Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
That's exactly why I prefer earnings per share. Because in the end, it's the share of profit that is contained in each share, and which is therefore in your pocket that interests you. The fact that shares disappear means that a little more wealth goes into your pockets. On the contrary, if there are more shares, the share of the pie becomes smaller.
Tu n’es pas obligé d’attendre un gros clash chaque 7 ans bien entendu. Ces périodes sont exceptionnelles pour les investisseurs value, c’est les grosses soldes où même les pépites sont bradées. En dehors de ces périodes, il faut juste être plus prudent et acheter au compte-gouttes. Dans les différents titres que tu as cités ci-dessus mes préférés sont CL, WAG et MCD… ça reste des classiques, des valeurs sûres à long terme.
Hi Alexander,
bienvenue sur le forum. Déjà bonne nouvelle, tu pars dans la bonne direction. Parfois les jeunes investisseurs, comme moi à l’époque, sont plus friands d’entreprises technos ou très volatiles et nettement moins attachés aux dividendes, qui passent toujours comme un investissement à la papy, à tort. Les critères que tu énumères sont bons aussi, à savoir que tu regardes les dividendes, leur historique et leur progression, mais aussi comment ils sont couverts par le bénéfices. Tu tiens compte aussi du cours, à travers la volatilité, ce qui est important, surtout par rapport à tes propres émotions d’investisseur.
Tu as tout à fait d’accord quand tu dis « si une entreprise a un rendement de 2% et une progression de l’EPS de 20%, elle est plus tentante qu’une entreprise avec un rendement de 4% et une progression EPS de 6% », quoique 20% de progression annuelle ce n’est peut-être pas soutenable très longtemps. Mais l’idée est là : tu ne dois pas te focaliser sur le rendement. Paradoxalement c’est même un des critères les moins importants en matière de dividendes ! Entre 2.5% et 5% de rendement, il n’y a pas trop de problème, au-delà de ces bornes il faut faire beaucoup plus attention. Mais même dans ces bornes, il peut y avoir d’énormes différences en matière de durabilité et de croissance du dividende entre les différents titres. Et puis au final, bien sûr, cela dépend beaucoup du niveau global du marché, qui est un peu haut à mon goût en ce moment.
Je connais de près ou de loin les titres de ta watch list. Là aussi tu es dans la bonne direction. Après il faut faire un peu de tri en reprenant les critères dont on a parlé : volatilité, croissance, payout ratio, historique des dividendes, rendement… Quelques titres devraient sortir du lot.
There are some nice values in there. I particularly like SYY, JNJ, WTR, PPL, SCHP, NESN and NOVN.
SREN nice move from friend Warren, once again.
This is theft and it is scandalous.
It's a spin-off, which should be indicated on the paper you received from the bank, and it means what it means.
retaining 25% on the value of the ABBV received is retaining 12.5% from the value of your old ABT, for a zero gain since the company has just been split into two entities
if you have a cake and you cut it in two, you don't have more to eat at the end... in this case you even have less since a freeloader came to invite himself to the "feast" without being invited.
I hope your bank doesn't do this during a split as well... but it's not that different... you inherit additional shares, but the total capital is still the same
show your banker the ABT stock chart... it says a lot... if he still wants to tax you for the "gain" on the new ABBV shares, then he should compensate you for the "loss" on your ABT shares...
we think we're dreaming
This table focuses only on yields, which is dangerous. It is also necessary to take into account, among other things, the distribution ratio.
Given the small amounts you invest, there is no risk. But if the amounts become larger, I prefer to diversify.
Constant income is not a priori bad, but in the medium/long term it is better to invest in growing dividends so as not to lose in terms of real income, because of inflation. In addition, the magic of compound interest transforms modest returns into real money factories.
Yields of 5% seem attractive at first glance, but since they don't move, their appeal melts like snow in the sun in just a few years, while a yield of only 2.5% that grows by 10% per year exceeds it in just seven years (and then it keeps growing even more…). By reinvesting the dividends it's even better.
These are not dividends, but a corporate bond fund, therefore with constant income.
Given your profile, a fund or ETF may be a good solution, otherwise put aside cash little by little.
I'm not saying you should never sell. I'm saying that it's the fundamentals, especially earnings, that determine whether the company is and will continue to be able to pay dividends in the future. Sometimes you have to sell, either because the dividend is no longer sustainable or because it no longer has much room to grow.
Remember that dividends historically represent nearly half of the market's total profitability. By focusing on price gains/losses, you are forgetting this important reality.
On the subject of the sale of dividend securities, I invite you to read the following articles:
http://www.dividendes.ch/2011/12/quand-vendre-des-dividendes-croissants/
http://www.dividendes.ch/2012/05/prendre-ses-benefices-avec-des-payeurs-de-dividendes/
I am not a fan of technical analysis, because it is too open to interpretation and too many false signals. But it is possible to reconcile the two approaches if that is what you really want. On this subject, I invite you to consult the series of articles http://www.dividendes.ch/2012/04/dividendes-to-be-or-not-to-be-episode-1/
I have selected a few dividend-paying ETFs in my strategy Ex-US (market = PCX).
Otherwise I know that there are ETFs on dividend aristocrats. You have to look a little and you easily come across them.
However, a few ETFs or investment funds are good to bring a little diversification, especially on types of investments or markets that we do not know well, on the other hand it is always less good than the original, and more expensive.
It is better to start by buying a few solid blue chips, with sufficient starting capital, 2000 euros minimum per share, ideally 4000 euros, then gradually increase your capital.
Hello Krasnaya, it's good to invest little by little, it smooths out the risk of returning at the worst time. However, I do find that the amounts invested are very small and as you say, the fees will eat up a lot of your profitability, even if you invest for the long term.
Danone is a good stock. You should not focus on whether the price is going up or down. The important thing is to see if the company is able to maintain its dividend or even grow it.
Good luck to you.
Français 
English 
Italiano 
Deutsch 
Español 
Português