risk. For this, of course, there must still be attractive ones on the market. Which is not obvious at the moment.Yes, for the software, that's sort of it. Except that not all titles are recognized. So for some, you also have to enter the dividends and the value manually.
Yes, dividends accumulate on CHF, EUR or USD accounts and are used to buy other shares. Or if you are lucky enough to be further along in the process, to live off your income.
I didn't understand the following questions, are you still talking about Postfinance? I'm lost...Hello Earnie
Yes, I think it's good to always keep the same initial amount when buying. However, be careful with the amount purchased per position, 1000 CHF doesn't seem very high to me, well it depends on your brokerage fees. The goal is to dilute the risk but above all to avoid the brokerage fees being too high.
More info in points 2 and 4 of the post http://www.dividendes.ch/forum-2/dividendes/questions-quand-on-commence-en-bourse/#p780Hello Mira
Welcome to the forum. It's always nice to read about women here, unfortunately they are too rare.
1) The easiest way is to rely on the stock rating in the members section. The stocks that have one star are stocks that don't smell very good. The reasons: the dividend is stagnating (or worse it is falling), the stock is too expensive (especially because the dividend yield is insufficient), the fundamentals are bad (typically the dividend no longer sufficiently covers the dividend payment). Currently I have three stocks purchased that are in this situation and that I am monitoring closely:
– Emmi (EMMN): one star, but on the verge of being two. Very good company, but the stock has clearly overbid itself (yield of 1.4%). Not yet sold because the dividend is well covered by profits (distribution ratio 27%) and it is a defensive stock, which resists in the event of a market decline (and since the latter is very high, this is very useful at the moment). The dividend is still increasing, but at a fairly slow pace. In short, I am monitoring and if one of my criteria deteriorates, I sell.
– BP: paradoxical, I just bought it. And it’s not my style to trade. For once I deviated a little from my principles, in exceptional circumstances you sometimes have to know how to take certain risks. I wanted to take advantage of the extremely cheap oil prices, via a dividend-paying company. Oil had fallen due to a temporary economic situation (shale gas production, Saudi Arabia’s desire to kill the shale goose in the egg by overproducing, poor global economic situation, etc.). But in the long term, black gold will inevitably rise again. So BP has made recent losses, like other companies in the sector. The dividend risks falling or stagnating. In a normal case, danger, do not invest. But here I considered that this risk was already included in the price at the time of purchase. We will see if the future proves me right, or not. In short, I advise beginners not to do this, rather follow the basic rules.
– Abbott (ABT): 1 star, but in truth it should be 4 or 5. Why? Because the company has been a growing dividend payer for decades but it has done a split which artificially makes it look like it has cut its dividend. So I am holding it until it goes back to 2 stars soon because that will be the case anyway.
2) In large quantities and less frequently. If the brokerage fees are cheap, one can buy a little less, a little more often. But never exceed 1% of brokerage fees.
3) As little as possible! In all, you should avoid staring at the screen. It is counterproductive and encourages you to do stupid things (the investor is irrational: he panics when it falls, instead of buying he sells, and he gets excited when it rises, instead of selling, he buys). Same thing for securing your gains: stop orders are always badly placed or you sell while trying to secure 20% of gain and the stock ends up making +200%… Very often the best thing is to do nothing. But it is very difficult for a human being. Balancing the lines, the question may possibly arise for small portfolios… and even then. It is the stock itself that is important, not its position in a portfolio.
4) It's all blah blah. Try to rationalize less and do what's good for you. In any case, by following the rule in point 2, you will start with few stocks. What is important, once again, is to choose your stocks carefully: they must correspond to your risk aversion, so in principle not be too volatile (low standard deviation). If they are of quality, defensive and not very volatile, they will behave like a much larger portfolio! Then, when the portfolio grows (and that's the goal), you can follow a lot of stocks if you stick to a few criteria that you master well.Have fun and good money
Postfinance can provide a tax statement (summarized positions and dividend earnings), like any bank. But it costs a lot. I asked the question at the time, I don't remember the price quoted, but it was clearly not worth the price. So I decided to process it myself, position by position. It takes a little time, but the job is made easier by the tax software provided by the cantonal administrations (VStax for example will automatically download the prices as of 31.12 and the dividends received from quite a few securities).
Dividends are not reinvested, they remain in the account of the corresponding currency.
Lombard credit consists of pledging some of these securities, in return for which the nice bank will lend you cash to buy other securities… This allows you to have a leverage effect because with less cash available you can buy more shares. All this is fine, as long as the value of the securities pledged does not fall… but when it does, hello damage => your cash balance will melt until it is necessary to add cash to cover your positions, otherwise the securities will be automatically sold by the bank. In short, it is highly speculative and I do not recommend it.Hello
thanks for this update. You are already on your tax return… you are brave. Haven't found the motivation to do it yet. It must be said that it is one of the less pleasant sides of dividends
Indeed, the recent decline due to the CHF seems to open up new nice opportunities in Switzerland and abroad, but I must say that I have not found anything really interesting, as the market is overvalued at the moment. Only the oil companies were interesting, but they have already gone up.
Regarding your titles, indeed there are some nice pillars and some nice very stable values. Always interesting to see that some values in USD can prove to be very stable in CHF. Few people are interested in this phenomenon that I have been trying to explain for a long time. Too bad for them…
Yes, TGT was one of the nice surprises of 2014… not easy to believe 12 months ago, given the quagmire they were in, and once again the resilience of growing dividends worked wonders.
Regarding your new criteria, it is always the eternal question, should you take your profits or try to take advantage of a greater increase in the stock. I understand your choice, especially with the current market level, but, because of the resilience of growing dividends, I prefer not to sell. Even if I had to lose 20% I could live with it. It is all a question of perspective. If I had sold some stocks after 20% of gain I would have lost many gains of several tens and even hundreds of %.Thanks Earnie for this avalanche of compliments.
I wish you the best for this period of discovery of increasing dividends and every success in your investments.Hello Aboumansa and welcome here.
I suggest you start here:
http://www.dividendes.ch/tutorial/
Happy reading.Hi Gregory
This is an indicator specific to dividendes.ch which aims to measure the quality of a security paying increasing dividends. All this is of course very theoretical, but to put it simply it means that if we do buy&hold, we have a chance of achieving a return on purchase cost of x%. It is indeed an annual return, not cumulative, measured in relation to the price paid for the acquisition of the security.
It is clear that to reach this amount of 35% it takes many years, even decades! But here we are talking about stocks that are capable of paying increasing dividends over such long periods and that is the whole point of this indicator.
Of course, in reality, few investors will actually achieve this hypothetical return because a lot can happen over such a long period, from the time of purchase. And here I am not only thinking of problems related to the company that is being purchased (payers of increasing dividends have defensive and resilient capacities) but also, and perhaps above all, to the investor himself.
So we must take this figure more as an element of comparison than as an absolute figure.
Français 
English 
Italiano 
Deutsch 
Español 
Português